This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Lowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs) at 03:11, 19 November 2018 (Archiving 2 discussion(s) to User talk:Malik Shabazz/Archive 67) (bot). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 03:11, 19 November 2018 by Lowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs) (Archiving 2 discussion(s) to User talk:Malik Shabazz/Archive 67) (bot)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff) |
|
 Search the Archives |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 5 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 2 sections are present. |
Slavery in the United States
Hello. Why you did undo my edit? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shahanshah5 (talk • contribs) 05:10, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
- Hello Shahanshah5. As I explained in my edit summary, the sentence was unclear, as was its relationship to the subject of slavery in the United States. I don't know what "African enslaved settlements" are: were they settlements in Africa or settlements in the United States made up of enslaved Africans. What does it mean that they "were result of contours of the European trade along the African coast"? What are the "contours of European trade"? What does that phrase mean? The sentence you cited in the footnote says that the contours of European trade were shaped by some debate (it's unclear what, or among whom), and that the trade resulted in the enslavement and resettlement of Africans in the Americas. That's exactly the opposite of what you wrote. — Malik Shabazz /Stalk 05:35, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
- If you want, I can send full text from page where I noticed this citation — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shahanshah5 (talk • contribs) 12:43, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
- I can access the page you cited as a source. Reading the sentence in context leaves me more convinced that the sentence has nothing to do with slavery in the United States, as it is about debates among Muslim clerics, and the effect they had on European trade in Africa. — Malik Shabazz /Stalk 01:53, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Weatherman-Red Guard v. Guevara
Can you please provide an RS re:Weatherman and Guevara that contradicts what I posted. There are numerous sources connecting WUO and Guevara/Regis Debray. Maoism is more directly associated with Who's rivals, the Progressive Labor Party.GPRamirez5 (talk) 09:17, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
- Rudd et al. may or may not have been inspired by Che Guevara, but (a) that isn't what they said at the time and (b) it isn't what Rudd is saying almost 50 years later in the source you cited. Here's what they said in their manifesto:
- The most important task for us toward making the revolution, and the work our collectives should engage in, is the creation of a mass revolutionary movement, without which a clandestine revolutionary party will be impossible. A revolutionary mass movement is different from the traditional revisionist mass base of "sympathizers". Rather it is akin to the Red Guard in China, based on the full participation and involvement of masses of people in the practice of making revolution; a movement with a full willingness to participate in the violent and illegal struggle.
- No mention of Guevara. Just the Red Guard. — Malik Shabazz /Stalk 02:50, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
References
- Karin Asbley, Bill Ayers, Bernardine Dohrn, John Jacobs, Jeff Jones, Gerry Long, Home Machtinger, Jim Mellen, Terry Robbins, Mark Rudd, and Steve Tappis. You Don't Need a Weatherman to Know Which Way the Wind Blows. Weatherman. p. 28.
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)