Why the difference?

[anotheoldgit]

In recent post I was criticised for posting about WW2.

Get over it, it was over 60 years ago, it should now be forgotten, just Brits celebrating a long gone war, far too late for either 'side' to be erecting memorials. etc etc.

Why is it then, it is those who say this, but they are still prepared to go back to the 11th-15th century and criticise Christianity for the crusades, and the Spanish Inquisition?

Prepared to go back to the 17th-18th century to hark on back to Slavery?

Prepared to go back to the 19th century to criticise The British Empire?

At least WW2 was in living memory.

[mike11111]

The Slave Trade was abolished in 1807. Slavery itself was abolished in 1833.

[jake-the-peg]

Slavery was very much *not* a British thing

There were plenty of Black tribes selling other Black tribes to European slave traders which is something that is only now being acknowledged.

And In Britain we were in the forefront of abolishing it.

However it was an appalling trade and it should not be glossed over and forgotten any more than the holocaust should.

[anotheoldgit]

sp1814

/// So you accept that there are many blacks in Europe and America who have succeeded despite prejudice?///

/// Good for you. I knew you'd see it my way eventually.///

I don't think you can claim any success personally from my admission, one would be a fool not to accept that many blacks have succeeded.

This is an obvious fact, but whether or not they first had to overcome prejudice is entirely a different matter.