I would go back to Sunday August 24th 1986 in Paris to attend the Prince And The Revolution aftershow at the New Morning. At the time, there was no internet and the information couldn't be spread as today (I didn't know about it..). At the time, I was already a fan & got my ticket for the concert the day after. I'm longing for that time: what a great concert, band, album, movie, style...

Today I listened to that great aftershow & walked past the New Morning...

Tomorrow will for sure listen to the Zenith show...

PS: If I could, I would go back to August 3rd 1983...

[Edited 8/25/19 9:34am]

refreshingly different from the usual "I'd kill baby Hitler" time travel fantasies. This one might actually do less harm. (imagine if the nazi movement had been lead by someone that was smart....)

mediumdry said:

mediumdry said:

if u killed pontius pilat (sp?)...jesus would still have been killed

databank said:

In fact preventing WWII and the holocaust could have unintended worse consequences :the trauma of the Nazi atrocities allowed for a boost in human rights and democratic and progressive values in the Western world that led to a lot of good things.

.

While I mostly agree with you, it also let to the final coup de grace of the british destabilisation of the Middle East, the creation of Israel. A lot of things can be said about the collective buyoff of guilt, but not that it was a good idea or that it brought much good.

.

Having said that, I'll try not to derail this thread any further.

RJOrion said:

.... i would go back to Africa when it was the hub of civilization, before it was raped, robbed and pillaged by European slave traders and "colonizers"

You would get raped, robbed and pillaged by the locals. Past history wasn't much of an attraction park anywhere in the world I fear. I wouldn't want to go back and live in any place at any point of time in the past for anything.

mediumdry said:

databank said:

In fact preventing WWII and the holocaust could have unintended worse consequences :the trauma of the Nazi atrocities allowed for a boost in human rights and democratic and progressive values in the Western world that led to a lot of good things.

.

While I mostly agree with you, it also let to the final coup de grace of the british destabilisation of the Middle East, the creation of Israel. A lot of things can be said about the collective buyoff of guilt, but not that it was a good idea or that it brought much good.

.

Having said that, I'll try not to derail this thread any further.

To be entirely fair the colonization of Israel had already begun before WWII, so it probably would have ended-up the same anyway. But yeah, that was not the brightest idea ever: there was plenty of space in Australia or Canada for the creation of a Jewish state, putting it in Palestine was really calling for trouble

databank said:

databank said:

RJOrion said:

databank said:

You would get raped, robbed and pillaged by the locals. Past history wasn't much of an attraction park anywhere in the world I fear. I wouldn't want to go back and live in any place at any point of time in the past for anything.

you have NO way of knowing that i "would get raped, robbed and pillaged by the locals"...and you missed the point entirely, but thats OK 😎

.

Slave trade was, at first, mostly europeans buying slaves from African warlords, who then stepped up "production", going after their rivals with more fervor.

.

Getting raped, robbed and pillages by the locals is likely, as it has been in most of the pre-industrialised world. Of course, you could become an all powerful god (in their eyes) and take some of our current weapons and assorted tricks.

.

The idea is to go to Africa and give them a technological advantage against those who invaded and conquered them later? That might be an interesting alternative, although I doubt that there would have been less carnage and suffering, just inflicted on slightly different people (and some the same)

mediumdry said:

RJOrion said:

mediumdry said:

.

Slave trade was, at first, mostly europeans buying slaves from African warlords, who then stepped up "production", going after their rivals with more fervor.

.

Getting raped, robbed and pillages by the locals is likely, as it has been in most of the pre-industrialised world. Of course, you could become an all powerful god (in their eyes) and take some of our current weapons and assorted tricks.

.

The idea is to go to Africa and give them a technological advantage against those who invaded and conquered them later? That might be an interesting alternative, although I doubt that there would have been less carnage and suffering, just inflicted on slightly different people (and some the same)

you are just rehashing lies told by the European slave traders and invaders, and their "historians"...the only Africans that sold slaves, did it involuntarily after being invaded murdered and conquered by Europeans and had no choice but to do so, or be slaughtered, or become slaves themselves...you can believe the historical lies and misrepresentations and brainwashing if you wish, but i know better and have been taught better than to believe the whitewashing and lies and brainwashing that has gone on thoughout history in the westernized "world"...and their "idea" wasnt to give Africa a "technical advantage"...the idea was to rape and pillage the continent for its natural and human resources...gold, spices, diamonds, sciences, languages, pharmacy, mathematics, alchemy, precious minerals and human slaves, etc....which is what they did...Africa was a peaceful continent before the Europeans invade and brought their diseases and warmongering and weaponry and violence and oppression...we didnt needlessly rape and pillage and rob each other...but i dont expect you as a person not of African descent to accept that... so you believe the historical lies and whitewashing, and ill believe the truth as it has been manifested...you probably believe christpher columbus "discovered" America, too...

.

Can't tell if you're just trolling or actually believe what you are saying. And for the record, I am of African descent, as we all are.

.

The idea that any place was "peaceful" is a big crock. Especially a place where the rest of nature is actively trying to kill you. If you look at, for instance, linguistic anthropology, you will see that different languages swept through Africa at different times and the spread of a culture or language does not go non-violently.There are many other ways of looking for evidence of how history went. Afaik, none of them were non-violent, but please point me in the right direction so I can look at your evidence.

.

You seem to feel you are an African from before the "Europeans" came? By the way, the different countries from Europe came in very different styles. And the people there used the Europeans as much as they could, like they were getting used as well.

.

Anyway, if you are an American black person, chances are you are a mix of European and of an African tribe enslaved by another African tribe. Any affiliation you feel you have with the people in Africa is an imagined one, at best. Not that I am saying that the Europeans were in any way shape or form "good" or that rape and pillage is a condonable action, as it is not.

.

As far as brainwashing and such... there is much scholarly work on the history of the world. Eurasians had an advantage because of their earlier start of keeping animals and getting larger cities and all the diseases that come with it. But that wasn't the only reason why they somehow became dominant.

.

Also, Columbus most certainly discovered America, although he wasn't the only one and not the first. Before him were the Vikings and much before them the asians that were the first settlers of the Americas, with some in between and from different places.

.

If you choose to believe that it took the Europeans to introduce violence, oppression and slavery to Africa, that is on you. Don't try to convince me of that blatant nonsense.

.

As to what I would do with a time-machine... I'd put cameras and recording devices in the different studios that Prince used to get hi-def multitrack recordings so we can have the complete vault and distribute it to the fans, bypassing the estate that doesn't seem too interested in releasing it properly.

mediumdry said:

RJOrion said:

you are such a liar...you are not of African descent...we've discussed your nationality before...but now you want to be African...im done with you...youve exposed yourself as lacking in true knowledge and now youve exposed yourself as a liar...good riddance to you and to this ridiculous exchange.

.

Get some knowledge.

.

I wonder about your "true" qualifier for knowledge. If not through the respective scientific fields, where does one get "true" knowledge?

.

I don't want to be African, but I am human, so it is undeniable. (unless you can come up with a better hypothesis that can become the dominant theory.

.

Glad to see that even you think that your comments border on the ridiculous.

mediumdry said:

RJOrion said:

mediumdry said: you are just rehashing lies told by the European slave traders and invaders, and their "historians"...the only Africans that sold slaves, did it involuntarily after being invaded murdered and conquered by Europeans and had no choice but to do so, or be slaughtered, or become slaves themselves...you can believe the historical lies and misrepresentations and brainwashing if you wish, but i know better and have been taught better than to believe the whitewashing and lies and brainwashing that has gone on thoughout history in the westernized "world"...and their "idea" wasnt to give Africa a "technical advantage"...the idea was to rape and pillage the continent for its natural and human resources...gold, spices, diamonds, sciences, languages, pharmacy, mathematics, alchemy, precious minerals and human slaves, etc....which is what they did...Africa was a peaceful continent before the Europeans invade and brought their diseases and warmongering and weaponry and violence and oppression...we didnt needlessly rape and pillage and rob each other...but i dont expect you as a person not of African descent to accept that... so you believe the historical lies and whitewashing, and ill believe the truth as it has been manifested...you probably believe christpher columbus "discovered" America, too...

.

Can't tell if you're just trolling or actually believe what you are saying. And for the record, I am of African descent, as we all are.

.

The idea that any place was "peaceful" is a big crock. Especially a place where the rest of nature is actively trying to kill you. If you look at, for instance, linguistic anthropology, you will see that different languages swept through Africa at different times and the spread of a culture or language does not go non-violently.There are many other ways of looking for evidence of how history went. Afaik, none of them were non-violent, but please point me in the right direction so I can look at your evidence.

.

You seem to feel you are an African from before the "Europeans" came? By the way, the different countries from Europe came in very different styles. And the people there used the Europeans as much as they could, like they were getting used as well.

.

Anyway, if you are an American black person, chances are you are a mix of European and of an African tribe enslaved by another African tribe. Any affiliation you feel you have with the people in Africa is an imagined one, at best. Not that I am saying that the Europeans were in any way shape or form "good" or that rape and pillage is a condonable action, as it is not.

.

As far as brainwashing and such... there is much scholarly work on the history of the world. Eurasians had an advantage because of their earlier start of keeping animals and getting larger cities and all the diseases that come with it. But that wasn't the only reason why they somehow became dominant.

.

Also, Columbus most certainly discovered America, although he wasn't the only one and not the first. Before him were the Vikings and much before them the asians that were the first settlers of the Americas, with some in between and from different places.

.

If you choose to believe that it took the Europeans to introduce violence, oppression and slavery to Africa, that is on you. Don't try to convince me of that blatant nonsense.

.

As to what I would do with a time-machine... I'd put cameras and recording devices in the different studios that Prince used to get hi-def multitrack recordings so we can have the complete vault and distribute it to the fans, bypassing the estate that doesn't seem too interested in releasing it properly.

Clearly, there was never such a thing as a "peaceful continent" anywhere at anytime. SInce the dawn of times, tribes, kingdoms and empires have waged wars on and abused each other.

.

You are also right in insisting on the fact that, in this day and age and regardless of the discipline, scholars remain by far our most reliable source of information. As with people who question the work of scientists, I invite anyone who doubts the validity of the work of historians to actually go and speak with some, in order to understand how they work, the history of the discipline and how consensus is created when a consensus emerges. The main issue, I think, is that those people who claim to offer "alternative" theories rarely do not do so in a way that allows for peer review or a clear protocol that can be challenged, which is why they tend to try and have people believe that researchers, whether historians or scientists, come-up with their conclusions in the same unverifiable, random manner when, in fact, they do not. I am sure no one in this thread is being insincere, but in this day and age many people are easily manipulated by dubious Youtube channels and other "alternative" sources of information, and I merely invite those people to suspend their judgement, go and talk to scholars and investigate the way they work before deciding for themlselves what's true and what's a lie.

.

Now TBH I do not really understand the meaning of this debate regarding slavery and colonization. The fact that the world was (is) a violent place and that all civilizations practiced instutitionalized violence to one extent or another does not negate, justify or excuse the atrocities commited by Europeans towards the people of the countries they colonized. It just puts such atrocities in a larger context. Europeans also commited countless atrocities towards themselves - the History of Europe is, for the most part, a neverending bloodbath. Besides, one cannot judge sins of the past purely from the perspective of today. Slavery and, for that matter, war are now considered as abominations by most people, but there was a time when some of the most enlightened Greek philosophers considered slavery as the most natural thing. Similarly, certain things we do today without much questioning, such as the treatment of animals for human consumption, will most likely be considered as abominations by the people of the 25th century, but their disgust shouldn't prevent them from understanding that their moral values are more "enlightened" than ours (I speak here, of course, as a progressist, I've met some people who'd rather go back to the morality of the 19th or even 18th century, but I am not one of them).

.

In the end, one can perfectly acknowledge the fact that Europeans have commited atrocities and condemn such atrocities without losing historical perspective or turning the pre-colonial former colonies into fairy tales gardens of Edens. No one here claims that Europeans did anything good to Native Americans or Africans during colonial times, we're simply acknowledging the fact that brutality is a universal human trait and that no place in the world was ever safe from it, except maybe in the case of entirely isolated tribes who didn't have the opportunity to wage war on their neighbors (but then again, I'm not sure anyone here really wants to live in a pre-technology tribe on some remote island or in the depth of some jungle).

[Edited 8/27/19 7:42am]

Hi databank, well said. I've often enjoyed your posts and we've often disagreed on certain points (bring on the multitracks for release! ), but I don't think I've ever seen you this eloquent.

.

And, not related to you (much more about me), I feel this calls for a little bit of the lyrics of Les Claypool (and others) from the song Mr Knowitall:

.

They call me Mr. Knowitall
I am so eloquent
Perfection is my middle name
And whatever rhymes with eloquent

This thread should be in the GD forum. Or P&R.

mediumdry said:

Hi databank, well said. I've often enjoyed your posts and we've often disagreed on certain points (bring on the multitracks for release! ), but I don't think I've ever seen you this eloquent.

.

And, not related to you (much more about me), I feel this calls for a little bit of the lyrics of Les Claypool (and others) from the song Mr Knowitall:

.

They call me Mr. Knowitall
I am so eloquent
Perfection is my middle name
And whatever rhymes with eloquent

sexton said:

This thread should be in the GD forum. Or P&R.

Indeed

I would attend the 1999 Tour with Prince, The Time and Vanity 6 - Met Center, Bloomington (MN) and the Aftershow - 15/03/1983 and then I would buy all the merchandise

[Edited 8/27/19 20:49pm]

[Edited 8/27/19 20:49pm]

This is some of the dumbest and most slanted fan fiction history I've ever read. It would get slaughtered in P&R, and rightfully so.

ThatWhiteDude said:

I love how that tread started so harmless and then somebody mentioned Hitler and now people debate if killing baby hitler would’ve made matters a bit worse. I love this platform

Just...thank U. Indeed it went crazy.

Ramzoo said:

ThatWhiteDude said:

I love how that tread started so harmless and then somebody mentioned Hitler and now people debate if killing baby hitler would’ve made matters a bit worse. I love this platform

Just...thank U. Indeed it went crazy.

DatDude knows how to break it all the way down.

If I had a time machine. I would love to seen the Purple Rain Tour and meet Prince personally.