There's not a good reason to treat people differently under the law or for 'hate crimes' since 'crime' is itself sufficient.
You clearly have no knowledge of the Roman or the Arab slave trade which traded in all people including whites. There where white slaves in the United States, so your narrative of all the white people teaming up against the brown people is just a tool used by others to manipulate your opinion.
White slaves were actually owned by blacks and Indians in the South to such an extent that the
Virginia Assembly passed the following law in 1670: “It is enacted that noe negro or Indian though
baptized and enjoyned their owne ffreedome shall be capable of any such purchase of christians...”
(Statutes of the Virginia Assembly, Vol. 2, pp. 280-81).
Negroes also owned other negroes in America (Charleston County Probate Court Records, 1754-
1758, p. 406).
While Whites languished in chains Blacks were free men in Virginia throughout the 17th century
(Willie Lee Rose, A Documentary History of Slavery in North America, p. 15; John Henderson Russell,
Free Negro in Virginia, 1619-1865, p.23; Bruce Levine, et al., Who Built America?, vol. I, p. 52).
In 1717, it was proposed that a qualification for election to the South Carolina Assembly was to be
“the ownership of one white man.” (Journals of the Commons House of Assembly of the Province of
South Carolina: 1692-1775, volume 5, pp. 294-295).
Negroes voted in the Carolina counties of Berkeley and Craven in 1 706 “and their votes were
taken.” (Levine, p. 63).
I could also talk about anti-Irish prejudice, or anti-Catholic prejudice, or Jewish and Protestant slave ownership rates in the American colonies but these too don't fit your narrative of the white oppressor against the 'minorities'
You clearly have no knowledge of the Roman or the Arab slave trade which traded in all people including whites. There where white slaves in the United States, so your narrative of all the white people teaming up against the brown people is just a tool used by others to manipulate your opinion.
White slaves were actually owned by blacks and Indians in the South to such an extent that the Virginia Assembly passed the following law in 1670: “It is enacted that noe negro or Indian though baptized and enjoyned their owne ffreedome shall be capable of any such purchase of christians...”
(Statutes of the Virginia Assembly, Vol. 2, pp. 280-81). Negroes also owned other negroes in America (Charleston County Probate Court Records, 1754- 1758, p. 406).
While Whites languished in chains Blacks were free men in Virginia throughout the 17th century (Willie Lee Rose, A Documentary History of Slavery in North America, p. 15; John Henderson Russell, Free Negro in Virginia, 1619-1865, p.23; Bruce Levine, et al., Who Built America?, vol. I, p. 52).
In 1717, it was proposed that a qualification for election to the South Carolina Assembly was to be “the ownership of one white man.” (Journals of the Commons House of Assembly of the Province of South Carolina: 1692-1775, volume 5, pp. 294-295). Negroes voted in the Carolina counties of Berkeley and Craven in 1 706 “and their votes were taken.” (Levine, p. 63).
I could also talk about anti-Irish prejudice, or anti-Catholic prejudice, or Jewish and Protestant slave ownership rates in the American colonies but these too don't fit your narrative of the white oppressor against the 'minorities'