Slavery Good?

Jprocrastinator · July 4, 2005, 4:38am

[quote]Vyapada wrote:
Another idea for discussion in this thread; would Africa be in the situation it is now without the substantial meddling of foreign powers - if we erased African slavery from history what would Africa look like today?[/quote]

I would just like to expand on what Vyapada said. First of all, the mentality that allowed for the creation of black slavery (That blacks were inferior or sub human and therefore it was ok to enslave them) Is the same attitude that allowed the colinial powers to carve up Africa and exploit it. While it is true that Africa is in very sad state today, this is a direct result of the mess created by the colonial powers. If not for the problems they created in carving it up and in creating arbritrary national borders upon giving up there colonies, there would not be the amount of wars, poverty, and other problems that exist today. Africa before the invaders was culturally rich and healthy, and way back in the day, (We’re talking ancient history here) There were parts of Africa that were smelting iron while certain areas of Europe were just coming out of the stone age. It is interesting to contemplate how healthy and advanced the continent would be if not for the “White Man’s burden” mentality that allowed for slavery and colonial domination.

Pretzel_Logic · July 4, 2005, 5:27am

Got a little ugly and personal. I kinda like dragOn not using the quote function. It was confusing a tiny, tiny bit, but I think all the quote upon quote upon quote is aggravating too. That link to the article by Thomas Sowell was a good one. His writing is better than mine though. I live in today. I was talking about blacks today. I?m talking about what did happen, not what could?a. Not that black slavery in America was OK. That it benefited most the people who complain about it most to this day. Those who reaped the rewards with none of the hell. That is my argument. I had some other stuff to say, but it?s pretty much already been said. Sorry I gave no hard data, but in all things listed, talking about being ‘better off’ financially, medically, nutritionally, academically, athletically, spiritually, emotionally, America beats Africa. I wanted to get a good discussion going on about a very taboo subject I see a different way, for my entertainment of course.

slimjim · July 4, 2005, 5:31am

I’m almost sorry I stumbled onto this thread, I don’t really have the time to debate this issue in depth with you guys.

I find it ridiculous that you guys would even offer some of the statements you’ve thrown out as evidence. Warring tribes in Africa for thousands of years? No shit? It wouldn’t have anything to do with the way we created borders without regard to boundaries already in place amongst tribes and forcing tribes that previously had defined their regions into countries created by European colonialism. Or let’s ignore the fact that when colonial powers were at war, their colonies had to fight each other as well. Killing themselves through the spread of AIDs because of unprotected sex? Really? Wouldn’t be because of religions introduced, and ultimately forced onto them[Africans], by those of the Western World.

The other contention, that they had a simple social structure, is also ridiculous. It was unecessary for them to live in cities and thus never developed the need for a centralized government. One could easily make the argument that the people’s interests were better served by such a government system than by a Monarchy which was the predominant system of government used by the Europeans that conquered them.

The question about why America is the only one held responsible is irrelevant. We are American’s and we should hold ourselves to a higher standard. If that means admitting we were wrong when others wouldn’t, then so be it. No country is infallible or without blame.

Back to the original argument would be different if stated in the context that Africa were left totally alone without outside intereference, but as the world exists today, it is obvious that being born in America gives them[blacks, whites, asian, latino, whatever] better advantages than 80-90% of the rest of the world. However, the way many of you have stated your arguments does so in a way as if to almost diminish the harm experienced by Africans throughout the 1800’s up until today when it is obvious that racial undercurrents still, and probably always will, exist.

While we applaud those that came before us in building this country: the presidents, inventors, machinists, pioneers; little mention, if any, is given to the effect slavery’s cheap and abundant labor force had on America’s rise to dominance, allowing plantations to flourish throughout the America’s.

gadget · July 4, 2005, 6:34am

May I please add my rant to this:

Before any of you comment on the condition of Africa do yourself a favour and pay us a visit. Especially Dragon.You might not know this but my “backwards” little country actually has an airport of international standards. Three actually. We are also the third largest producer of gold, second in platinum, fifth in maize production. Just so you fully understand, this is worldwide, not in the continent. Not bad for a country smaller than some of your states.

So get on one of SAA’s aeroplanes and pay me a visit, hell I’ll even put you up in my house for week or so. I will show you the poverty of Soweto and Mamelodi, but I will also try to show you Tokyo Sexwale or Cyril Ramaphosa. These two most probably spend more in a day than everyone on this post will earn in a lifetime. I will show you a country with eleven official languages, I bet you can’t even speak two. I will show you a country that has more innovation in mining and agriculture than any other country in the world. Dit is natuurlik as ek jou nie dood donder wanneer jy van die vliegtuig afklim nie.

Yes I am white, and many of you will say this disqualifies me from commenting on blacks, but I know many of the people you describe as backward. Hell, our president has a masters degree in economics. Yours?

My blood is already boiling. I’ll leave the rest of what I want to say for another day. But before you say another word take me up on my offer.

rancho · July 4, 2005, 9:46am

[quote]gadget wrote:
May I please add my rant to this:

Before any of you comment on the condition of Africa do yourself a favour and pay us a visit. Especially Dragon.You might not know this but my “backwards” little country actually has an airport of international standards. Three actually. We are also the third largest producer of gold, second in platinum, fifth in maize production. Just so you fully understand, this is worldwide, not in the continent. Not bad for a country smaller than some of your states.

So get on one of SAA’s aeroplanes and pay me a visit, hell I’ll even put you up in my house for week or so. I will show you the poverty of Soweto and Mamelodi, but I will also try to show you Tokyo Sexwale or Cyril Ramaphosa. These two most probably spend more in a day than everyone on this post will earn in a lifetime. I will show you a country with eleven official languages, I bet you can’t even speak two. I will show you a country that has more innovation in mining and agriculture than any other country in the world. Dit is natuurlik as ek jou nie dood donder wanneer jy van die vliegtuig afklim nie.

Yes I am white, and many of you will say this disqualifies me from commenting on blacks, but I know many of the people you describe as backward. Hell, our president has a masters degree in economics. Yours?

My blood is already boiling. I’ll leave the rest of what I want to say for another day. But before you say another word take me up on my offer. [/quote]

Good Points and you are a Gentlemen, I hope those who think the world exist between there two ears take you up on your offer to see the world from a less limited view the chair in front of there evening news, I find the national archives a good starting point too.

Aleksandr · July 4, 2005, 10:05am

[quote]drag0n252pi wrote:

Prof just so you could follow along, If they were so sophisticated as you put it then why were they overrun by a more advanced society? You want to play semantics here and you keep repeating the smae useless meaningless diatribe.[/quote]

I wasn’t going to get into this one at all, but this little morcel was too tempting. Europe’s military power was inferior to almost every other civilization’s, except for their naval technology. Europe’s naval advancement, created largely because of it’s geography and the near-constant warfare, led to an advantage that superior land warfare couldn’t withstand. Of course, there are isolated exceptions (eg the Abesinians and the Zulu).

Your notion that Africa was a primitive tribal land, where as europe was an advanced culture is laughable (what do you call all of the “clan” fighting in Europe, if not tribal warfare?). Africa had advanced civilazations while Europeans lived in caves. When native americans come up, everyone thinks of North America. Look at Central and South America, and you’ll find formidable civilizations. It has been speculated that the Spanish would have never taken the Aztec, were it not for the cooperations of their enemies.

All-in-all, your ethnocentrism is astounding. You have to realize that Europe’s advantage originated by chance, and started out quite small. Over time, as they conquered more and more people, they assimilated their technology, and become more powerful. Every viewpoint you’ve expressed shows a clear pattern…

rainjack · July 4, 2005, 11:13am

The strong flourish and the weak are conquered.

There’s no way to make that politically correct, but trying to make the weak and the conquered to be brave and strong is revisionist in it’s own right.

You can use all the studies and ‘logic’ you want to, but when it is all sifted out, you find that the weak are conquered and the strong flourish.

I for one refuse to be guilted into an apologist’s role for stating the obvious. If the incas, and the aztecs, and mayans were truly as advanced as you claim, they would not have been destroyed.

Was it fair? No. Until the Blame America revisionists started blowing their horns, it was just accepted that the weak die and the strong prosper. Fairness and equity have no place in the evolution of societies.

drag0n252pi · July 4, 2005, 1:27pm

[quote]Professor X wrote:
drag0n252pi wrote:
When was the last time you looked at how much the federal government confiscates of your taxes to give away? Yep some of it goes to the Tribes and they are also making billions with their casinos employing many tribe members all paid for by us. I dont look down my nose at any culture or civilization. I have traveled all over the world and seen it all. I work in a hospital know as the director of security and I see every day the inhumanity that man does to man. Dont preach to the choir.

My grandmother was Cherokee indian. Contrary to your apparent belief, they are not a rich people and any money given to them doesn’t justify the means in which much of that land was originally taken.

Rainjack’s response also confuses me…as if we should ignore what was done in the past simply because we were born after an event. It is not hypocritical for the children of a past event to note the negatives that occured, even if only for the sake of discussion. Otherwise, future generations are born with no in depth knowledge of the past. Understanding where you came from is essential in order to build from that point.

You mentioned “inhumanity”, meanwhile you look down your nose at every other culture but your own. Everyone else before us was “primitive” living in the “dark ages” according to you. Thank GOD the Europeans came along and “saved” all of those other cultures through slavery and hostile take over. You seem to have no respect for other cultures different than your bike-riding-leather-wearing-sunglasses see directly in front of them. I am glad you work security at a hospital. I would hate to see you in charge of actually saving any of those lives directly.[/quote]

Prof at no time did I ever imply that I look down my nose at other cultures. THat is why I travel to learn. I dont always stay in a nice cozy luzury hotel. I have gone out and lived in the villages, tried to speak their languages and even made friends.

Not saving lives, what are you kidding me? 25 years as a cop and now director of security and prior to it all served in special forces in Viet Nam, what do you think I do? It is clear that you have no idea of what any of those jobs entail otherwise you would have not made such a short sighted statement. During the convention I had the honor of heading the security detail at the 4 Seasons where I was responsible for the safety of Hillary, Gore, Dan Rather and host of others. Yeah I worked hand in hand with the secret service. You can’t hold a candle to me.

drag0n252pi · July 4, 2005, 1:32pm

[quote]TeeVee69 wrote:
drag0n252pi wrote:
No you’re not intolerant, no not at all. Just another fucking bigoted asshole.

Whoa, take it easy there. No need to resort to name-calling. I would think that your superior cultural viewpoint could see through to the fact that I was just having fun at your expense. But if I’ve offended you with my comments about your outfit, I apologize. But you must admit: given your extreme views and manner of dress, you are setting yourself up to be a target.

Nice to see you finally learned to use that quote function. See, it wasn’t that difficult to change some bad habits, now was it?

Cheers![/quote]

I used the quote function so you all wouldn’t whine. I didnt know that stating historical fact was an extremem view. I dont think I am superior and never alluded to that fact. I made a general statement and a few have made it a federal case. Apology accepted and I withdraw my egregious comment.

drag0n252pi · July 4, 2005, 1:37pm

[quote]Jprocrastinator wrote:
Vyapada wrote:
Another idea for discussion in this thread; would Africa be in the situation it is now without the substantial meddling of foreign powers - if we erased African slavery from history what would Africa look like today?

I would just like to expand on what Vyapada said. First of all, the mentality that allowed for the creation of black slavery (That blacks were inferior or sub human and therefore it was ok to enslave them) Is the same attitude that allowed the colinial powers to carve up Africa and exploit it. While it is true that Africa is in very sad state today, this is a direct result of the mess created by the colonial powers. If not for the problems they created in carving it up and in creating arbritrary national borders upon giving up there colonies, there would not be the amount of wars, poverty, and other problems that exist today. Africa before the invaders was culturally rich and healthy, and way back in the day, (We’re talking ancient history here) There were parts of Africa that were smelting iron while certain areas of Europe were just coming out of the stone age. It is interesting to contemplate how healthy and advanced the continent would be if not for the “White Man’s burden” mentality that allowed for slavery and colonial domination.[/quote]

Western Europe was not the first to divide up Africa. Let’s see, there were the Romans, the Greeks, the Persians and the Egyptians at points in time conquered them. SHow me a Gold COast country that had the civilization of the Egyptians and then maybe your argument can hold water.

drag0n252pi · July 4, 2005, 1:44pm

[quote]gadget wrote:
May I please add my rant to this:

Before any of you comment on the condition of Africa do yourself a favour and pay us a visit. Especially Dragon.You might not know this but my “backwards” little country actually has an airport of international standards. Three actually. We are also the third largest producer of gold, second in platinum, fifth in maize production. Just so you fully understand, this is worldwide, not in the continent. Not bad for a country smaller than some of your states.

So get on one of SAA’s aeroplanes and pay me a visit, hell I’ll even put you up in my house for week or so. I will show you the poverty of Soweto and Mamelodi, but I will also try to show you Tokyo Sexwale or Cyril Ramaphosa. These two most probably spend more in a day than everyone on this post will earn in a lifetime. I will show you a country with eleven official languages, I bet you can’t even speak two. I will show you a country that has more innovation in mining and agriculture than any other country in the world. Dit is natuurlik as ek jou nie dood donder wanneer jy van die vliegtuig afklim nie.

Yes I am white, and many of you will say this disqualifies me from commenting on blacks, but I know many of the people you describe as backward. Hell, our president has a masters degree in economics. Yours?

My blood is already boiling. I’ll leave the rest of what I want to say for another day. But before you say another word take me up on my offer. [/quote]

Been to Nigeria and Egypt. I know about South Africa and I too know plenty of millionaires. If you had read my earliuer posts I stated that South Africa was far ahead of the rest of the continent. Thanks the Boers for that.

drag0n252pi · July 4, 2005, 1:46pm

[quote]rainjack wrote:
The strong flourish and the weak are conquered.

There’s no way to make that politically correct, but trying to make the weak and the conquered to be brave and strong is revisionist in it’s own right.

You can use all the studies and ‘logic’ you want to, but when it is all sifted out, you find that the weak are conquered and the strong flourish.

I for one refuse to be guilted into an apologist’s role for stating the obvious. If the incas, and the aztecs, and mayans were truly as advanced as you claim, they would not have been destroyed.

Was it fair? No. Until the Blame America revisionists started blowing their horns, it was just accepted that the weak die and the strong prosper. Fairness and equity have no place in the evolution of societies.[/quote]

Bravo!

hedo · July 4, 2005, 2:51pm

Thomas Sowell is certainly an esteemed historian who wrote a great deal about the world history of slavery, of many different cultures. He is not a new PC professor with an agenda.

A quote of his is particularly topical:

“Today slavey is too often discussed as an abstract question with an easy answer, leading to sweeping condemnations of those who did not reach that easy answer in their own time. In nineteenth-century America, especially, there was no alternative that was not traumatic, including both the continuation of slavery and the ending of it in the manner in which it was in fact ended by the Civil War- at a cost of one life for every six slaves freed. Many problems can be made simple, but only by leaving out the complications which those in the midst of these problems cannot so easily escape with a turn of a phrase, as those who look back on them in later centuries can.”

Aleksandr · July 4, 2005, 2:57pm

[quote]rainjack wrote:
The strong flourish and the weak are conquered.

There’s no way to make that politically correct, but trying to make the weak and the conquered to be brave and strong is revisionist in it’s own right.

You can use all the studies and ‘logic’ you want to, but when it is all sifted out, you find that the weak are conquered and the strong flourish.

I for one refuse to be guilted into an apologist’s role for stating the obvious. If the incas, and the aztecs, and mayans were truly as advanced as you claim, they would not have been destroyed.

Was it fair? No. Until the Blame America revisionists started blowing their horns, it was just accepted that the weak die and the strong prosper. Fairness and equity have no place in the evolution of societies.[/quote]

You are making an error in assuming that the conqueres are the strong. Shit happens. Bad luck actually does occur, and it shapes history. The Aztec mistook the identity of the spanish, and when the fighting started too many others in the area sided against them (not surprising, considering how the Aztec treated those smaller, weaker tribes). The Kamekazi saved Japan from the Mongols, The crossing of the Alps with elephants saved Rome, and let it flourish into a huge empire.

The Nazis were crushed because they invaded the USSR too early. D-Day was a success because Hitler sent his forces to the wrong place. The UN allowed the Korean war because the USSR was boycotting and missed the chance to veto. It’s not as simple as “the strongest win”, there are all sorts of random things that change everything. In the case of europe’s dominance, it was the geography of the area that necessitated the development of naval tachnology.

The spanish exploration of the world was made possible by the huge wealth gathered from muslims and jews during the inquisition. The inquisition occured because the moores made several mistakes in occupying spain.

Also, loosing a war does not make a civilization primitive. Germany lost WWII, but I certainly doubt anyone would call the country technologically backwards.

But what does it matter? No one is asking you to apologize, just understand the events that led to the current situation. If something bad happened, saying “yeah, that was bad” doesn’t hurt you, does it? Further, pretending like everything is fair now is going to piss off a lot of people, and rightfully so.

You claim that this is an interesting topic to discuss, I assert that the very question is inherently racist. Why would blacks in america have to be taken as slaves to live there? Let’s pretend America is a beter place to live than Africa. I have a lot of african friends, and many of them move right back home, from Canada and the US, as soon as they get the chance, but that’s a whole different argument.

Anyway, the US is better, let’s say. Why isn’t the question “are blacks that immigrated here better off than those who didn’t?” Your assumption that, unlike everyone else, blacks should not have been able to freely immigrate into the US, and should be thankful that they were even let in is racist. As a result, you (the original poster), and the guys agreeing with you, are racist.

Now, Rainjack said that The strong flourish and the weak are conquered. If that’s how it has to be, I know a lot of guys that have no problem with that. Just realize that if you tell blacks they must either be subjugated, or “be strong”, you are going to see a whole lot more Nat Turners. The strong flourish? “Them’s fightin’ words”, as they say.

Aleksandr · July 4, 2005, 3:07pm

[quote]drag0n252pi wrote:
Jprocrastinator wrote:
Vyapada wrote:
Another idea for discussion in this thread; would Africa be in the situation it is now without the substantial meddling of foreign powers - if we erased African slavery from history what would Africa look like today?

I would just like to expand on what Vyapada said. First of all, the mentality that allowed for the creation of black slavery (That blacks were inferior or sub human and therefore it was ok to enslave them) Is the same attitude that allowed the colinial powers to carve up Africa and exploit it. While it is true that Africa is in very sad state today, this is a direct result of the mess created by the colonial powers. If not for the problems they created in carving it up and in creating arbritrary national borders upon giving up there colonies, there would not be the amount of wars, poverty, and other problems that exist today. Africa before the invaders was culturally rich and healthy, and way back in the day, (We’re talking ancient history here) There were parts of Africa that were smelting iron while certain areas of Europe were just coming out of the stone age. It is interesting to contemplate how healthy and advanced the continent would be if not for the “White Man’s burden” mentality that allowed for slavery and colonial domination.

Western Europe was not the first to divide up Africa. Let’s see, there were the Romans, the Greeks, the Persians and the Egyptians at points in time conquered them. SHow me a Gold COast country that had the civilization of the Egyptians and then maybe your argument can hold water.[/quote]

Remember that egyptians are african…

But to answer your challenge, here are some readings to get you started.

"Koslow, Philip. Centuries of Greatness - The West African Kingdoms:750-1900, Chelsea House Publishers, 1995.

McKissack, Patricia and Fredrick Mckissack. The Royal Kingdoms of Ghana, Mali, and Songhay - Life in Medieval Africa, Henry Holt and Company, Inc., 1994.

Bianchi, Robert Steven. The Nubians - People of the Ancient Nile,

Millbrook Press,1994.

Chu, Daniel and Elliott Skinner. A Glorious Age in Africa - The Story of Three Great African Empires, Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1965.

Trupin, James E. West Africa - A Background Book from Ancient Kingdoms to Modern Times, Parent’s Magazine Press. New York, 1971."

rainjack · July 4, 2005, 3:38pm

[quote]Aleksandr wrote:
rainjack wrote:
The strong flourish and the weak are conquered.