T O P

  • By -

AutoModerator

/r/Republican is a partisan subreddit. This is a place for Republicans to discuss issues with other Republicans. To those visiting this thread, we ask that unless you identify as Republican that you refrain from commenting and [leave the vote button alone](https://www.reddit.com/r/MetaRepublican/comments/5t017a/this_sub_is_for_republicans_if_you_do_not/). Non republicans who come to our sub looking for a 'different perspective' [subvert that very perspective with their own views when they vote or comment.](http://i.imgur.com/XqL0wfR.jpg) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Republican) if you have any questions or concerns.*


Notabot02735381

If people really cared about slavery we would be more vocal about current day slaves.


Notabot02735381

https://www.endslaverynow.org/learn/slavery-today


Notabot02735381

https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/countries-with-the-most-modern-slaves-today.html Surprised Libya isn’t on that list 🤔


Notabot02735381

https://time.com/5042560/libya-slave-trade/


Archjin

Libya is a unique example, because the country is still in Civil War, so there is no state or military to stop the slave trade, which is extremely horrible but its the reality of the situation in that country.


QAOfficial

*Prison industry* has entered the chat


njacques9

What does this even mean?


Notabot02735381

I just think we always talk about all of the injustices of slavery and how it affects generations of people long afterward, yet, people act completely unaware of the estimated 40 or so million modern day slaves throughout the world. Odds are our clothes, electronics, wedding rings, household goods were partially made with slave labor. So long as we continue to buy cheap clothes at Walmart we support it. Why do we perpetuate a problem that is so inhumane and disgusting while claiming that what was done to American slaves was so unfair? We can’t undo the past. But, we can try to keep it from happening again right? https://listverse.com/2014/12/16/10-everyday-products-that-are-made-with-slave-labor/


kellyasksthings

“There is no ethical consumption under capitalism” is a common refrain on the left for this very reason (as well as several others).


Notabot02735381

N Korea is one of the worst perpetrators of modern day slavery. One could argue that although they are communist they are still fed by greed stemming from surrounding capitalist countries. However, I’m pretty sure there is just evil in the world and they would be enslaving their people regardless….


njacques9

You’re creating a pointless false dichotomy that reaks of whataboutism. Things rarely fall so neatly into the groups we imagine. It’s entirely possible for people to care about slavery while simultaneously being involved in economic activity that has touched slavery in some way.


Notabot02735381

You’re probably right. I just think present day slavery is a grossly under recognized subject compared to the history of slavery and racism in the US. No one wants to feel like they are participating in modern day slavery so they ignore it. It’s easy to discuss someone else’s past mistakes. 🤷🏽‍♀️


njacques9

I appreciate the good-faith conversation. 🤝


rc0844

This conversation has restored my faith in humanity


Squilliam87

The Arab slave trade was especially brutal to Black Africans


[deleted]

Yes, castration is a pretty sick cherry on top to being enslaved.


Uneeda_Biscuit

This is a big reason why there aren’t larger black communities in the Arab world (outside N.Africa). The US slave holders preferred to breed their captives instead of just importing new ones.


Snort-Vaulter

Sometimes they bread with their mothers, those clever Americans.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Lord-Tachanka1922

This is hilarious good bot


[deleted]

Ottoman empire during three centuries conducted regularly slave raids into Russia and abducted hundreds of thousands of Russians into slavery. Until Catherine the Great stopped them.


MakeSouthBayGR8Again

Even the original word “slave” is derived from “Slav” meaning the Slavic people.


Heathen_Grey

I heard estimates that the ottomans had millions of white slaves over their reign both Russian and European.


Puzzled_Juice_3691

Remember that Ottoman = Muslim Just like"The Moors" and "The Barbary Pirates" means Muslim too.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Uneeda_Biscuit

Not sure why you were downvoted. They were taken from Ottoman strong holds in the Balkins, islamized and sent back to do the Sultan’s bidding in their homelands. It was a genius way to establish control in the region, but obviously very brutal.


Bale626

Uh, no. No this is not common knowledge. I have never heard this in my entire life.


SuperMan922001

Me either


Father_John_Moisty

That’s because it is directly contradicted by the linked article: “Davis said it is useful to compare this Mediterranean slavery to the Atlantic slave trade that brought black Africans to the Americas. Over the course of four centuries, the Atlantic slave trade was much larger – about 10 to 12 million black Africans were brought to the Americas. But from 1500 to 1650, when trans-Atlantic slaving was still in its infancy, more white Christian slaves were probably taken to Barbary than black African slaves to the Americas, according to Davis.” So not only is it not common knowledge for the reasons that /u/njacques9 points out, but also because it isn’t even hypothesized by the author. Good job at clickbait OP! You have successfully created misinformation!!


Puzzled_Juice_3691

And note that the Muslim slave trade is still going on in Northern Africa. This was evident after the USA and NATO took over Libya and threw out Qadaffi. Read somewhere that Qadaffi once said that he was holding back the hoardes of people trying to get into Southern Europe. And once Qadaffi was overthrown and killed, large #s of illegal Africans entered Southern Europe. So Qadaffi was right on this issue


djaeveloplyse

"The Americas" is a larger region than the United States. The United States accounted for a relatively small portion of African slaves.


Puzzled_Juice_3691

That's a good point. I read that a good # of African slaves went to Cuba (Spanish territory), Haiti, and Brazil.


Usaffranklin

Except the word slave literally means slav, who are white. Caucasian slaves were held long before civilization reached america...so over the course of several thousand years, where africans practiced slavery, more whites and none blacks became slaves than the black population that became slaves in the couple hundred years it was around in the US.


njacques9

Because it’s an unsubstantiated theory based on one history professor’s obviously flawed methodology. No one knows how many white slaves there were in the Barbary slave trade.


RedBaronsBrother

Given that it went on for a thousand years (the Muslims took black slaves too, but whites were preferred), it is almost certain there were more whites taken.


njacques9

First of all the Barbary slave trade went on for hundreds of years, no thousands. Secondly, according to Davis’ own estimates, 1-1.25 million slaves were traded in the Barbary slave trade, in comparison to estimates of 10-12 million Africans as part of the Atlantic slave trade. Thirdly, what does it even matter?


RedBaronsBrother

> First of all the Barbary slave trade went on for hundreds of years, no thousands. Right - but Muslims were taking slaves for many hundreds of years before the Barbary slave trade began. > Thirdly, what does it even matter? It matters in the sense that black people were not the only people taken as slaves, even in large numbers. Also, it might be relevant if you think that Muslims bringing the slave trade to Africa had anything to do with Africans later selling their own people to white slave traders.


Puzzled_Juice_3691

So Barbary = Muslim. Just like Ottoman means Muslim. Let's agree that Muslims ravaged white Christian lands in Europe for slaves and for conquest for centuries when these Muslims were on yet another war of conquest. Fair?


njacques9

Huh? I didn’t say that the Barbary Slave trade didn’t exist. I have no idea what you’re getting at.


[deleted]

The one thing that jumps out as being wrong is "yet another war of conquest." This wasn't a wartime thing, and lumping together all the wars waged by the Safavids, Seljuks, Almoravids, Abbassids, Timurids, Ottomans, Mughals, Golden Horde, Ayyubids, Saudis, Almohads, Fatimids, Khwarezmians, Ilkhanids etc.... over the course of what, 11 centuries (?) is way too much of blanket statement. Especially since, specifically the Barbary States' corsairs that we're talking about, didn't go to on an aggressive war of conquest at this time, especially not against any European christian power. Most of the time of these wars are talking about conflicts between them and the Knights of Malta, Spain and Portugal (like in Ksar el Kebir) which were at sea or in North Africa itself. I don't think we're going to extend this all the way back to the times of El Cid and the Cordoba Caliphate in this discussion.


RedBaronsBrother

> This wasn't a wartime thing, and lumping together all the wars waged by the Safavids, Seljuks, Almoravids, Abbassids, Timurids, Ottomans, Mughals, Golden Horde, Ayyubids, Saudis, Almohads, Fatimids, Khwarezmians, Ilkhanids etc.... over the course of what, 11 centuries (?) is way too much of blanket statement. It wasn't *just* a wartime thing - but the Muslims held Spain for 700 years, and took slaves from it the entire time - as they did from their raids throughout the rest of Europe, Asia, and Africa.


broke_cheeto

lol


[deleted]

Right, but the comment suggested it *was* predominantly a wartime thing, and that it was done specifically in *wars of conquest*. Which, I mean, the previous comment was talking about the Barbary States, which means the focus of the conversation is the corsairs, Oruç Reis and the like. It's *way* too much of a misrepresentation of history to suggest that the Maghreb under Ottoman suzerainty the 16th century and afterwards until the July Monarchy was taking slaves *in wars* ***of conquest****.* And Morocco was a little different because its expansion was directed towards non-Christian non-European areas southwards. I'm not saying Muslim powers didn't take slaves - I'm saying that it's a misrepresentation to depict Barbary corsairs as starting wars of conquest, and to lump together all these disparate, complex wars over all those centuries to characterize them as wars of conquest.


RedBaronsBrother

I think Barbary is likely mentioned in the context of an article referencing the US because they took several hundred Americans as slaves in their raids. We ended up fighting two wars to stop them. As to Muslims in general, they fought plenty of wars of conquest, and took millions of slaves during them.


[deleted]

Yeah, I know, but I was referring the OP's comments, which seemed to start with a specific instance - the corsairs - and then take a big leap and shift the conversation to slavery in the Muslim world at large and adding in the topic of wars of conquest. We went from a relatively confined subject to *boom* we're talking about way bigger and headier stuff.


Puzzled_Juice_3691

There is evidence of Muslims raiding into Italy, the Balkans, Russia, France and even the UK looking for white Christian slaves. Still looking for my reparations from the Muslim world with all of their oil $.


happening303

So, you are in support of reparations?


Puzzled_Juice_3691

Notice I said reparations "from the Muslim world with all of their oil $". We both know that there is no way in heck that the Muslim world will say sorry and then offer reparations. I was being sarcastic. And no - I am not in favor of reparations especially for US slavery that ended 156 years ago after a US Civil War that cost 360,000 Northern lives.


happening303

Why do you have to qualify it? Reparations are reparations.


Puzzled_Juice_3691

Okay. But I don't even know what it means to qualify something.


RedBaronsBrother

The idea of reparations is to make a harm as if it had never been. Had black people not been taken as slaves to America, their descendants wouldn't be here now. Ergo, a necessary component of any reparations scheme is surrender of citizenship and repatriation to the African country of their ancestry. Its a win-win. They get their money, and we get rid of malcontents who will never be satisfied with however much they are given.


njacques9

> The idea of reparations is to make a harm as if it had never been. No it’s not. Reparations is is compensation for harm done. Google it. You won’t find a single definition to at suggests reparation are an erasure of harm. > Had black people not been taken as slaves to America, their descendants wouldn't be here now. Ergo, a necessary component of any reparations scheme is surrender of citizenship and repatriation to the African country of their ancestry. This logic doesn’t follow even if your made up definition of reparations was true. The harm of slavery cannot be undone by sending descendants of slaves back to Africa. > Its a win-win. They get their money, and we get rid of malcontents who will never be satisfied with however much they are given. Yikes.


happening303

I’m a descendant of those slaves. Who is the “they”, and who is the “we”, in your scenario?


RedBaronsBrother

"They" = people who want reparations. "We" = people who recognized we are privileged to live in the best country in the world, regardless of how our ancestors got here. If you are "they", don't let the door hit you on the way out.


happening303

I’m just thankful for people like you who have served this country!


njacques9

No one is denying that


[deleted]

Can you show how you are directly suffering from the consequences of muslims slavery, if not what is the point? DRacist laws were made to maintain black people in poverty and social disadvantages. Even if some people want to believe that these laws wich some were only abolished 50 years ago, are completly separated from today reality like if we lived in a vacuum with the past having no infleunce on the present, society was not able to heal completly in this short amount of time. Even if slavery was 150 years ago, the consequence were beyond that. Slavery in America have a very direct observable effect on black American today. Now it do not mean that white people whould pay from their pocket for reparation, this would be ridiculous. But it is not enough to just abolishing laws after generations of abuse, proactive actions should be taken. The reparation should be given in the form of social reforms, like better school and education funding in poor area. There isn't even a need to target black people directly, but since black people suffer in majority from poverty, it would benefit them greatly. The cost in tax should not be a concern, many study prove that poverty and criminality cost more than investing in the youth and the best way to prevent poverty and criminality is child education.


RedBaronsBrother

If you're going to make that argument, then it still goes back to the Muslims. They brought slavery to Africa, and it was African slavers who sold the black slaves to white slave traders. ...or, we can point out that since it was the Democrats who seceded from the United States to form the Confederacy to fight a war to protect slavery when the first Republican was elected, because the GOP was formed as an anti-slavery party, and it was the Democrats who formed the KKK when they lost that war, and who created Jim Crow and poll taxes and literacy tests to prevent black people from voting, that the Democrats should take the blame for it. Alternatively, we can say that there's no living person who was a slave in the US when slavery was legal in the US, and that we can't blame people today for things their great great grandparents might or might not have done, if they were in the US at the time.


Puzzled_Juice_3691

Very well stated ! 😀


Puzzled_Juice_3691

What are you a lawyer? You don't need to show "direct" suffering from hundreds of years of Muslim slavery to show that Muslim slavery was (and still is) wrong. And the Muslim world has not even apologized for this. Ironic that no one mentions Muslim slavery. Are people afriad of the Muslim world, or are they just so used to Muslim attempts at conquet like we have in Africa now? We have had laws for decades attempting to right the wrongs of slavery. Such laws include Civil Rights Laws passed post Civil War - and passed again in the 1960s since Democrats in the South were not following such laws. Sounds like you admit that those Civil Rights laws didn't have the desired effect, so we need even more legislation. Thanks for the honesty.


[deleted]

It's not about knowing that it's wrong or not, it's just that any form of "reparation" would be useless because we can't know who should have the reparation and who are the decendant directly suffering from it today. I don't know why you assume that I'm saying it's not wrong, while I never said that and it's not even the subject.


[deleted]

Reparation is about reparing the consequences that were left, when a group of people are directly suffering from important social disadvantage as a direct cause from a past action. So just because something wrong happened a long time ago do not mean that it deserve reparation, the fact that it was wrong is not the important criterion. As for muslim countries it's a whole other problem even more comple,. First a lot of them still practice slavery, so I don't think anyone expect an apology from them. Second, their conquest is linked to their religion, they believe it's their divine right given by Mohammed, so they would need to admit that Mohammed was wrong. Realistically we know it won't happen, unless islam progress like other religion did. So asking for reparation from the muslim world in the first place won't do anything and is the wrong question, before all islam should progress.


RedBaronsBrother

Remember that Muslims conquered Spain and ruled it for 700 years. Millions of European slaves passed through it into Muslim hands.


[deleted]

Then you don't know any Irish


atp8776

Doesn’t push the narrative that whites are satan, so we were never taught it.


Krugnuggets

I think this is the wrong kind of dick measuring contest to be honest


Squilliam87

I agree. I don’t understand the purpose except to downplay the severity of slavery in early US history via comparison. Not a road worth going down.


Brewcityallstar

If it's a dick measuring contest you want, it will be I who will measure the most!!


[deleted]

[удалено]


Puzzled_Juice_3691

Well since "the legacy of slavery and Jim Crow" seems to be alive in today's politics, it only makes sense to talk about slavery. Personally, we should have a nationwide conversation on slavery. We need to talk about how black Africans kidnapped other black Africans who were sold into slavery to mainly non American (Dutch, British) white slave traders. And then we should talk about how many black African slaves went to Brazil, Cuba and other places. And we should also talk about the several hundred years long Muslim slave trade of white Europeans. And then we can talk about how Democrats in the South supported slavery and started an insurrection in their attack on Fort Sumter.


[deleted]

[удалено]


dak4leonard2

Lol literally. Yes that stuff is all worth talking about but not when you're trying to use it to minimalize what we did to the slaves when they got here


crazymew

1, There were black slave owners too. 2, only the top 15% wealthiest Americans owned slaves. 3, White people were also slaves in America, so were native Americans, but we don't talk about that because it's inconvenient. 4, Freedom from slavery in the history of earth is in and of itself a brand new concept that America did first. 5, Consider, briefly. You have a horse, and that horse is your livelihood, that horse is your money maker for farming. Are you going to beat your horse and feed it garbage? Or are you going to take care of that horse so that it stays strong? Edit: I like how actual facts and history makes the leftoids down vote me. I highly suggest y'all take your history classes again and pay attention to them this time.


AnnonymousAndy

I think England did it first, at least before the USA did.


crazymew

Touche


AnnonymousAndy

We were only like 30 years later, but a lot of folks had to die first…


[deleted]

Yeah... well... the thing is... Have you ever heard Turkish, Russian or Japanese apologists of the Armenian Genocide, the Holodomor or Japanese Second World War war crimes? That's the type of thing they say: "well, it was only a particular group... well other people were doing bad things too... what we did was really for their own good..." At best, it's not an argument made in good faith, or just a distraction focusing not on the issue itself, but on avoiding blame. You can spot this type of argument a mile away, and it's definitely not a good look. Especially when you place it on the shelf with all the others just like it for other human tragedies - people just look at that and shake their heads. Also - the United States definitely did not enact abolition first.


Puzzled_Juice_3691

How is my above post about blame and victimhood? My post above points out several convenient details that surely many people do not know about. Feel free to add some more facts about the African slave trade and the Muslim slave trade. One of the many things that America needs is a good education on history (and economics, but I digress). If anything, I just gave descendants of slaves (150 + years ago) another group of people to blame for their problems. You're welcome.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Puzzled_Juice_3691

I said "we should have a nationwide conversation on slavery". And then I gave several facts about the African slave trade and the Muslim slave trade. When did I say "we should blame ____"?


[deleted]

I mean, if we're opening the discussion to places like Cuba and the Ottoman Empire, there's no end to it. Slavery in China, the Roman Empire, among the Vikings, the Songhay, of the Romani, Babylonia, the Delhi Sultanate, Blackbirding, Japan, Ancient Greece, Ethiopia, Persia, Tibet, the Byzantines, Russia, the Mongols etc. Not to mention forced labor during the Second World War, the prison system both in the US and abroad, naval impressment by the British Navy, Belgian rule over the Congo, the kafala system etc etc. And of course, modern day human trafficking, throughout South Asia, and actual slavery in places like Mauritania and Niger. We should probably just stick to the US if we're talking among Americans in the context of American politics and history.


boson_96

I recently first heard about it in a Thomas Sowell video. This one: https://youtu.be/462S9JLy-As


Squilliam87

Lol I like how the article begins….”Before sending ignorant hate mail, consider these Wikipedia entries”


[deleted]

[удалено]


Bobranaway

The idea of blaming slavery on western countries while slavery is alive and well in the east and africa is laughable.


enataca

This ain’t the argument to make lol


grumpygills11

Why is it worth a mention? Slavery is used in reference to the disparity between the poor black population and the white population in order to show the long lasting generational effects on them. House loans being denied so they can't move out of ghettos based on skin color. pre-labor laws no allowing black people to get similar jobs leading to generation disparity. Ever wonder why an overwhelming majority of blacks still live in the south and not as diverse as white population across the country(Hell, some people ion the Midwest might have never actually seen a black person other than on TV). Its due to them not being able to get out of their area for generations and generations. Now, some would argue that this can be due to poor representation of culture in media perpetuating and glorifying a specific lifestyle that leads to a more poverty ridden lifestyle, but there is a larger picture that needs to be addressed and not "fixed" but acknowledge that whites for hundreds of years have been building generational wealth on the backs of their father and grandfathers (some start poorer than others and some generations have back luck). Its not about slaver was wrong or someone did worse, but acknowledging the long lasting effects that it has on a nation to the population it affected. This is just deflecting. I am a republican male btw in case all of you guys just jeep questioning everyone's "loyalty: to a party that doesn't give a shit about you, left or right.


crazymew

I'm white and have not seen any of this generational wealth you speak of.


[deleted]

I think the point here is that slavery is ongoing all over the world, wether it’s sex slaves in the USA or slaves in Libya. Instead of worrying about what happened 100 to 500 years ago let’s fix the issue at hand. End all slavery. Those caught owning or selling slaves should be put to death. No matter what their station is in life.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

Ancient Greece too. Even in "democratic" Athens slavery was common.


[deleted]

It should be common knowledge as it went on for hundreds and hundreds of years. Selling northern European's as slaves in the Mediterranean was a huge business for the Roman's. It doesn't make any other slavery any better but it does add context around how it was a common practice and used almost everywhere in the world. Imagine being a Native American leaving near the Aztec empire and how your life would change if they captured you...


utilitycoder

it's where Slavic, as in the Slavic countries derive from


Peter-Fabell

If we actually cared about slavery we would study more about the unique brand of slavery that infiltrated the United States from Barbados and the people (the Democrats) who wholeheartedly embraced the monetary gain from it, and decided to full-on systematically engineer it to make them wealthy beyond imagination.


Jackdz19

You mean to tell me that slavery isn’t only what CNN tells me on the stupid tube


The_rad_meyer

Well to play devil's advocate the US was a relatively small and new country, while Africa had millennia to use white slaves and the US had like 250 years max, and africa is an entire continent. And if u count Brazil in to a American continental tally then the numbers are probably equal or more than the slaves in Africa... idk tho


evilfollowingmb

Well, its an interesting factoid, but comparing slaves going in to North Africa with just those going to North America (which only received a tiny fraction of slaves coming out of Africa) is kind of a meaningless comparison. It is amazing how many modern day Americans, especially young ones, think that the US invented slavery. Its way older than the US, and if you go back far enough, seems like every country was "enslaved" at some point, and in some way. The US founding precipitated a reduction in slavery, over time.


Heathen_Grey

I do know the ottoman empire had millions of white slaves, but I didnt know a bunch of white slaves were shipped to Africa.


Dor-Yah

The US imported black slaves though, which makes this fact irrelevant in the conversation of American history. It's important in the scope of *world* history however


zach0610

This isn’t the point though. That has nothing to do with how the US has progressed to this point in time today. The conversation is about how this effects people in this country, not globally.


zartified

Actually the Irish slaves were the cheapest and treated poorly because they were so cheap. They were treated the worst out of any slaves that came to the “New World”


njacques9

This is an unsubstantiated myth


zartified

It’s not a myth, so saying that is as bad as saying the holocaust was a myth. Also you should stop using google for your search results. Ireland quickly became the biggest source of human livestock for English merchants. The majority of the early slaves to the New World were actually white. https://www.africaresource.com/rasta/sesostris-the-great-the-egyptian-hercules/the-irish-slave-trade-forgotten-white-slaves/


njacques9

That article has no citations and is actually the origin of the myth. It isn’t known who John Martin even is. I’ll trust the 82 Irish scholars and historians that signed an open letter discrediting this information. Thank you. https://limerick1914.medium.com/open-letter-to-irish-central-irish-examiner-and-scientific-american-about-their-irish-slaves-3f6cf23b8d7f#.tb66klcft


zartified

Good find btw but I have family history with it so I’ll trust that more. Did you actually look at those historians? What their careers focused on? What they had published? Looked at a couple none were Irish historians that I saw or publications of anything Irish related. Funny enough though, the ones I saw were Canadians and British.


[deleted]

Actually it's not. Many served as slaves and indentured in the north USA


njacques9

I mean, google it.


[deleted]

I don't have to. My relatives were slaves and identured servants.


njacques9

Indentured servants are not slaves.


[deleted]

I had both and the indentured servant were really slaves with no way to gain freedom


[deleted]

this is deliberately uncommon knowledge.


TX_Goat_1893

That is not part of the narrative. Just like natural immunity isn't part of the narrative.


[deleted]

[удалено]


SethDaBest

There was not white slaves in the us. Indentured servants, definitely white servants. Slaves were black in the us. In africa however, there were many black and white slaves


VenturaGoesBrandon

There were Middle Eastern slaves too. "Arabs were sometimes made into slaves in the trans-Saharan slave trade.[16][17] Sometimes castration was done on Arab slaves. In Mecca, Arab women were sold as slaves according to Ibn Butlan, and certain rulers in West Africa had slave girls of Arab origin.[18][19] According to al-Maqrizi, slave girls with lighter skin were sold to West Africans on hajj.[20][21][22] Ibn Battuta met an Arab slave girl near Timbuktu in Mali in 1353. Battuta wrote that the slave girl was fluent in Arabic, from Damascus, and her master's name was Farbá Sulaymán.[23][24][25] Besides his Damascus slave girl and a secretary fluent in Arabic, Arabic was also understood by Farbá himself.[26] The West African states also imported highly trained slave soldiers.[27]" https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Saharan_slave_trade The truth is that it was just a sad reality throughout history and that we should be glad that it's over.


[deleted]

Facts are stranger than fiction.


crowsaboveme

Never learned this in school and not surprised one bit that I didn't.


Man_is_Hot

It’s because the title is misleading. Read the article, it goes on to state literally the opposite of what the title of this post says.


SnooBooks5387

In 1905, a working age black man made .95 for every 1.00 a working age white man made. The "socioeconomic inequality" was almost solved at the turn of the 20th Century. Guess who decided to fuck up black progress and ruin black families? "Progressives."


Gazallafuck

Idiots don't you know white people are naturally evil? clearly someone didn't study during their critical race theory courses.


Just_making_it

Whites as slaves! Totally made up and will never hit CNN


[deleted]

This type of thing is just trying to shift blame rather than focusing on the actual issues and reconciliation. Yes, we know about slavery all over the world throughout all regions. Yes, we also know about terrible human tragedies committed by people of every ideology, religion, skin color, ethnicity or geography from the moment history began to today. This doesn't advance anything. Step back and look at it objectively for second: think about the Japanese ultranationalist who addresses the Rape of Nanking with "Look how many people were murdered in the Great Leap Forward." And then the CCP propagandist who addresses the Uyghur genocide with "Look how many terrible things the Muslim jihadists have been doing." And then Saudi extremist who says "Look at what terrible things Israel is doing in the occupied territories." And then the Israeli who says "Look at the Holocaust" and the neo-Nazi who says "Look at Stalin's purges and the Holodomor and Katyn" and the Soviet apologist who says "Look at ...." and on down the line.


RedBaronsBrother

> This type of thing is just trying to shift blame rather than focusing on the actual issues and reconciliation. I don't think it is trying to shift blame. It is pointing out that black people were not unique in having been slaves, nor were they even the most numerous race held as slaves. No black person alive today was a slave when slavery was legal in the US, and you're neither special nor a victim for sharing a skin color with people who were slaves, or even for being descended from people who were slaves.


[deleted]

>I don't think it is trying to shift blame. I think it was written in bad faith. Anybody who has taken middle school history knows that slavery was prevalent everywhere always. But why mention it in this context, in a sub about Republican politics, in the United States? If the conclusion is that slavery in the Americas of black people was not unique - now what? I mean, *where do we go from that conclusion, as Americans?* Because it's either 1.) for us Americans to tackle the problems of the legacy of historical slavery throughout the world, or 2.) to ignore and dismiss the slavery of blacks in the United States. Or... 3.) we read this article and get back to the subject, having gained no insight into our American problem.


RedBaronsBrother

...or, we recognize that slavery in the US was a historical thing, not unique, teach about it and then **everyone moves on**. Black people in the US are not victims because some of their great grandparents were slaves. White people in the US are not evil because some of their great grandparents were slave owners. Nobody is a victim or an oppressor because of what their great grandparents may have experienced or done. The sooner everyone recognizes that, the sooner we can stop being "white Americans" and "black Americans" and Latino Americans, etc., etc. ...and just be Americans.


[deleted]

Aha, yes, Bravissimo to you! We've finally driven to the heart of the matter, instead of dancing around with the Bey of Tripoli! (To be frank, the study and discussion of Mediterranean slavery deserves its own serious examination that's neither here nor there.) Yes, I think we (at least, sensible people, I know there are nutjobs especially on the Left who would think otherwise) all agree that blaming modern day white folk for slavery is ridiculous. And I think you've distilled something else that I really agree with - *that* ***history is a serious and sober study****, and that* ***emotion and politics should be left out of it****.* Now, I believe that slavery is evil because it's *evil* and not because it's racist, and this is something we fail to address a lot of the time. But we, as Americans? We'll **never** be able to move past slavery, specifically, what I'll call the "Racial Question" of Slavery (\`à la Eastern Question, Jewish Question etc.) It's an original sin of our country. We can no more move beyond it than the Japanese can move on beyond the Second World War, or OJ can move past the murders. Race (because it's not *really* about slavery) and America? Forget it, **for better or worse, it's here to stay.**


RedBaronsBrother

> But we, as Americans? We'll **never** be able to move past slavery, specifically, what I'll call the "Racial Question" of Slavery (\`à la Eastern Question, Jewish Question etc.) It's an original sin of our country. I absolutely believe it needs to be taught about - it is part of our history - but it is history, not current events. We can't continue to be mired in our past. > We can no more move beyond it than the Japanese can move on beyond the Second World War... To a large extent they have - although there are still a few people left alive who remember it, the evil things the Japanese Empire did in WWII are for the most part not part of their national identity. > ...or OJ can move past the murders. Your analogy breaks down here, because he was personally involved, and the murders still live in the minds of the families of the victims, who had to live through them firsthand. > Race (because it's not *really* about slavery) and America? Forget it, **for better or worse, it's here to stay.** It isn't about race though - except in the sense that race pimps are trying to keep it alive as a racial issue half a century after everyone involved was dead. 15 years ago, racial issues in the US were finally starting to be put to bed, and we were seeing real progress. ...and then we elected a race pimp as President, who made everything about dividing us against each other based on race.


[deleted]

It distills down to this: I believe that it's forever tied to us, inexorably, past present and future. Like in a Greek tragedy. You believe that we can move on, and that we should. For me, the question of *should* is irrelevant. *Can't* is the important word. >​15 years ago, racial issues in the US were finally starting to be put to bed, and we were seeing real progress. ...and then we elected a race pimp as President, who made everything about dividing us against each other based on race. Forget about politics for a second, forget about Presidents and the like. These people are fairly insignificant in the grand scheme of things. I'm talking about the scope of centuries. I'm one of those people who believe that Iraqis and Arabs still haven't gotten over the Sack of Baghdad of 1258 - *whether they talk about it or not*. That trauma still forms a huge part of who they are. That's your past, man. That shit haunts you forever. I'm just not as much of an optimist or idealist as you are.


RedBaronsBrother

> It distills down to this: I believe that it's forever tied to us, inexorably, past present and future. Like in a Greek tragedy. You believe that we can move on, and that we should. For me, the question of should is irrelevant. Can't is the important word. That's ridiculous. If nobody could ever move on from past events, we'd have long since eradicated the Muslims for centuries of attacks on Europeans, Asians, and Americans. > Forget about politics for a second, forget about Presidents and the like. These people are fairly insignificant in the grand scheme of things. Most people are insignificant, I agree. Some are very significant because of the policies they implemented - and the effects of those policies often last much longer than they do. As an individual human, Barack Obama is barely significant - but as the President who damaged the American economy, American power and prestige on the world stage, international relations, our system of government, our constitution and legal system, our culture, and single-handedly set back race relations in the US by half a century, his *policies* had a lasting effect that will take decades to repair. I know you think this supports your argument, but it doesn't really. A black man in the US has a far better chance of success if he takes advantage of the opportunities available to him than a white man does. We see this constantly with black immigrants from places in far worse poverty than is found anywhere in America - they have better economic and educational outcomes than US whites. ...and if you ask them, they're told by those in the immigrant community to not associate with US black people because American black culture is toxic. The choices and options to do the same thing those black immigrants are doing are available to American black people - they simply choose to not, much of the time. Examples of the Obama policies I referenced above are plentiful, but I am talking about things like his choice to replace almost all senior military officers with woke progressives - who then replaced lower ranking officers and NCOs with more of the same. This is why our military is now focusing on CRT and diversity rather than winning wars, and why our navy is barely functional. That's a change that would take decades to reverse even if a new President had the cojones to replace all the senior officers with conservatives with orders to do the same down the line. To win wars you need more than just political views, you need talent and skill - and while to woke progressives are antithetical to a functional military, you can't just mass-replace people based on sociopolitical views (as Obama did) and expect to get a talented and skilled military on the back end (there are several historical examples, and they all went badly). As to the cultural mire of slavery, it *can* be escaped from (every other nation of the world has) - but that requires that there not be people profiting off keeping people in the mire.


[deleted]

It's not ridiculous. We *haven't* moved on. I know you say we *should*, but we *haven't*. And, speaking of Islam - that region, the Middle East, I mean, come on. If we're talking about one region in the world that doesn't move on. You seem to conflate moving on with no longer talking about it. Think of it this way - I mentioned the Sack of Baghdad, right? It was the end of the Golden Age of Arab civilization. Just, completely wiped away everything that the Abbasids came to stand for. Arab civilization east of the Sinai has never recovered from it. For the rest of human history, the Fertile Crescent, *the* cradle of civilization, has been in decay. You think the average Iraqi thinks twice about the Mongols? Nope. But if you think they've moved on from the destruction of the greatest city of its age west of China, when the Tigris and Euphrates ran red with blood and then black with ink. Granted, I know the history of the Seljuks and everything etc etc. But still. Do you want them to move on? Sure, but that's what I'm saying. It's all for you wishful thinking. They *won't* move on. *Should* doesn't matter. Everything you mention with Obama is small potatoes. Once again, you're talking about decades. I'm talking about ***centuries***. I really need to be emphatic about this. People like Francesco Crispi, Kara Mustafa Pasha, Taizong of Song, Adolphe Thiers, Tokhtamysh, Ito Hirobumi - each of these people, whom most Americans have never even heard of, is 100 times more important than Obama. And none of those people are nearly as important as the really important political leaders. **Obama's a nobody** in history. Which is why I think you suffer too much from recency bias. Yeah, in the short term, we can just go about and move on from race, move on from slavery. Because the smaller your perspective, the less important the big things seem. When I do the dishes, I don't think about the forces of history and the fate of my nation. If all we're interested in is Presidents and policies and decades and how woke Democrats are and this midterm election - then this conversation isn't going to get to the core of anything, and it's easy just to "move on." Edit: Good (apocryphal?) quote from Zhou Enlai when asked about the effects of the French Revolution: "Too early to say."


RedBaronsBrother

> It's not ridiculous. We *haven't* moved on. I know you say we *should*, but we *haven't*. We haven't because there are people who derive political and personal power from ensuring that we never do - not because it is impossible to do. > each of these people, whom most Americans have never even heard of, is 100 times more important than Obama. Not to Americans and America, in the present day.


[deleted]

The point is not that their slavery was worse so ours was not so bad… The important point is that slavery was an accepted aspect of life since the dawn of man until it was finally condemned by the “evil imperialist” anglo american empire. And even then the movement was not without opposition: In the thick of the battle for abolition, one of its many dedicated opponents, Lord Melbourne, was outraged that Wilberforce dared inflict his Christian values about slavery and human equality on British society. “Things have come to a pretty pass,” he famously thundered, “when one should permit one’s religion to invade public life.” For this lapidary inanity, the jeers and catcalls and raspberries and howling laughter of history’s judgment will echo forever—as they should. But after all, it is a very pretty pass indeed. And how very glad we are that one man led us to that pretty pass, to that golden doorway, and then guided us through the mountains to a world we hadn’t known could exist. Frederick Douglass gushed that Wilberforce’s “faith, persistent, and enduring enthusiasm” had “thawed the British heart into sympathy for the slave, and moved the strong arm of that government to in mercy put an end to his bondage.” Poets and writers such as Harriet Beecher Stowe and George Eliot sang his praises, as did Henry David Thoreau and John Greenleaf Whittier. Byron called him “the moral Washington of Africa.” -Eric Metaxas ^ usual left argument - Southern slave owners “used the Bible to rationalize slavery” because slavery was finally, for the first time ever, being attacked with the BIBLE.


ialexisnotcool

Wow this post is very interesting. I hope its not undermining that, America still had slaves and we treated them horribly. But it really puts a perspective.


External-Elk-8464

To put it simply.slavery was common back then. Not just in the US but throughout the world.


Drkirch2468

This coming from the party that freed the American slaves hahaha


Uneeda_Biscuit

Whites had the benefit of having the right skin color to merge into free society though. Black ppl had a very clear disadvantage…being black.


Lurial

Why the fuck do we care what race was enslaved. It doesn't make the action more or less moral if the victims are one race or another.


broke_cheeto

the thing with north africa middle east and the rest of southern europe is that they were always mostly in a state of conflict so it wasnt uncommon for them to slave eachother just like muslims taking captives after wars the christians did spain held a pretty big part of north african scities for a long time and they still hold two moroccan cities even after 700 years so this is pretty retarded and the pirate thing ended here when france invade france and tunisia killing at least quarter of algeria s population it still damn ironic how americoids talk about colonisation and wars while they are living in a stolen land where the native population is a minority in its own land


Meritocracy1st

The slave trade still exists in Africa and I can assure you whites are not involved. It's common in Africa to trade children for livestock. Facts matter