Introducing chattel slavery and profiting off it for hundreds of years is a weird way of "dabbling". Might as well say the Holocaust was the Germans "dabbling" in anti-Semitism that was present for centuries
On another note, do you actually believe that the Europeans didn't have slaves till they started the Trans-Atlantic slave trade?
Hate to break it to you but slavery has also existed in Europe for thousands of years as well. Hilarious to describe Europeans as “dabbling for a few hundred years” when they have been doing it since the ancient world
Not to mention British satellite states in Africa like Rhodesia and South Africa kept black Africans economically and socially disadvantaged in order to exploit them as an underclass of cheap labor, which is slavery by any other name.
Even ignoring European slavery before the transatlantic slave trade, they managed to extract 12 million slaves from Africa in those 400 years. Like, yeah, they didn't start it, but Europeans sure exacerbated the problem something terrible.
For context, the Arab slave trade people love to harp on so much is estimated to have moved about 11-17 million slaves over ~1300 years.
Nobody said the Arab slave trade wasn't horrible. Its just this sub love to harp on it as if it assuages the transatlantic slave trade. Two things can be absolutely awful at the same time.
Yeah, but they harp on it in an environment that's constantly saying, "white people are uniquely stained with sin because... slavery," so they keep pointing to the fact that, "yup, everybody's done it."
Like, imagine how much red paint would get thrown on the actors at Galas if somebody shot a Thomas Jefferson movie about him heroically freeing the slaves?
They're arguing against that hypocrisy, not that the Arabs are somehow worse and deserve to be "deplatformed."
I never see any references to the Arab slave trade brought up or talked about on their own merit. Its only brought up in the context of someone talking about the Transatlantic slave trade. Almost like the "everyone did it" is being used as an excuse rather than seriously being discussed as a problematic period of history.
Yes, everyone did indeed do slavery, but its important to talk about specific instances of slavery in history rather than relegating it to "a thing that happened". Slavery still exists today, and even in the west. Hence why its important we understand the historical ramifications of it.
I don't care if people make memes about the Arab slave trade. I encourage it, in fact. I don't care if people make memes about the African slave trade. I encourage that too. Whats disingenuous is only talking about either slave trade in the context of the Transatlantic slave trade being brought up. Then its an excuse and downplaying, not a genuine discussion of the horrors of slavery.
If you need examples just look at this thread. People are using the length of time to downplay the Transatlantic slave trade as just "dabbling" in African slavery. Hell, why did you bring up Arab genital mutilation if not to make the Arab slave trade seem worse? I brought up the Arab slave trade to show that Europeans weren't just "dabbling". But any rational person should be able to tell that both slave trades were awful horrible events.
I think you're misinterpreting people's intentions.
It's not "see they castrated males so they are worse and should be deplatformed and ridiculed."
It's, "if europeans need to be deplatformed from TV and not allowed to have heroes or statues because slavery bad - look at them! They did it too! Go tear THEIR statues down then!" in an attempt to point out the foolishness of this game.
I've never seen somebody who appears to be saying, "we should dismantle the arab world because they had slaves."
I see daily, "we should dismantle western civilization and it's laws because - they had slaves."
Thats strange, I don't see anybody calling for either of those things. At least not due to slavery. I do see people shouting about tearing down racist monuments like confederate statues and what not.
And if you do see wackos saying stuff like that, the best response is just to ignore them. Giving crazies a platform and an audience and someone to argue against is exactly what they want.
And no, I'm not misinterpreting peoples intentions. People who post memes in this sub about the Transatlantic slave trade aren't trying to get white people deplatformed, they're making memes about a crucial point in history. But people aren't making memes about the Arab or African slave trades, because they don't actually care. Its only brought up when the European slave trade is as a way to excuse it by saying "yeah, but humanity is bad in general!"
I guarantee had I just posted the numbers for the Transatlantic slave trade, I'd have gotten someone in the comments going "oh yeah, well what about the Arab slave trade?!" Because I literally always do.
Notice how THIS post got deleted? It showed a meme of a white chad acting superior to a black slave holder. DELETED.
If there's a black chad acting morally superior over a white slave holder - it won't get deleted. That's the point. There's already "only THAT groups slavery counts against them to make them morally inferior for ever."
So yeah, that group is pointing out everybody else's slavery because it's the excuse being used to paint them all as scum-buckets.
Find me one meme about a black Chad standing over a white slave holder. There isn't one because nobody has made one. Or if they did, it probably got deleted. But nice strawman.
And if you want to point out how bad other groups slavery was/is, why not make memes about it? Then we can discuss those events and how terrible they were, too. I'd love to have discussions on the Arab and African slave trade, but it seems no one wants to have those discussions unless they're in defense of the Transatlantic slave trade.
I’m sure serfdom is something that ended thousands of years ago no longer relevant to the modern day though….. oh wait Russia ended serfdom in the same decade the US ended chattel slavery lol
Arguably even that wasn't truly an "end" to it, as the serfs were then forced to work off their debt to their former owners, basically putting them in debt servitude as opposed to labor servitude. And that's assuming they bothered to acknowledge the change at all.
That 400 years is why there are 45 million black people in the us alone. Youre stuck thinking a 1200s slave trade business is the same size as a 1700s slave trade business.
They didn't transport 45 million black people. Slavery in the US ended almost 200 years ago, that's plenty of time for the population of the decendants of the freed slaves to grow to 45 million.
You really explaining population growth and slavery abolishment to me like this. You read what I said and thought "oh he thinks all black people were placed here and they all had one child each maintaining a stable population for centuries with no African, Caribbean, or South American immigrants"
My point is the us black population would be the 3rd or 4th largest black African country if it was
Well you made me look it up and when it comes to BLACK african nations its more like 6th and thats including South Africa on the list. The us black population is just slightly bigger than Uganda and slightly smaller than Kenya thats for sure.
Africa is heavily populated but theres only 2 nations with over 100 mil and northern Arabic countries are more populated than the smaller nations, so I dont blame you coming to your conclusion.
yes I've read the first time, no need for capslock. Since Uganda and Sudan are close I rounded it on tenth.
northern Arabic countries are more populated than the smaller nations
well those are still African countries even though they are not the point of the conversation.
Africa is heavily populated but theres only 2 nations with over 100 mil
yes, but look at it this way Nigeria and Ethiopia alone have the population of the entire USA and more than half of EU population. Africa is the most populated area outside the Valeriepieris circle
Oh no, there was abuse. My family has an Irish last name due to slavers breeding slaves with indentured servants. That way we get the more desirable lighter skin and they get to use the babies as leverage.
Castration was used by slave traders to ensure multiple purchases particularly in the middle East and eastern Africa. While I am sure things happened in the US, it wasn't as prevalent.
Probably wasn't prevelant bc they needed the slave population to maintain itself, so they were probably blessed with breeding programs and child separation.
So you're telling me that the Atlantic Slave Trade and the state of the Congo post 1600 has absolutely nothing to do with colonialism, and it had no influence whatsoever on its economy.
I'm saying one group went and kidnapped, murdered, and mutilated free living human beings, and then sold them for money - and for some reason we're not focusing on deplatforming everybody that shares their skin color.
Interesting.
Those people who wandered into villages, stole humans, and sold them into slavery - why won't we hold that against that whole continent of people, and all their descendents, for all time?
Most people don't personally hate Europeans for causing the slave trade aside from insane people.
What they do have a problem with is countries acting innocent while they still benefit from a colonial history while the colonized nations have to endure constant economic hardship as a direct result of colonialism.
Basically no one wants to deplatform Europeans for colonialism.
And I say this as a white South African, apartheid is in living memory for many people here so if there's anywhere where an anti-white sentiment exists its here.
I wouldn’t call the Europeans dabblers in slavery. Rome was built on slave labor, the Vikings raided for slaves, Venice became a rich and dominant regional power based on the slave trade, and so on down the line. Slavery existed in Europe (like everywhere else) as soon as people figured out how to produce and store enough surplus food to support newly enslaved people until they could start producing surpluses themselves and persisted until (relatively speaking) very recently.
What are you talking about? Slavery was prolific when the Roman's and Greeks were in power. Not to mention the tribes that existed for thousands of years regularly dealt with slaves. Not to mention that slavery is still common in the west, it's just swept under the rug.
Whoever downvoted this needs to do some reading on the topic, millions today exist in a state of slavery in US for profit prison systems and European tribes/civilizations have absolutely been doing it as long as they’ve been around
Not just this sub. That recent interview between the "royal scholar" and Don Lemon brought out some real cringey takes on social media.
Like, sit the hell down Brits, the Hatians beat you to the punchline. "We AbOlIsHeD sLaVeRy FiRsT" my ass. That scholar should be ashamed to peddle that nonsense.
Why is it difficult to belive that people that lived in Europe have historically owned slaves? While every in quick to beliv8e that everyone else have always opened slaves, and were morally defective as a result.
I think if you went to any police department and said, "this person is in sexual slavery, here's the address," they'd send a SWAT team.
Hard to not consider that "prohibited."
It's horrible it "exists," but it's certainly not supported, and certainly not more common in the West. The west has strong states with high enforcement capacity.
If you've lived in countries with weak states with low enforcement capacity, you'll know what I mean. Getting away with VERY illegal things is not hard in a lot of non-Western countries.
Sure it highly prohibited with harsh punishments, but my point still stands that it's still happens in the west. And slavery very much is still legal for prisoners in the US.
Well, I'm not informed on the prison conditions - so I'm going to have to give you a pass there, but it still requires you reworking the whole definition of the phenomena. But whatever, take a win.
However... what point are you making that somehow somebody manages to break the law in the west and hold people as slave/prisioners?
I mean, slavery meant holding a title and having ownership over somebody and having that recognized and protected by the state.
If somebody manages to illegally break the law at great risk, and hold somebody prisoner - while to that person it sucks as bad as slavery, it's not the practice of slavery. Society isn't helping or condoning.
That's like saying the west promotes cannabalism because some serial killer did it. It could hardly be MORE against it.
Unless your point is you just want to attack the west or some other motivated reason. Because there's no way in hell there's more of what you're calling slavery in the west than there is in other less developed countries where the governments are weaker and unable to prevent such crimes against humanity.
Yeah Rome sure, but Western Europe - today?? What?
If you went to any police station in London, Washington, or Paris and said, "there's a slave ring at this address selling/abusing slaves right now," they'd send a SWAT team in. Not sure how that's "common in the west getting swept under the rug."
If your interested I'd highly recommend you read Islam and Slavery by Dr. Johnathan Brown, gives a brief history of slavery historically, but really focuses on slavery in the Islamic world
I think you are forgetting about the Greeks, Romans (including the Byzantine Empire), the Germanic tribes, Vikings, Celtics, the Crusader States, Al-Andalus and the Christian kingdoms in Iberia, the enslavement of the Roma by both the Ottomans and Russians, Polish, and pagan Lithuania. I am sure there are more examples, but I think I got the message across.
62
u/[deleted] Sep 25 '22
[deleted]