Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
They bought them with muskets and gunpowder. Did the African accept dollars? Franks? German marks? No they wanted the weapons of war that would make them the dominant force in the area. They are still doing it with gang warfare. They supply the guns and drugs and the gangs provide more dead bodies.
Africans drove the slave trade before whites even were involved. They were enslaving each other before whites became involved. This had nothing to do with racism, but had everything to do with the propensity of humanity to enslave each other. The fact that they sold slaves to people was because they already had no problems with enslaving and selling other humans. It was all abhorrant to us today with the more modern mindset. But it wasn't to them back then. So it's totally inappropriate to blame people today who recognize the wrongness of it for the things done during a time when people were totally different and had different morals and values at a time such as that.
Actually it was Arabs but white men too advantage of the situation. Equipting African tribes with muskets so they could haul in a nice crop of slaves. Aficans didn't build those slave ships, they just supplied the demand of Europeans who came in and colonized them anyway chopping off hands and feet of slaves that weren't working hard enough for them.
Except that the law of the land of America dictated that only blacks could be slaves.
Yes it was and it has had an effect on our time.
THey are responsible for providing slaves for the European trans-Atlantic slave trade. It was the Europeans that were buying them up as fast as they could get their hands on them.
THen stop blaming Africans for providing what the market dictated. That's not to even mention how the EUropeans came in and colonized Africa and stole all of their natural resources. Was that righteous? Also, providing slaves was survival because if they couldn't provide the slaves they would take them and enslave them. Stop defending the trans-Atlantic slave trade.
Lol, no it wasnt the Arabs I was talking about. Africans were enslaving each other before. You may want to brush up on some history.
Whites drove the demand and if they weren't provided with slaves, they took the tribes that they traded with. Providing slaves was survival. They had to provide slaves or be slaves themselves. Africans didn't build those huge slave ships Europeans did. THen they enslaved the entire population of Africa through colonization.
But they DID! Are you denying this? Are you claiming African kingdoms did not supply slaves? Or are you trying to claim they were blameless in the whole ordeal? The slave buyers AND the slave traders were guilty of slavery; and shame on you if you are trying to absolve the Africans role in this atrocity because they share your skin color!
Absurd! You keep saying this, but that does not make it true. Provide an outside source that indicates African slave traders were forced to provide slaves or become slaves themselves.
Africans needed to provide slaves or become slaves. I would choose to enslave my neighbor than become a slave myself.
Right, you only believe a source if it comes from a white man right? Do you think Africans enjoyed enslaving their neighbors? It was about survival. If the Europeans weren't provided with slaves they made slaves out of whoever they encountered. Did Africans build those huge slave ships? They did what they had to do to survive and when Europeans colonized Africa it got even worse. Or are you defending colonization as well when they were chopping the hands and feet off of their slaves? Defend that practice while you're at it. SO is it that white people can do no wrong, only Africans? Stop the self-hate, you'll feel better.
You keep repeating the same absurdities, but you never seem to back anything up! Your word isn’t good enough; you need to provide an outside source if you wish to be taken seriously.
I believe credible documented records regardless of the skin color of the person providing those records.
Did Hitler enjoy what he did to the Jews and Gypsies even though they shared the same skin color? Did the Hutu’s enjoy what they did to the Tutsi even though they shared the same skin color? Yes! Evil men has a tendency to commit atrocities against people, even those who share their same skin color.
No it was not.
Then why did the Dahomey continue in the slave trade business even after Europe and the USA ended the slave trade with them? As a matter of fact, The French Dahomey war was the result of the Dahomey attacking a village that had sought protection from the French Government, and when Dahomey raided the village to make them all slaves, that is what caused the French to retaliate beginning the war. It was only after the French defeated Dahomey and they were renamed Benin were they forced out of the slave trading business.
I think you would prefer his-story to real history
Your nose up the white man's tail is the real absurdity
Hitler loved it. Africans did what they had to do to stay free
Continue to consult the whitewashed version of history and you will stay comfortable. And the French were so enlightened that they freed al of the slaves. They took the slaves where they could. There was a whole trans_Atlantic slave trade based on this. Champion the French, English, Dutch, Belgium, Spain, and Portugal slave trade all you want. You only show your hatred of your own people. Stick with those white history books as they seem to make you feel comfortable. The United States made a law that only blacks could be slaves. That is the system you defend. Stop it.
But here is some white history for you that shows Europeans drove the slave trade
Where is the US in all of this? My point was concerning the United States involvement in the trans-Atlantic slave trade. What the Dutch were doing, what the Spanish were doing, or anyone else has nothing to do with the points I made. People were not leaving the USA in cargo ships and capturing slaves themselves; The US did not have an army of men here raiding villages to supply slaves for the homeland, they depended on slave traders of West Africa like the Dahomey kingdom to supply them with slaves, and they were not enslaving the slave traders if they didn’t get enough slaves for them. If they were bad enough to put 300 people in chains, Amistad would not have happened. Amistad happened when one of the slaves got a piece of metal and was able to pick his lock freeing himself, then he freed other slaves by picking their locks, till they had enough free men to take over the ship! If they were tough enough to put them in chains in the first place, they would have had no problem putting them back in chains after they picked their locks.But here is some white history for you that shows Europeans drove the slave trade
Spanish conquistadors took enslaved Africans to the Caribbean after 1502, but Portuguese merchants continued to dominate the transatlantic slave trade for another century and a half, operating from their bases in the Congo-Angola area along the west coast of Africa. The Dutch became the foremost traders of enslaved people during parts of the 1600s, and in the following century English and French merchants controlled about half of the transatlantic slave trade, taking a large percentage of their human cargo from the region of West Africa between the Sénégal and Niger rivers. In 1713 an agreement between Spain and Britain granted the British a monopoly on the trade of enslaved people with the Spanish colonies. Under the Asiento de negros, Britain was entitled to supply those colonies with 4,800 enslaved Africans per year for 30 years. The contract for this supply was assigned to the South Sea Company, of which British Queen Anne held some 22.5 percent of the stock.
Study the history of the African slave trade and its economic effect on western Africa, where coastal states became rich and powerful while savanna states were destabilized as their people were taken captive
See all videos for this article
Probably no more than a few hundred thousand Africans were taken to the Americas before 1600. In the 17th century, however, demand for enslaved labour rose sharply with the growth of sugar plantations in the Caribbean and tobacco plantations in the Chesapeake region in North America.
In other words, the white man's documentation correct?
One ship on one trip is what you cling to. The USA was involved in all of that too, they just didn't begin the trade, they ended it when most European countries got enlightened and we fought a civil war.. The USA was still behind the times. So one African tribe provided all of the slaves for the trans-Atlantic slave trade? Why were there no white slaves? Because the USA and European nations made it so only black could be legally enslaved. Keep defending that practice, They protected themselves like the tribes in Africa who provided slave for the white man's insatiabe need for them. They tried to keep colonization away as long as they could but the white man with his gun powder too over all of Africa and raped it naked of it's natural resources. Do you also defend that practice?
The book I recommended you was a documentation of an African sold into slavery in the USA
I never said that
No; the USA purchased slaves from slave traders.
I never said that either. I used Dahomey, Bambara, and Manikongo as examples of slave traders; I never implied they were the extent of them.
I've read all that. None of it contradicts what I said about the blacks enslaving each other before the white man came along. And none of that contradicts that blacks sold each other into slavery.Whites drove the demand and if they weren't provided with slaves, they took the tribes that they traded with. Providing slaves was survival. They had to provide slaves or be slaves themselves. Africans didn't build those huge slave ships Europeans did. THen they enslaved the entire population of Africa through colonization.
- Trans-Saharan slave trade
- Indian Ocean slave trade
- Barbary slave trade
- Slavery in Tunisia
- Slavery in Libya
- Slavery in Sudan
- Slavery in Mauritania
- Slavery in Yemen
See also[edit]
Arab slave trade - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Arabs were involved and they considered themselves causations. so it was still based on black skin. That's the difference between the trans-Atlantic slave trade and other slave trade routes. When the Romans raided the Goths and the SLaves they brought back slaves of every color. It was the United States that made laws that slaves could only be black.
