SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Cogito Ergo Sum who wrote (191912)9/17/2022 10:34:47 AM
From: Pogeu Mahone  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 218043
 
You do not get it now or ever! Stupid is as Stupid does!"


escolta a repeata



Black Tribal Leaders sold Black slaves to the European slave traders.

Here is some soothing music to calm you down!



African Participation and Resistance to the Trade


Map of West Africa, created by Johann Baptist Homann, 1743.


Mossi horsemen, created by J.W. Buel, 1890. The Mossi Kingdoms resisted the trans-Saharan slave trade and slave raiding from the Ghana, Mali, and Songhai Empires in West Africa, but with the expansion of the trans-Atlantic slave trade, they became involved in slave trading in the 1800s.

With some early exceptions, Europeans were not able to independently enter the West and Central African interior to capture Africans and force them onto ships to the Americas. Instead,European traders generally relied on a network of African rulers and traders to capture and bring enslaved Africans from various coastal and interior regions to slave castles on the West and Central African coast. Many of these traders acquired captives as a result of military and political conflict, but some also pursued slave trading for profit.

Scholars provide various explanations for why African traders were willing to supply enslaved Africans to Europeans for the trans-Atlantic trade. By the early sixteenth century, slavery already played a major role in some western and central African societies, and contributed to maritime slave trade systems across the Indian Ocean and Mediterranean Sea. Subsequently, some historians argue that Europeans in the Atlantic took advantage of a pre-existing slave trade system in Africa to obtain labor for expanding plantation economies in the Americas. During the development of the trans-Atlantic trade, West and Central Africa consisted of diverse political and social structures, ranging from large empires to small states, and these groups often conflicted over internal politics as well as economic expansion.


Manillas from Nigeria, commonly used as currency in West Africa during the trans-Atlantic slave trade, particularly by European traders on the coast purchasing enslaved people from African traders.

As noted earlier, though ethnic identities were influential, these groups did not share a common African or black identity. Instead, they saw cultural and ethnic differences (such as Igbo, Ashanti, Mende, and Fulani) as social divisions. Frequent conflicts between these groups produced captives who could then circulate in the local slave trade system, and eventually the trans-Atlantic slave trade.

Europeans also went to great lengths to influence African traders and leaders to provide enslaved Africans for the trans-Atlantic trade. European traders encouraged African consumer demands for European goods, formed military alliances to instigate fighting and increase the number of captives, and shifted the location of disembarkation points for the trade along the West and Central African coast to follow African military conflicts. In areas of West and Central Africa where slavery was not prevalent, European demand often expanded the presence of the institution and trade. But European traders still generally worked within terms set by African rulers and traders, who negotiated their own interests in these trading and military alliances.


" Door of No Return" memorial at The House of Slaves, Gorée, Senegal, image taken 2004.

For example, when the profits of the slave trade did not outweigh the loss of local labor caused by the trans-Atlantic trade, African leaders could refuse to supply European demands. Still, the pressures from European consumer interests in African slavery were great, and the social instability that followed military conflicts inevitably challenged the resources of African groups. Many Africans turned to the trans-Atlantic slave trade to expel their opponents or to garner profits. The population loss and disruptive effects on social, political, military, and labor systems caused by the trans-Atlantic slave trade varied in scale depending on the African region and group. As a result, scholars still debate the long-term impacts of the trans-Atlantic slave trade in West and Central Africa.

Regardless, the suffering of separated families and the experiences of enslavement during the trans-Atlantic trade were universally devastating for victims of the trans-Atlantic slave trade. Throughout the trade, the Africans who were enslaved or threatened with enslavement consistently resisted the dehumanizing confines of this institution. Villages and towns built fortifications and warning systems to prevent attacks from traders or enemy groups. If captured and forced onto ships for the Middle Passage, enslaved Africans resisted by organizing hunger strikes, forming rebellions, and even committing suicide by leaping overboard rather than living in slavery. Scholars believe that roughly one slaving voyage in every ten experienced major rebellions. These rebellions were costly for European traders, and led them to avoid certain regions known for this resistance strategy, such as Upper Guinea, except during periods of high slave trade market demand. This resulted in fewer Africans entering the trans-Atlantic slave trade from these regions, which suggests that African resistance strategies could be effective.

"Death of Capt. Ferrer, the Captain of the Amistad, July 1839," engraving and frontispiece from John Warner Barber, A History of the Amistad Captives, 1840. The rebellion on the slave ship Amistad in 1839 was one of the most famous in United States history because the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Mende on board should have their freedom restored.




To: Cogito Ergo Sum who wrote (191912)9/18/2022 9:06:44 AM
From: Pogeu Mahone  Respond to of 218043
 
3.8 million people

Prevalence. The Global Slavery Index estimates that on any given day in 2016 there were over 3.8 million people living in conditions of modern slavery in China, a prevalence of 2.8 victims for every thousand people in the country.

China | Global Slavery Index



To: Cogito Ergo Sum who wrote (191912)9/18/2022 9:12:39 AM
From: Pogeu Mahone  Respond to of 218043
 
The world has been built on slavery:

'After All, Didn't America Invent Slavery?'

Tom Lindsay
Former Contributor

I cover higher education, culture, and the intersection of the two

New! Follow this author to stay notified about their latest stories. Got it!
Follow

Aug 30, 2019,10:35am EDT

This article is more than 3 years old.





Washington DC, USA

GETTY

If you think the title’s question is silly, you’re right. But here’s the problem: Increasing numbers of college students today would unhesitatingly respond, “Hell, yes!” to the query. Could it be because that is what they are being taught?

I first learned of this misconception about slavery about three years ago, when a professor published the results of 11 years of his quizzing his students at the start of each year on what they knew about American history and Western civilization.

By far the most shocking result to emerge from his years of polling is this: Students overwhelmingly believe that slavery “was an American problem . . . and they are very fuzzy about the history of slavery prior to the Colonial era. Their entire education about slavery was confined to America.”

PROMOTED

Supporting this deceptive—because incomplete—“history” of slavery comes The New York Times, whose “ 1619 Project” advertises that it now “aims to reframe the country’s history, understanding 1619 as our true founding.” Why 1619? Because, says the Times, that is the date of the arrival of the first slaves to the land that would a century-and-a-half later be called the United States. Because America’s “true founding” arose out of slavery, this institution is the key to understanding America’s uniqueness as a country and culture.

Of course, it is important to study the history of slavery in this country. But what if America was not unique in holding slaves? What if America didn’t invent slavery, as our students have come to think? In our “Just Google It” era, the answers to these questions, though apparently not provided by some universities, are easily found on the website, FreeTheSlaves.net. Reading it should be your first step toward learning the full facts about slavery worldwide.

In perusing the FreeTheSlaves website, the first fact that emerges is it was nearly 9,000 years ago that slavery first appeared, in Mesopotamia (6800 B.C.). Enemies captured in war were commonly kept by the conquering country as slaves.

And in the 1700s B.C., the Egyptian pharaohs enslaved the Israelites, as is discussed in Exodus Chapter 21. Later, the pagan Greeks participated in slavery, for ancient Sparta as well as Athens relied fully on the slave labor of captives.

But Greek slavery paled in comparison to that in ancient Rome. According to historian Mark Cartwright, “slavery was an ever-present feature of the Roman world,” in which “as many as one in three of the population in Italy or one in five across the empire were slaves, and upon this foundation of forced labor was built the entire edifice of the Roman state and society.”

By the 8th century A.D., African slaves were being sold to Arab households in a Muslim world that, at the time, spanned from Spain to Persia.

By the year 1000 A.D., slavery had become common in England’s rural, agricultural economy, with the poor yoking themselves to their landowners through a form of debt bondage. At about the same time, the number of slaves captured in Germany grew so large that their nationality became the generic term for “slaves”—Slavs.

As for the Atlantic slave trade, this began in 1444 A.D., when Portuguese traders brought the first large number of slaves from Africa to Europe. Eighty-two years later (1526), Spanish explorers brought the first African slaves to settlements in what would become the United States—a fact the Times gets wrong. The Times likewise fails to mention that the Native American Cherokee Nation also held African slaves, and even sided with the Confederacy during the Civil War.

But the antipathy of many Americans toward slavery became evident as early as 1775, when Quakers in Pennsylvania set up the first abolitionist society.

(Betsy Ross, whose American flag was deemed politically incorrect recently by Nike, was herself both a Quaker and an abolitionist.)

Five years later, Massachusetts became the first state to abolish slavery in its constitution. Seven years after that (1787) the U.S. Congress passed the Northwest Ordinance of 1787, outlawing slavery in the Northwest Territories.

In 1803, Denmark-Norway became the first country in Europe to ban the African slave trade. In 1807, “three weeks before Britain abolished the Atlantic slave trade, President Jefferson signed a law prohibiting ‘ the importation of slaves into any port or place within the jurisdiction of the United States.’” Jefferson’s actions followed Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution.

In 1820, Spain abolished the slave trade south of the Equator, but preserved it in Cuba until 1888.

In 1834, the Abolition Act abolished slavery throughout the British Empire, including British colonies in North America. In 1847, France would abolish slavery in all its colonies. Brazil followed in 1850.

Closer to home, in 1863 President Abraham Lincoln issued The Emancipation Proclamation, freeing all U.S. slaves in states that had seceded from the Union, except those in Confederate areas already controlled by the Union army. This was followed in 1865 by the 13th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, outlawing slavery.

The 20th century would see emancipation come to Sierra Leone, Saudi Arabia, India, and Yemen. In 1964, the sixth World Muslim Congress, the world’s oldest Muslim organization, pledged global support for all anti-slavery movements. In 1990, after its adoption by 54 countries in the 1980s, the 19th Conference of Foreign Ministers of the Organization of the Islamic Conference formally adopted the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam, which states that “human beings are born free, and no one has the right to enslave, humiliate, oppress, or exploit them.”

The last country to abolish slavery was Mauritania (1981).

But the 20th century would also witness the German Nazis’ use of slave labor in industry. Up to nine million people, mostly Jews, were forced to work to absolute exhaustion—and sent to concentration camps. In 1954, China began allowing prisoners to be used for labor in the laogai prison camps. In 1989, the National Islamic Front took over the government of Sudan and then armed new militias to raid villages, capturing and enslaving inhabitants.

Sadly, the 21st century has not rid itself of slavery. In fact, in 2017, a research consortium including the U.N. International Labor Organization, the group “Walk Free,” and the U.N. International Organization for Migration release a combined global study indicating that 40 million people are trapped in modern forms of slavery worldwide.

Even this thumbnail sketch of the history of slavery is enough to rebut The New York Times’ “1619 Project.” No, slavery was not primarily an American phenomenon; it has existed worldwide. And, no, America didn’t invent slavery; that happened more than 9,000 years ago. Finally, slavery did not end in the world with the passage of the 13th Amendment; there are 40 million people enslaved even today.

The historical facts rehearsed above are so easily accessed that one cannot but wonder why the Times and too many professors seek now to persuade us that a nation “dedicated to the proposition that ‘all men are created equal’” is in fact defined, not by its world-transforming aspiration for human equality, but by slavery—the destruction of which required the Civil War, the bloodiest conflict in American history.

Far from ignoring or minimizing the history of slavery in the United States, presenting the full facts about the history of slavery worldwide is requisite to understanding American slavery—as well as our successful efforts to end it.

But if we allow ourselves to be persuaded that not only our past—but our “national DNA”—is ruinously soiled by a sin for which there is no atoning, how can we expect our misinformed citizens to possess the confidence in their own principles that is required to defend individual liberty and limited government? How can we expect them not to embrace the false, fatal promises of utopian regimes?

Our badly educated students—through no fault of their own—appear well on their way to consummating this fatal embrace.