Chattel Slavery: Was there any worse atrocity in human history????
Options
Comments
-
and the impact of chattel slavery in the u.s, the carribean, the u.k. and south america are not visible today and lasting far into future generations???fiat_money wrote: »That wouldn't account for the European countries that had no major involvement in the transatlantic slave trade but still ended up taking portions of Africa. And with all the wars the Europeans had to fight to colonize Sub-Saharan Africa and other parts of Africa, along with the dozens of millions they had to ? ; I wouldn't say that they had "neutralized" them with the transatlantic slave trade.
It may not have lasted for 400 years, but its negative impacts are still easily visible throughout much of Africa today and will probably remain that way for generations to come.
Seems worse than the transatlantic slave trade.
they had an economic foothold for many, many years before the wars started.
there were no major or minor participators in the ma'afa. only participators. the same ones who colonized africa. -
I believe that what the British did to the Native Americans of North America, and what the Spaniards did to the Native Americans of Central and South America was much worse. They stole the land, slaughtered the people, ? the women, and it happened over a much longer period than slavery. 90 percent of the Native American population was wiped out, the culture was forever destroyed and they are still the least represented of groups in the United States..
That being said.. you need to watch this...
-
Italy and Germany didn't exist as nations at the time. Even if you count the various countries that occupied present day Italy/Germany as Italy/Germany, they didn't have the navy/resources to participate in the transatlantic slave trade like the other European countries. However, both Italy and Germany still got in on colonizing Africa. Additionally, the major participants in the transatlantic slave trade were already quite powerful/wealthy beforehand; so while it's true they benefited greatly as a result, they weren't lacking in manpower/resources to begin with.and the impact of chattel slavery in the u.s, the carribean, the u.k. and south america are not visible today and lasting far into future generations???
they had an economic foothold for many, many years before the wars started.
there were no major or minor participators in the ma'afa. only participators. the same ones who colonized africa.
I never said the impact of the chattel slavery of the entire transatlantic slave trade wasn't visible today. I use the word "worse" because I think the impact European colonialism had on Africa was worse. If you combine the entire populations of South America, the United States, the Caribbean, and the United Kingdom; perhaps it is somewhat comparable to Africa's population of ~1 billion. However, when you exclude the non-Blacks of those populations, the total drops significantly; to less than 200 million (50m from South America, 40m from the US, 40m from the Caribbean--assuming all Caribbeans are Black, and 1.1 million from the UK). Leaving it at that, and fallaciously assuming that every Black person in the listed areas lives in poverty/malnutrition, Africa easily beats them out:Facts on Poverty in Africa- 315 million people – one in two of people in Sub Saharan Africa survive on less than one dollar per day
- 184 million people – 33% of the African population – suffer from malnutrition
- During the 1990s the average income per capita decreased in 20 African countries
- Less than 50% of Africa’s population has access to hospitals or doctors
- In 2000, 300 million Africans did not have access to safe water
- The average life expectancy in Africa is 41 years
- Only 57% of African children are enrolled in primary education, and only one of three children complete school
- One in six children die before the age of 5. This number is 25 times higher in sub-Saharan Africa than in the OECD countries
- Children account for half of all civilian casualties in wars in Africa
- The African continent lost more than 5,3 million hectares of forest during the decade of the 1990s
- Less than one person out of five has electricity. Out of 1.000 inhabitants 15 have a telephone line, and 7,8 out of 1.000 people surf on Internet.
In 2006, 34 of the 50 nations on the UN list of least developed countries are in Africa.
Sure, it'd be difficult to say whether these African countries would be poor now if it weren't for European colonialism, but it's probably no coincidence that the poorer countries correlate with the heavily-colonized regions:fiat_money wrote: »Africa is the king as far as hunger/poverty goes:
-
I'd say the mass genocide of Native Americans on their own land was much much worse. Their whole continent got stolen from them and 90% of their population got wiped out. Doesnt get any worse than that.
-
-
im not tryna draw any pity for my people here or anything, but i do believe india had it just as bad at least, or probably worse, than blacks in slavery in the americas.
1. we were under european control for over 400 yrs too, and hundreds of millions of us were enslaved in our own country by the British
2. thousands or maybe even millions of us were brutally murdered for no reason. british rulers would literally "hunt" indians like they would hunt a deer or something. if thats not degradation i dont know what it is.
3. they completely ripped us apart and turned us against each other, giving us the illusion that certain groups of indians are somehow different from others. Blacks in america still are relatively united and collectively identify as a single group often, but indians in india have non of that. To this day millions are killed by their own brothers because of "differences" instilled by the british when they left
4. 50% of the world's malnourished kids are in india.
5. At least some people care about blacks in america. No one cares about indians because all though we are a distinct race from arabs, and zero terrorists are indian, people often associate us with arabs and terrorists and dont give a damn about us.
you dont see any blacks in america living like this:
-
tikingjcoleprince wrote: »im not tryna draw any pity for my people here or anything, but i do believe india had it just as bad at least, or probably worse, than blacks in slavery in the americas.
1. we were under european control for over 400 yrs too, and hundreds of millions of us were enslaved in our own country by the British
2. thousands or maybe even millions of us were brutally murdered for no reason. british rulers would literally "hunt" indians like they would hunt a deer or something. if thats not degradation i dont know what it is.
3. they completely ripped us apart and turned us against each other, giving us the illusion that certain groups of indians are somehow different from others. Blacks in america still are relatively united and collectively identify as a single group often, but indians in india have non of that. To this day millions are killed by their own brothers because of "differences" instilled by the british when they left
4. 50% of the world's malnourished kids are in india.
5. At least some people care about blacks in america. No one cares about indians because all though we are a distinct race from arabs, and zero terrorists are indian, people often associate us with arabs and terrorists and dont give a damn about us.
you dont see any blacks in america living like this:
It was common for White settlers in South Africa, some Oceanic islands and I think even parts of the Americas to hunt indigenous people for sport as well.
When I was younger my friend told my about Udham Singh who fought against British rule and was hanged as a result. I had a lot of respect for him. -
tikingjcoleprince wrote: »im not tryna draw any pity for my people here or anything, but i do believe india had it just as bad at least, or probably worse, than blacks in slavery in the americas.
1. we were under european control for over 400 yrs too, and hundreds of millions of us were enslaved in our own country by the British
2. thousands or maybe even millions of us were brutally murdered for no reason. british rulers would literally "hunt" indians like they would hunt a deer or something. if thats not degradation i dont know what it is.
3. they completely ripped us apart and turned us against each other, giving us the illusion that certain groups of indians are somehow different from others. Blacks in america still are relatively united and collectively identify as a single group often, but indians in india have non of that. To this day millions are killed by their own brothers because of "differences" instilled by the british when they left
4. 50% of the world's malnourished kids are in india.
5. At least some people care about blacks in america. No one cares about indians because all though we are a distinct race from arabs, and zero terrorists are indian, people often associate us with arabs and terrorists and dont give a damn about us.
you dont see any blacks in america living like this:
DAMN!!!!!! As bad as some parts of America are at night time, I'm grateful to live in a nation where ? like this can't be seen.......and as bad as India has it in many parts, they still dont have it as bad as the Native Americans had it. I'm shocked how often people overlook the complete L they took from history, I guess it's cuz most of us have never even seen a Native American. -
Respectfully, Judah, I can't believe that you seriously think that African slaves in the West are the only people throughout history to have been brutally abused and victimized to the extent that they were. Political prisoners in North Korea are severely tortured in prison camps and detention centers, they're punished for not working fast enough or forgetting the lyrics to patriotic songs, this punishment includes withholding food, beatings, being forced to sit in a single spot for long periods of time etc. I remember reading a few years ago about Congolese rebels who killed a woman's baby ( boiled the child alive), and ate it right in front of her. In Kosovo, Darfur, Rwanda and many other war torn (previously or currently) countries it's never been uncommon for soldiers or rebels to ? women, randomly massacre civilians, torture dissenters etc. I remember reading of British officials in colonial Kenya who would mutilate people alive for being suspected Mau mau sympathizers and Blacks in the Congo who were forced to work on rubber plantations and mutilated or beaten for not working fast enough. Have you seen pictures of starving Jewish concentration camp prisoners? These people were gassed in the shower, burned alive, even buried alive.
80% of the world's population lives on less than a dollar a day, people everywhere suffer in ways that we will probably never understand. Starvation, disease, war and genocide, unusual genetic disorders, it's honestly terrifying how bad things can get.
The duration of African slavery and its impact on how the world of today is shaped trumps all of the above. Its not a debate on whether each of these happenings were worse than one another, its about the impact it had on those involved and the effects that still linger today. -
blacks in america have been thru more harsh situations than what you are portraying. and indians are way more united than blacks in america. indians come over here and own businesses in our communities.
Any examples of the more harsh situations? Because all though I may not have mentioned all of them, pretty much every thing blacks faced that i'm aware of off the top of my head, indians did too. And what people don't realize is, Indians in America are so well off generally because its the top .5% of Indians, the richest and most educated, that are even able to come here. Indians in India are a completely different story. -
what you dont know is that everything you speak of regarding blacks in america and native indians is Hebrew Bible prophecy. the white man's biblical nationality is ESAU/EDOM aka the wicked of the Bible.
I'm hearing this more and more from religious people these days.....interesting theory....... -
we need to develop a criteria before we have this debate?
what are some factors that we should consider? intensity? duration? lasting effects? -
the british are the key to it all. they opened up the motherland and made it possible for everybody to come in and join the berlin confrence ?
actually no they are not.
the "motherland" was opened up long before them.
The British weren't even the earliest Europeans in West Africa...the Portuguese and then Spaniards were
The continent was breached by non-Africans long before the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade kicked off. -
do u just come on here to argue for the sake of arguing? the portuguese and spaniards didnt ? the west coast to get filthy like the british did. i never said the british were the first europeans. greeks were the first europeans there btw but the british showed just how profitable colonialism is. thought u was west african, cuz. u should've known what i meant.stillmatic_01 wrote: »actually no they are not.
the "motherland" was opened up long before them.
The British weren't even the earliest Europeans in West Africa...the Portuguese and then Spaniards were
The continent was breached by non-Africans long before the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade kicked off. -
do u just come on here to argue for the sake of arguing? the portuguese and spaniards didnt ? the west coast to get filthy like the british did. i never said the british were the first europeans. greeks were the first europeans there btw but the british showed just how profitable colonialism is. thought u was west african, cuz. u should've known what i meant.
I'm not trying to argue for the sake of arguing...I just don't think the British should be the only ones blamed or take sole responsibility when it was many European nations (the first ones being the Spanish and Portuguese), Arab/Moorish middle men and sell-out treacherous African Kings and Chiefs who cooperated...they are all to blame for slavery. We have to get it right and appropriate blame where it's due to prevent it from happening again.
But the Portuguese and Spaniards took more Africans to the new world and set up the first settlements/posts in West Africa. The got introduced to the region via their relations with Moors (Berbers, Arabs and some Islamic Blacks)
I'm not in disagreement with anything you said, I just think it was more of a collaborate effort as opposed to the the British running the show and calling the shots. -
stillmatic_01 wrote: »I'm not trying to argue for the sake of arguing...I just don't think the British should be the only ones blamed or take sole responsibility when it was many European nations (the first ones being the Spanish and Portuguese), Arab/Moorish middle men and sell-out treacherous African Kings and Chiefs who cooperated...they are all to blame for slavery. We have to get it right and appropriate blame where it's due to prevent it from happening again.
But the Portuguese and Spaniards took more Africans to the new world and set up the first settlements/posts in West Africa. The got introduced to the region via their relations with Moors (Berbers, Arabs and some Islamic Blacks)
I'm not in disagreement with anything you said, I just think it was more of a collaborate effort as opposed to the the British running the show and calling the shots.
i get what u saying tho. from what ive read, and i might be wrong, but they really didnt start truly collaborating till the berlin conference- before then it was kinda like the different european powers would do business with one another but they were still in competition. britain was the envy of all them bandits for a minute tho. -
What happened to the native americans in north and south america is worse than chattel slavery.
the transatlantic slave trade was a byproduct of naive african leaders and greedy europeans, the african leaders themselves did not know they were depleting their populations by giving away slaves to the europeans
many of the slaves were already slaves in africa, yet its not the same type of slavery they experienced in the new world, others were captured by africans in tribal wars, the europeans used the same divisive tactics on native americans. Europeans could not physically survive in africa so they depended on compliant greedy misguided african leaders to attack their enemies... yet the stark difference is: the europeans kept north and south america as well as the carribean. Africans still have africa, and in fact colonialism, "the scramble for africa" took place during the decline of slavery, the late 19th century, and it wasnt as successful as it was in the americas -
pictures and media do alot of things. Propaganda was inked in black blood and never forget it. The pictures show only depict what is current but don't act like you don't know what is wrong with our community. When all of those who are being mention have begun their reprisal, the will know their history and will have it close to them. Can you say the same for us...
-
Kushington wrote: »What happened to the native americans in north and south america is worse than chattel slavery.
Still waiting on explanation of this. -
ether-i-am wrote: »Weed has killed more ? than ? .
Nah son. Mc'Donalds has killed more ? than weed. -
Still waiting on explanation of this.
Native americans were enslaved
that didnt work out so europeans just killed em and took two continents
genocide is just alittle bit worse than slavery, and since native americans experienced both, their loss is the worst in human history -
if our numbers were that small we would be all but wiped out too.Kushington wrote: »Native americans were enslaved
that didnt work out so europeans just killed em and took two continents
genocide is just alittle bit worse than slavery, and since native americans experienced both, their loss is the worst in human history -
if our numbers were that small we would be all but wiped out too.
Native Americans were not a small population, lol........the Native American genocide was by far way worse than what Blacks went through. Native Americans numbered in the tens of millions according to most historians, and they were enslaved before Blacks were in America. They not only suffered enslavement in their own land, they were butchered and killed off like mice. ? is beyond sad and horrifying if you really think about it. -
kingblaze84 wrote: »Native Americans were not a small population, lol........the Native American genocide was by far way worse than what Blacks went through. Native Americans numbered in the tens of millions according to most historians, and they were enslaved before Blacks were in America. They not only suffered enslavement in their own land, they were butchered and killed off like mice. ? is beyond sad and horrifying if you really think about it.
there were ten times ten million africans who died en route alone.... -
stop making threads about your facebook convos
also, black people invented slavery and still practice it today. they were enslaving each other before whitey came around and they're still doing it because their voodoo deities tell them too.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8wBUy93vvw
