slavery was good????

[scooter_the_shooter]

I know the actual act of slavery is bad...but I love what it’s done for thousands of people today. Before you start shouting "racist" at me listen to what I have to say.


I was reading a magazine(readers digest i had nothing to do) article about an African American journalist who went to Africa during the Rwanda massacre. He was watching the bodies float down a river and thought "If slavery didn't happen I could be one of them" and if not one of them he could have been starving or in a different massacre. And he said he was glad his ancestors got the "hell out of there"


Then I got thinking about some of my friends that are black if slavery didn't happen they could

Be in the Sudan
Be in Somalia
Be dead in Rwanda
Be in crime-infested South Africa
And countless other horrible places.


So do you think slavery had a positive effect or not?? I am not defending what happened to the slaves but their descendants are very lucky IMHO

[master of the puppets]

for there ancestors probably not, but in the long run there line now lives because of what one might call a willfull migration. so it's true that they are probably alive and (if they were smart)well in the united states rather than back in africa.
so for them be thankful that your in the U.S. rather than somalia dispite our past wrongs.
but i am caucasion, i would like to hear the opinion of an african american.
and while we're at it lets bash on the confederates, damn rebels

[Sjakihata]

If you lived during the american revolution, would you prefer to fight and die for your freedom, or exported away to some distant unknown country to work as a slave and probably die that way?

[Grey_Fox]

This will probably get fairly ugly. Interesting to debate, but too many would insult you. Bit like the time I said (in the RTW lobby, so this probably won't surprise anybody) that Hitler was a genius for getting Germany out of the ecnomic doldrums and turning it into the dominant force in Europe.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Bit like the time I said (in the RTW lobby, so this probably won't surprise anybody) that Hitler was a genius for getting Germany out of the ecnomic doldrums and turning it into the dominant force in Europe.

Well its the truth. Some peole let thier emotions get in the way of reality. This though reminds of this silly notion of reperations for slavery. Hell they should be paying us for bringing them here. ~D

[Sjakihata]

Hitler wasnt a genius. The way he brought economic wealth to Germany, was because he used the Jews as a scapegoat. That brought the nation together, nationalism flourished. People became sheep. Then you start a huge military production, and bingo.
Not the work of a genius, but by a warmonger.

[Sjakihata]

yeah, but that doesnt make it legit does it?

[asilv]

Bit like the time I said (in the RTW lobby, so this probably won't surprise anybody) that Hitler was a genius for getting Germany out of the ecnomic doldrums and turning it into the dominant force in Europe.
...And a few years later Germany was in ruins and millions of people dead because of his actions. Doesn't sound like a work of a genius to me.

[scooter_the_shooter]

So you think that they(the africans americans of now not the actual slaves) are better off here then if slavery never happened and they had to stay in hell hole africa?

[Big_John]

i've seen it before, but this has to be one of the funniest rationalizations for crimes against humanity that i've ever seen. i mean, you honestly can't be serious, right? did you stop to think for a second that there might actually be a connection between the havoc (including slavery) that europe and america wrought on africa and the current sociopolitical situation?

this is like being kidnapped and raped by the same guy that burns your house down after he abducts you. then, after being beaten and sodomized, you come to the realization: "wow, good thing that rapist got me out of there before he burned down my house! god bless man!"

http://www.my-smileys.de/smileys2/emotlol.gif

[The Stranger]

if there was no slavery they prolly would never been born but besides that, who says africa would have looke like this when the "white men" hadnt destroyed the highly cultivated people along the Niger, Ethiopia and in Zimbabwe. there wouldnt have been any bloody revolution against the belgians, english, dutch, portuguese and french. maybe Africa would be all moslim or maybe the most powerful continent in the world. cuz we all know that it is one of the richest maybe even the richest in the world. maybe not in terms of money but definitly in the rest.

[The Stranger]

i've seen it before, but this has to be one of the funniest rationalizations for crimes against humanity that i've ever seen. i mean, you honestly can't be serious, right? did you stop to think for a second that there might actually be a connection between the havoc (including slavery) that europe and america wrought on africa and the current sociopolitical situation?

this is like being kidnapped and raped by the same guy that burns your house down after he abducts you. then, after being beaten and sodomized, you come to the realization: "wow, good thing that rapist got me out of there before he burned down my house! god bless man!"

http://www.my-smileys.de/smileys2/emotlol.gif

so true...

[scooter_the_shooter]

I know it was horrible for the actual slaves. But go up to most african americans and ask if they want to go to the sudan...what do you think they will say.

[The Stranger]

cuz Sudan looks like this cuz you destroyed the cultures that once were there. didnt you read BJ or my post

and Gelatinus, you gotta be kidding right. let america pay their 1000 billion dollar dept of first

[scooter_the_shooter]

I did it yep indeed i did. I climbed in my time machine and messed up africa :help:

How did white people destroy it. The war lords of africa are white??? :help:

[scooter_the_shooter]

And if you mean the USA did it how do you come up with that...as cube said there were mostly euros colonizing it.

[Big_John]

So, what, you guys think the Africans were peace-loving people? As time passed, let's say we did leave them alone. They'd get access to guns eventually, and we'd still have the same shit happening.

Sorry to break it to you, they aren't angels. They sold their own people as slaves, after all. Or rather, their "Tribal Enemies." Tribal enemies they would have continued to war with regardless of whether or not we ever intevened.ok, so african's just naturally, genetically, can't handle technology? is that your argument? i mean, honestly, how old are you people? this is not a complex subject. can you really not understand that there is a connection between destroying the society and cultures of an entire continent and the chaos that reigns there a few generations later?

[scooter_the_shooter]

How did america destroy their culture....now the euros colonizing it....

[The Stranger]

I did it yep indeed i did. I climbed in my time machine and messed up africa :help:

How did white people destroy it. The war lords of africa are white??? :help:

i said "white men" you know what i mean.

[Laridus Konivaich]

For the most part, America just bought what the Africans were selling. It is irrelevant whether that good was charcoal or humans, it is still just a product that the Africans were marketing to their customers, in this case the Americans and Europeans.

[The Stranger]

And if you mean the USA did it how do you come up with that...as cube said there were mostly euros colonizing it.

did i mention america in my line. i do i know where you're from. i said you as in colonisating countries. when i was talking about revolts did i mention america, nooo.

GC
the way europe treated their working class is even worse than being a slave.

and america still has the highest depth in the world.

[The Stranger]

a diifferent way of life isnt the same as not being developed. how do you explain those beautiful buildings in Zimbabwe, their astounding knowledge of the starts. whe werent as civilised as them till the renesaince.

and Ceasar dont act like you dont understand

[Big_John]

so this isn't an attempt to rationalize latent racist tendencies, instead it's a shot at scoring patriot points? that's good news.

anyway, if you can't see how taking upwards of 12,000,000 people from a continent (not including the number that were killed in the process, probably about as many) would destroy the fabric of a society, i can't help you. you are right that europeans are just as guilty, but trying to pretend that the american slave trade has nothing to do with the current situation in africa, is plain ignorant, at best.

what's more, you are actually trying to build a framework on that profound ignorace! not only are the americas (or is it somehow just the US?) blameless in the situation, america actually did africans a favor by enslaving at least 12,000,000 of them and killing as many! that's some fine reasoning. congrats.

[scooter_the_shooter]

Most of africa wasn't like timbuktu (i spelled it wrong i know) Most of it was tribal life and they were already selling slaves before the "white men" got there

[The Stranger]

That's not what I'm saying. Don't be a prick, please read my arguments carefully before responding.

Africa never got the chance to go through the same civilization changes that the rest of the world did. It's isolation meant that it was centuries behind Europe when the brits and french started colonizing.

A good example is the Native Americans: Before we started our, uh, mass campaign westward. Indeed before the US was even a nation, and when the colonists had just recently began arrive and trade with the Indians. They gave the Indians guns, and access to technologies far ahead of what they had. As a result, the Indians simply took it and used it in their everyday life. Giving them guns didn't suddenly make them European Gentlemen, it made them Indians with guns.

Giving africans technology without colonization would not have been making European Gentlmen out of the Africans, it would have been giving africans guns. They'd go about their daily life, only now they'd have guns.

The situation caused today is as much a fault of European Colonization as it is giving them too much technology without enough modernization. Parts of africa are still very trible, and alot of the wars are over tribal ethnic issues.

That has a bit of trueth in it. but didnt the greeks sold slaves and are considered one of the most civilised countries at that time, the same for romans. that is also the same for Ethiopia. the world wasnt as big as it is now, we were as isolated as they were, perhaps even more. their trade was very sophisticated and their richdoms were tremendous. they could have become as we (maybe better) are if they hadnt been destroyed. if we were conquered by the mongols we also wouldnt wear nikes.

you speak like they were murderous baboons that could talk.

[scooter_the_shooter]

The slaves descendants have a better life here then they would in africa. That is what i am saying.

[The Stranger]

Now you're being ignorant. That's not even a counterpoint. How does them having beautiful buildings change the nature of their tribal lifestyle, which was inherantly warlike?

it doesnt. but it does shows that werent only murderous primates. you look at rome as a token of civilisation the same goes for these buildings. romans were warlike, they traded slaves but you dont speak about them as they couldnt develop

[Big_John]

That's not what I'm saying. Don't be a prick, please read my arguments carefully before responding.am i being a "prick"? i must have gotten confused, i acidentally thought a couple of you were actually trying to rationalize the destruction of a continents society. my bad.


Africa never got the chance to go through the same civilization changes that the rest of the world did. It's isolation meant that it was centuries behind Europe when the brits and french started colonizing.read a book man, seriously.


A good example is the Native Americans: Before we started our, uh, mass campaign westward. Indeed before the US was even a nation, and when the colonists had just recently began arrive and trade with the Indians. They gave the Indians guns, and access to technologies far ahead of what they had. As a result, the Indians simply took it and used it in their everyday life. Giving them guns didn't suddenly make them European Gentlemen, it made them Indians with guns.right, and american indians are certainly better off now too. you've got some great points.


Giving africans technology without colonization would not have been making European Gentlmen out of the Africans, it would have been giving africans guns. They'd go about their daily life, only now they'd have guns.but, of course, this wouldn't actually be a problem because africa is so isolated.. right?


The situation caused today is as much a fault of European Colonization as it is giving them too much technology without enough modernization. Parts of africa are still very trible, and alot of the wars are over tribal ethnic issues.gee, i wonder why frica is having such a hard time of it?



The slaves descendants have a better life here then they would in africa. That is what i am saying.dude, it's neither my will, nor my place to educate you. go on believing whatever you want.

[The Stranger]

The difference between the africans and the greeks (or romans, for that matter) is that the Greeks and Romans, and other European cultures evolved into modern society. Africa didn't.

africa did but you werent there to notice. are guns a token of civilisation????

[/QUOTE]
Changes like that have to come gradually, but the European colonization of Africa denied them that. The Slave Trade did not destroy their culture (they were doing it before the greeks), the colonization did.[/QUOTE]

i agree

[scooter_the_shooter]

I said


The slaves descendants have a better life here then they would in africa. That is what i am saying.


then you said



dude, it's neither my will, nor my place to educate you. go on believing whatever you want.

So you think they would be better off in the places i mentioned in the first post :help:

[Big_John]

You seem hellbent on taking meanings out of my posts that I don't intend. If it's your desire to be contrary, so be it. I can't change your mind.then perhaps you should revise your statements. i'm only responding to what is written.

as with ceasar, if you can't understand that taking or killing more than 24 million people might damage a society, just a tad.. so be it.

[The Stranger]

if you hadnt colonised the place and didnt trade slaves. africa might not had to pay depths. Africa has the richest enviroment in the world yet nothing good comes out cuz it is all in the hands of the europeans and americans.

[The Stranger]

that is true, as long as it were they that offered it wouldnt be as bad, but does that mean that the ones that live in america now have a better live then they would when there were no colonies. nobody knows.

with the current facts it is true, but it doesnt mean they should be thankful for it. thats whats wrong.

you cant fix somthing like that anymore. the way europe left africa after they were independent is disgusting. they gave it up cus they knew they could exploit them later anyway.

[Big_John]

I can't and won't justify slavery as something that is morally acceptable. If you're looking to demonize racists, you won't find any here. Now, if you want to throw off whatever bias agenda you're looking to pick a debate with, and look at the facts as they are, keep reading.you seem to be lacking in the facts department, this is why i suggested you "read a book".


The tribes are africa are, by a decent margin, some of the oldest civilizations on earth. They were engaged in the slave trade long before anyone else. They would go wage a war with a tribal neighbor, round up some slaves, and sell them to the whites! This was not some kind of involuntary kidnapping, this was the tribes offering goods and the whites accepting them. Heinous as it is in hindsight, it would not have looked that way back then. Slavery did not damage their culture any more than they were already damaging it themselves. The real people who suffered were the slaves brought over from Africa, not the african tribes.of course this is not unique to africa. all human societies, at some point, collected and traded slaves. you, for some reason, seem to be trying to make the argument that africa, unlike much of the rest of the world, would have been unable to move out of slavery as their economic systems evolved. why would this be so?

what's more, it is a mistake to conflate the tribal slavery that exited in africa prior to that with the commercial slave trade infrastructure maintained by europeans and americans from the 15th through 19th centuries, just as it would be equally incorrect to conflate the latter mass slave trade with the mamluk's situation in medieval europe/near-east/north africa.


What caused the cultural devestation of the African Tribes was the Colonization by the European powers, who happily proceeded to exploit the tribes on their very homeland. Once again, this is not justifyable in hindsight, but what would you have expected them to do?

"Oh, look! Primitive tribes! Let us leave them be for a few thousand years, so they can catch up to our society in a civilized and humane manner."

Give me a break. They exploited them. That's what empires do. What we have now are cultures that had to make the jump from bronze age to jet age in less than 100 years. It's a place where ethnic tribal rivalries are mixed with modern-day technology. And it's not a good mix. And I don't know that there is any solution to it.what does expectation have to do with anything? the expectation, should be, that might makes right, as it always has. but this is completely unrelated to the topic. why do you think that taking/killing more than 24 million healthy men and women would do no harm to african societies?

[The Stranger]

i said it still goes on. doh, you got the facts at that time how would you know. if Attilla didnt lost at Chalons who knows what happened. if Carthage won the punic wars who knows what happened. you cant say that africa was doomed, but if you think you can, tell me who's next.

do you think their ancestors wanted to leave, do you know how much psychological damage has been suffered. their life is better huh. they've been discriminated, abused, falsely accused etc. many americans still look at them as monkeys that can talk. if america was poor, were their lifes better? are the lifes of those in the ghetto better than those in african tribes. not everyone in africa suffers, as you assume
.

just tell me how do you think a African Tribal village looks like and what their daily life is

[The Stranger]

again GC, different way of life doesnt mean that they werent civilised. the Greeks called every one not as them barbaric. youre doing the same.

[Big_John]

You must not be reading my posts very clearly.

I didn't say anything about Africa being unable to move out of Slavery. I think all cultures at some point reach that awareness where they realize it's Barbaric, and the Africans would have been no exception. The problem is that they were so far behind that there is no way you can realistically expect that they would have modernized enough to stop the Europeans from exploiting them.conversely, you seem to be reading intentions into my responses that aren't there. aren't forums great?

again, what does the expectation of exploitation have to do with the contention that "slavery was good????"?


I've already made the bit about slavery clear, have I not? They were already taking healthy men and women from eachother. They sold them to the americans. We didn't go over there and steal them. Although, to be fair, the Europeans did do that. But we bought them from the Europeans. The fact remains that such displacement was already a norm within their society.it's clear that you don't have a firm grasp of the situation. again, reading proper history on the subject will help in that respect. you seem to be confusing normal societal slavery with the industrial slavery machine that, thus far, has only really been seen once in human history.

[The Stranger]

are you saying its not true that many americans still discriminate black people. i'm black myself and i've been there, believe me. ofcourse not all, lets say 90 procent doesnt but there still is that 10. if nobody did how do you explain the KKK still existing

[PanzerJaeger]

Hitler wasnt a genius. The way he brought economic wealth to Germany, was because he used the Jews as a scapegoat. That brought the nation together, nationalism flourished. People became sheep. Then you start a huge military production, and bingo.
Not the work of a genius, but by a warmonger.

Hitler was no genius, but such a simplistic answer shows you not to be one either.. Yea, the hatred of the Jews translated into economic growth.. ~:rolleyes:

As to the actual topic - I wouldnt touch it with a 10 foot pole. ~;)

[scooter_the_shooter]

No one here is saying slavery was good(i put that in the title cause i thought people would get mad come here to flame me but then read the initial post). I said the after product has helped thousands of people escape africa.

If i said slavery is good that would be like saying the holocaust was good because it helped form israel :help:

[Big_John]

I'm not the one making the argument that Slavery is good. If you'll care to notice, I didn't start this thread.
oh, sorry for staying on-topic. but excuse me if i have to laugh at an absurd assertion like: "Slavery itself changed absolutely nothing about tribal life in Africa."

but being as that's off-topic, maybe i should just ignore statements like that?


Now, I do have a firm grasp on the situation. The "Slavery Machine" as you call it, was terrible. Yes. Horrible, even. But slavery was as much a part of their "Culture" as pretty buildings in Zimbabwe. The ones who remained in Africa did not all of a sudden suffer cultural breakdown and die because of it. Now, the ones who had to suffer the long journey accross the atlantic, and then spend their whole life working the cotton fields--they suffered, to be sure.

I maintain that it was not slavery that destroyed the African Cultures. You can't pin it down on a specific issue like that. It was the more general problem of European colonization in general, and things like Share-cropping.i'm not pinning it down on any one thing at all. conversely others keep saying things like "The Slave Trade did not destroy their culture"; seemingly trying to remove any sense of cause and effect from the systematic theft and destruction of millions of individuals (which, btw, was quantitatively and qualitatively worlds apart from normal societal slavery) from the current chaos in africa. they are the one's trying to "pin" something on something else. i'm simply acknowledging all aspects of the situation.

[Big_John]

World's away from "Normal" slavery, but a drop in the water compared to what else was happening, Culture-wise. Like I said, the slavery did not affect those back in Africa so much as it affected the ones being transported.are you still saying that the slavery in question had no effect on the people it left behind in africa? or are you revising that previous statement? in either case, your assertion that slavery was a "drop in the bucket" is baseless, as far as i can tell.

[Dâriûsh]

Then I got thinking about some of my friends that are black if slavery didn't happen they could

Be in the Sudan
Be in Somalia
Be dead in Rwanda
Be in crime-infested South Africa
And countless other horrible places.

Somalia, Sudan, and Rwanda wasn’t a source for the transatlantic slave market. Most of the hapless people the Europeans kidnapped were from West Africa.



So do you think slavery had a positive effect or not?? No.


I am not defending what happened to the slaves but their descendants are very lucky IMHO Really?

Edit: And one might also theorize that Africa would have been better off without the invasion of the vile European colonialists in the first place.

[KukriKhan]

The post starter sought (I think) to examine the 'law of unintended consequences' vis-a-vis slavery, a difficult proposition because it calls for too much speculation to examine - but a worthy subject of pursuit.

However, the discussion has degenerated into racial stereotypings, name-callings, and other violations of forum rules.

Therefore the thread is closed. Our thanks to the contributors who gave the topic a fair shot.