Sesquicentennial Comparisons: Black Slavery in America and Ottoman Turkey

[Wehrwolfen]

Sesquicentennial Comparisons: Black Slavery in America and Ottoman Turkey​

January 1, 2013
By Andrew G. Bostom



**Snip**
The aggressive campaigns of Western abolitionists stand in stark contrast. Due to these efforts-spearheaded, initially, by Evangelical Christians, such as William Wilberforce-slaves were freed within England via court order during 1772, in the British colonies starting in 1834, and colonial France in 1848; the United States abolished in slavery in 1865. Slavery did not become illegal within Islamdom, however, until large swathes of its territory came under European colonial rule (for example, Egypt in 1882; Morocco in 1912), or Muslim nations sought admission to the League of Nations after 1920 (p. 12). Thus slavery was not formally outlawed in Republican Turkey until 1933, when, within a year of joining the League of Nations, Turkey sanctioned its prohibition by ratifying the League of Nations Convention on the Suppression of Slavery (p. 217).

The Anthropological Society of London presentation begins with the estimate of the black slave population in "Stambul" [Istanbul] "at 30,000 souls." An immediate distinction is drawn between these black slaves and the black slave population in the southern US:


Read more:
Articles: Sesquicentennial Comparisons: Black Slavery in America and Ottoman Turkey

 

[Black_Label]

Spamming the forum with non-stop BS threads from ultra right wing propaganda sites does nothing but make yourself and those on the far right look like a bunch of idiotic parrots and sheep.

 

[Wehrwolfen]

Spamming the forum with non-stop BS threads from ultra right wing propaganda sites does nothing but make yourself and those on the far right look like a bunch of idiotic parrots and sheep.

I could just picture you guarding the Hareem after becoming a eunuch. A favorite practice of Muslims with their slaves.

 

[Black_Label]

Spamming the forum with non-stop BS threads from ultra right wing propaganda sites does nothing but make yourself and those on the far right look like a bunch of idiotic parrots and sheep.

I could just picture you guarding the Hareem after becoming a eunuch. A favorite practice of Muslims with their slaves.

Clearly you are a slave to breitfart, Limbaugh, or are just incredibly stupid. Do you get paid by the thread?

 

[JakeStarkey]

woeful wol'hfen is a slave to his masters who think for him

 

[Publius1787]

Sesquicentennial Comparisons: Black Slavery in America and Ottoman Turkey​

January 1, 2013
By Andrew G. Bostom



**Snip**
The aggressive campaigns of Western abolitionists stand in stark contrast. Due to these efforts-spearheaded, initially, by Evangelical Christians, such as William Wilberforce-slaves were freed within England via court order during 1772, in the British colonies starting in 1834, and colonial France in 1848; the United States abolished in slavery in 1865. Slavery did not become illegal within Islamdom, however, until large swathes of its territory came under European colonial rule (for example, Egypt in 1882; Morocco in 1912), or Muslim nations sought admission to the League of Nations after 1920 (p. 12). Thus slavery was not formally outlawed in Republican Turkey until 1933, when, within a year of joining the League of Nations, Turkey sanctioned its prohibition by ratifying the League of Nations Convention on the Suppression of Slavery (p. 217).

The Anthropological Society of London presentation begins with the estimate of the black slave population in "Stambul" [Istanbul] "at 30,000 souls." An immediate distinction is drawn between these black slaves and the black slave population in the southern US:


Read more:
Articles: Sesquicentennial Comparisons: Black Slavery in America and Ottoman Turkey

More food for thought, the US also banned the importation of slaves in 1808. By that time the U.S imported 300,000 slaves. Today the only people who advocate for slavery are liberals who all universally claim that we have no right to self ownership.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Publius, grow up.

 

[Publius1787]

Publius, grow up.

Any law inconsistent with the right of self ownership is indeed partially a move toward slavery. You disagree? The Democratic platform is almost completely a rejection of the right of self ownership which makes slavery a viable option. Republicans have their own rejections as well but not to as large an extent.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Libertarianism is a move towards barbarianism.

Government is necessary. Get over it. It's not going away.

 

[Publius1787]

Libertarianism is a move towards barbarianism.

Government is necessary. Get over it. It's not going away.

Who said anything about libertarianism? The purpose of government is to protect the right of self ownership, without which, would be impossible. You disagree? Government has no other purpose but to protect property. The only thing left to the democratic process is how we go about it.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The purpose of government is to preserve "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Libertarianism is a mental disease.

 

[clevergirl]

Libertarianism is a move towards barbarianism.

Government is necessary. Get over it. It's not going away.

Who said anything about libertarianism? The purpose of government is to protect the right of self ownership, without which, would be impossible. You disagree? Government has no other purpose but to protect property. The only thing left to the democratic process is how we go about it.

Excellent sir, excellent!

 

[Publius1787]

The purpose of government is to preserve "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Libertarianism is a mental disease.

All of which is property according to the man that phrase was ripped from and according to the man who put it in the Declaration of Independence. How now brown cow?

 

[JakeStarkey]

#11, clevergril, who is not so clever.

 

[clevergirl]

The purpose of government is to preserve "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Libertarianism is a mental disease.

Liberty being self ownership, or put another way, the freedom to own property and wealth and pursue happiness.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Jefferson would not have pissed on a libertarian if he were on fire.

You certainly have not read the man in great detail.

The purpose of government is to preserve "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Libertarianism is a mental disease.

All of which is property according to the man that phrase was ripped from.

 

[Publius1787]

Jefferson would not have pissed on a libertarian if he were on fire.

You certainly have not read the man in great detail.

The purpose of government is to preserve "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Libertarianism is a mental disease.

All of which is property according to the man that phrase was ripped from.

According to Jefferson, Bacon, Newton, & Locke “are my trinity of the three greatest men the world had ever produced.” Of course, he ripped the Declaration of Independence from Locke. Jefferson's political philosophy was grounded in the principle of self ownership. Locke, who was the most influential philosopher of our founding generation, also grounded the main stay of his political philosophy in the principle of self ownership. You think otherwise? Who's speaking of libertarianism?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Jefferson's philosophy was on the principles of classical liberalism.

No libertarian can ever be a classical liberal: mutually exclusive.

 

[Publius1787]

Jefferson's philosophy was on the principles of classical liberalism.

No libertarian can ever be a classical liberal: mutually exclusive.

Classical liberalism is grounded in natural law which holds the principle of self ownership as the grounds for all subsequent laws. Indeed, Locke was a classical liberal as was Jefferson who molded his political philosophy after Locke. This fact is not up for debate. Jeffersons political philosophy is that of the right of self ownership. To deny the right of self ownership is to make slavery a viable option. Thus Democrats, more so than Republicans, are intent on moving closer to enslaving the individual. Democrats do not hold the right of self ownership as the main stay of their political philosophy. They hold the principle of egalitarianism as the mainstay of their political philosophy which is why inequality of stuff is more important to them than the equality of individual liberty.

 

[clevergirl]

#11, clevergril, who is not so clever.

Jake you always spend so much time tilting at windmills...the hair splitting you do is phenomenal, albeit more then just a little tedious.

I may not be so clever...but Jake, I am often more accurate and intellectually honest than you are on a given matter....and I can live with that.