fyi

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

The first legal slave holder in the US was a negro. It took White ingenuity and common sense to free these critters. Now what?

No the first legal slave owner in the US was not black. Hugh Gywnn made John Punch a slave some 15 years before Anthony Johnson purchased his wife. Second blacks did not make slavery legal here. Whites did.

Now the Spanish from Europe were white so lets get that one straight right now.

Not really.

Some DNA, and pigmentation maps which show that Spaniards are hardly White European.

 

[IM2]

The first legal slave holder in the US was a negro. It took White ingenuity and common sense to free these critters. Now what?

No the first legal slave owner in the US was not black. Hugh Gywnn made John Punch a slave some 15 years before Anthony Johnson purchased his wife. Second blacks did not make slavery legal here. Whites did.

Now the Spanish from Europe were white so lets get that one straight right now.

Not really.

Some DNA, and pigmentation maps which show that Spaniards are hardly White European.

Yeah just like Prince Georges County was all we needed to know.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

The first legal slave holder in the US was a negro. It took White ingenuity and common sense to free these critters. Now what?

No the first legal slave owner in the US was not black. Hugh Gywnn made John Punch a slave some 15 years before Anthony Johnson purchased his wife. Second blacks did not make slavery legal here. Whites did.

Now the Spanish from Europe were white so lets get that one straight right now.

Not really.

Some DNA, and pigmentation maps which show that Spaniards are hardly White European.

Yeah just like Prince Georges County was all we needed to know.

Prince George's County, Maryland is an excellent demonstration of the Black problems even in high income areas.

 

[IM2]

No the first legal slave owner in the US was not black. Hugh Gywnn made John Punch a slave some 15 years before Anthony Johnson purchased his wife. Second blacks did not make slavery legal here. Whites did.

Now the Spanish from Europe were white so lets get that one straight right now.

Not really.

Some DNA, and pigmentation maps which show that Spaniards are hardly White European.

Yeah just like Prince Georges County was all we needed to know.

Prince George's County, Maryland is an excellent demonstration of the Black problems even in high income areas.

No it's not.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

Now the Spanish from Europe were white so lets get that one straight right now.

Not really.

Some DNA, and pigmentation maps which show that Spaniards are hardly White European.

Yeah just like Prince Georges County was all we needed to know.

Prince George's County, Maryland is an excellent demonstration of the Black problems even in high income areas.

No it's not.

Prince George's County, Maryland has an income level about 30% higher than the U.S.A average, and also a murder rate about 30% higher than the U.S.A average.

Could it's large Black population have something to do with it?

 

[IM2]

Not really.

Some DNA, and pigmentation maps which show that Spaniards are hardly White European.

Yeah just like Prince Georges County was all we needed to know.

Prince George's County, Maryland is an excellent demonstration of the Black problems even in high income areas.

No it's not.

Prince George's County, Maryland has an income level about 30% higher than the U.S.A average, and also a murder rate about 30% higher than the U.S.A average.

Could it's large Black population have something to do with it?

Murder is not the only crime dumb ass.

Woodmore Maryland is 86 percent black, wealthy, and located in PG county.

The overall crime rate in Woodmore is 78% lower than the national average.

Woodmore is safer than 83% of the cities in the United States.

Woodmore, MD Crime Rates & Statistics

Shut the fuck up about Prince Georges county because you are wrong.

You see in 2015 the last recorded year, the national murder rate was 4.9 per 100,000 which equates to 49 per one million.

In 2015 the murder rate of PG county was 16 per one million. That's basically 33 percent less than the national average.

You got this wrong.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

Not really.

Some DNA, and pigmentation maps which show that Spaniards are hardly White European.

Yeah just like Prince Georges County was all we needed to know.

Prince George's County, Maryland is an excellent demonstration of the Black problems even in high income areas.

No it's not.

Prince George's County, Maryland has an income level about 30% higher than the U.S.A average, and also a murder rate about 30% higher than the U.S.A average.

Could it's large Black population have something to do with it?

In 2015 the murder rate of PG county was 16 per one million. That's basically 33 percent less than the national average.

You got this wrong.

How do you figure that?
Prince George's county, Maryland has just over 900,000, and had 60+ murders in 2015.

Homicides on the rise in Prince George's Co., but overall crime is dropping

That's close to a 7 out of 100,000 murder rate, which is higher than the U.S.A average.

 

[Paul Essien]

I’ve seen several recent posts about the fact that black people in Africa sold their own people into slavery. It’s been cited as a basis to declare that black people are also at fault and are therefore just as bad as the white people who enslaved them. I am currently reading “Slaves In The Family,” by Edward Ball. In chapter 7 he gives the most thorough explanation of this I have ever heard.

“The coast of Loango, included a port settlement, Cabinda. The Royal African Company, which brought slaves to Charleston, made the Loango coast its trading base, so much so that the company’s records from the 1720s show that all of its ships going to central Africa during that time listed Cabinda as a destination.

Whites had long ago given up making raids themselves and instead operated forts on the coast known as “factories.” These were heavily armed buying centers to which black slave-handlers delivered their merchandise in exchange for guns, rum, and fabric. The captives brought by the black middlemen to the factories had previously been held by chiefs and headmen farther interior, away from the coast. These chiefs rounded up victims in several ways – by staging raids on villages for the purpose of getting prisoners of war, by punishing people in debt through sale into slavery, and sometimes by selling members of their own tribe for personal profit. With this involvement at the source of the capture business, slavery became a shared venture.

Forced labor was practiced in West Africa before the Europeans began to carry people off, but it was not plantation slavery like that in America. West African slavery consisted of the subjugation of whole villages by invading chiefdoms, which led to arrangements that resembled the vassal societies of feudal Europe. As it was in medieval England, the vanquished were required to make oaths of obedience to a piece of land and to work it, giving tribute to the lords in services and crops but holding on to personal identity. By contrast, American slavery meant the denuding of individuals of all rights and property, one person at a time.

In the Asante kingdom of southern Nigeria, for example, a slave could own property, own a slave him or herself, intermarry with the kin of the ruling family, and be an heir to his or her master – none of which rights were held by captive American blacks. When the Europeans arrived on the African coast, this patriarchal system became rapidly more harsh, and the pace and methods of slave capture were sharpened to suit white demand.”

I have believed and am now even more convinced that American slavery was its own evil, not to be compared to or blamed on anyone else.

Notice the double standard

When whites do something bad like slavery ?

All of sudden. History now matters. And they look for evidence to see if black people have done anything like it.

When whites do something good like an invention ?

All of a sudden. History does not matter. And they deny any evidence of black people doing the same thing.

 

[IM2]

Yeah just like Prince Georges County was all we needed to know.

Prince George's County, Maryland is an excellent demonstration of the Black problems even in high income areas.

No it's not.

Prince George's County, Maryland has an income level about 30% higher than the U.S.A average, and also a murder rate about 30% higher than the U.S.A average.

Could it's large Black population have something to do with it?

In 2015 the murder rate of PG county was 16 per one million. That's basically 33 percent less than the national average.

You got this wrong.

How do you figure that?
Prince George's county, Maryland has just over 900,000, and had 60+ murders in 2015.

Homicides on the rise in Prince George's Co., but overall crime is dropping

That's close to a 7 out of 100,000 murder rate, which is higher than the U.S.A average.

Now ask yourself is 7 out of 100,000 a really high number. There are 365 days in a year and lets say they had 70 murders. That a murder ever 5th day and you u se that to make a racist claim and you actually think that has validity? And where your claim becomes dishonest is the fact that most of the killings were in pats the county hat bordered Washington DC and not on the black suburban areas. What you did was exaggerate to male a racist argument. A county of 900,000 people with 60 plus murders in a year does not have a major problem with murder.

For example a majority white city, Tulsa has a murder rate of 14 per 100,000.double that f Prince Georges county.

Omaha Nebraska 73 percent white with a 10.6 per 100,000 murder rate.

Oklahoma City 62 percent white with an 11.6 murder rate per 100,000

These numbers are higher than the national average. So is Albuquerque, Anaheim, Aurora Colorado, Bakersfield, Columbus Ohio and a whole lot of others.

I can keep going but the point is that your claim about Prince Georges county is bogus and without merit.

On top of that your link showed crime had decreased in the county.

 

[OldLady]

I’ve seen several recent posts about the fact that black people in Africa sold their own people into slavery. It’s been cited as a basis to declare that black people are also at fault and are therefore just as bad as the white people who enslaved them. I am currently reading “Slaves In The Family,” by Edward Ball. In chapter 7 he gives the most thorough explanation of this I have ever heard.

“The coast of Loango, included a port settlement, Cabinda. The Royal African Company, which brought slaves to Charleston, made the Loango coast its trading base, so much so that the company’s records from the 1720s show that all of its ships going to central Africa during that time listed Cabinda as a destination.

Whites had long ago given up making raids themselves and instead operated forts on the coast known as “factories.” These were heavily armed buying centers to which black slave-handlers delivered their merchandise in exchange for guns, rum, and fabric. The captives brought by the black middlemen to the factories had previously been held by chiefs and headmen farther interior, away from the coast. These chiefs rounded up victims in several ways – by staging raids on villages for the purpose of getting prisoners of war, by punishing people in debt through sale into slavery, and sometimes by selling members of their own tribe for personal profit. With this involvement at the source of the capture business, slavery became a shared venture.

Forced labor was practiced in West Africa before the Europeans began to carry people off, but it was not plantation slavery like that in America. West African slavery consisted of the subjugation of whole villages by invading chiefdoms, which led to arrangements that resembled the vassal societies of feudal Europe. As it was in medieval England, the vanquished were required to make oaths of obedience to a piece of land and to work it, giving tribute to the lords in services and crops but holding on to personal identity. By contrast, American slavery meant the denuding of individuals of all rights and property, one person at a time.

In the Asante kingdom of southern Nigeria, for example, a slave could own property, own a slave him or herself, intermarry with the kin of the ruling family, and be an heir to his or her master – none of which rights were held by captive American blacks. When the Europeans arrived on the African coast, this patriarchal system became rapidly more harsh, and the pace and methods of slave capture were sharpened to suit white demand.”

I have believed and am now even more convinced that American slavery was its own evil, not to be compared to or blamed on anyone else.

Yes, some African countries/tribes practiced slavery themselves. The vast majority captured rivals and sold them because there was a MARKET for them. Kind of a natural resource. Our and Europe's hunger for slaves fueled the increased traffic. They would not have been capturing all those folks if there was no one to sell them to.

 

[IM2]

I’ve seen several recent posts about the fact that black people in Africa sold their own people into slavery. It’s been cited as a basis to declare that black people are also at fault and are therefore just as bad as the white people who enslaved them. I am currently reading “Slaves In The Family,” by Edward Ball. In chapter 7 he gives the most thorough explanation of this I have ever heard.

“The coast of Loango, included a port settlement, Cabinda. The Royal African Company, which brought slaves to Charleston, made the Loango coast its trading base, so much so that the company’s records from the 1720s show that all of its ships going to central Africa during that time listed Cabinda as a destination.

Whites had long ago given up making raids themselves and instead operated forts on the coast known as “factories.” These were heavily armed buying centers to which black slave-handlers delivered their merchandise in exchange for guns, rum, and fabric. The captives brought by the black middlemen to the factories had previously been held by chiefs and headmen farther interior, away from the coast. These chiefs rounded up victims in several ways – by staging raids on villages for the purpose of getting prisoners of war, by punishing people in debt through sale into slavery, and sometimes by selling members of their own tribe for personal profit. With this involvement at the source of the capture business, slavery became a shared venture.

Forced labor was practiced in West Africa before the Europeans began to carry people off, but it was not plantation slavery like that in America. West African slavery consisted of the subjugation of whole villages by invading chiefdoms, which led to arrangements that resembled the vassal societies of feudal Europe. As it was in medieval England, the vanquished were required to make oaths of obedience to a piece of land and to work it, giving tribute to the lords in services and crops but holding on to personal identity. By contrast, American slavery meant the denuding of individuals of all rights and property, one person at a time.

In the Asante kingdom of southern Nigeria, for example, a slave could own property, own a slave him or herself, intermarry with the kin of the ruling family, and be an heir to his or her master – none of which rights were held by captive American blacks. When the Europeans arrived on the African coast, this patriarchal system became rapidly more harsh, and the pace and methods of slave capture were sharpened to suit white demand.”

I have believed and am now even more convinced that American slavery was its own evil, not to be compared to or blamed on anyone else.

Notice the double standard

When whites do something bad like slavery ?

All of sudden. History now matters. And they look for evidence to see if black people have done anything like it.

When whites do something good like an invention ?

All of a sudden. History does not matter. And they deny any evidence of black people doing the same thing.

Delores is trying to explain things to these whites here in this quote. She's married to a black man. However your point is utmost valid. Whites use history to excuse themselves from wrong and to credit themselves.

 

[Liberty777]

I’ve seen several recent posts about the fact that black people in Africa sold their own people into slavery. It’s been cited as a basis to declare that black people are also at fault and are therefore just as bad as the white people who enslaved them. I am currently reading “Slaves In The Family,” by Edward Ball. In chapter 7 he gives the most thorough explanation of this I have ever heard.

“The coast of Loango, included a port settlement, Cabinda. The Royal African Company, which brought slaves to Charleston, made the Loango coast its trading base, so much so that the company’s records from the 1720s show that all of its ships going to central Africa during that time listed Cabinda as a destination.

Whites had long ago given up making raids themselves and instead operated forts on the coast known as “factories.” These were heavily armed buying centers to which black slave-handlers delivered their merchandise in exchange for guns, rum, and fabric. The captives brought by the black middlemen to the factories had previously been held by chiefs and headmen farther interior, away from the coast. These chiefs rounded up victims in several ways – by staging raids on villages for the purpose of getting prisoners of war, by punishing people in debt through sale into slavery, and sometimes by selling members of their own tribe for personal profit. With this involvement at the source of the capture business, slavery became a shared venture.

Forced labor was practiced in West Africa before the Europeans began to carry people off, but it was not plantation slavery like that in America. West African slavery consisted of the subjugation of whole villages by invading chiefdoms, which led to arrangements that resembled the vassal societies of feudal Europe. As it was in medieval England, the vanquished were required to make oaths of obedience to a piece of land and to work it, giving tribute to the lords in services and crops but holding on to personal identity. By contrast, American slavery meant the denuding of individuals of all rights and property, one person at a time.

In the Asante kingdom of southern Nigeria, for example, a slave could own property, own a slave him or herself, intermarry with the kin of the ruling family, and be an heir to his or her master – none of which rights were held by captive American blacks. When the Europeans arrived on the African coast, this patriarchal system became rapidly more harsh, and the pace and methods of slave capture were sharpened to suit white demand.”

I have believed and am now even more convinced that American slavery was its own evil, not to be compared to or blamed on anyone else.

Notice the double standard

When whites do something bad like slavery ?

All of sudden. History now matters. And they look for evidence to see if black people have done anything like it.

When whites do something good like an invention ?

All of a sudden. History does not matter. And they deny any evidence of black people doing the same thing.

Delores is trying to explain things to these whites here in this quote. She's married to a black man. However your point is utmost valid. Whites use history to excuse themselves from wrong and to credit themselves.

Preach it brother wake these whites up.

 

[Eloy]

1.) Portuguese, and Spaniards both started the Atlantic Slave Trade, and took the most Black slaves out of Europe too.

2.) Some Black slaves taken would have otherwise been sacrificed by African tribes as POWs.

3.) The Black slave population in the U.S.A, grew faster than Europe's population.
So, it doesn't seem that Black slaves had it quite so bad for that time period as you think.

Your post is false; The Spanish did not begin the trans-Atlantic slave trade. All the major European powers were involved in this enterprise, but by the early 18th century, England became the world's leading slave trading power. It's estimated that English ships were responsible for the forced transportation of at least 2-3 million Africans in that century.

So dominant were English ships and merchants that they carried away African captives not only to English colonies in North America and the Caribbean but even to the colonies of their main economic rivals, the French and Spanish, as well as to others.

The Spanish were the first European country to ban slavery while the descendants of the English in the USA continued slavery until they had a war to stop it between 1861 and 1865.

Funny how you left out the Portuguese, who were the biggest slave traders, and who ended slavery in Brazil after the U.S.A had.

Your post was erroneously blaming mostly the Spanish for the slave trade when the English/USA were far more pro-slavery.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

I’ve seen several recent posts about the fact that black people in Africa sold their own people into slavery. It’s been cited as a basis to declare that black people are also at fault and are therefore just as bad as the white people who enslaved them. I am currently reading “Slaves In The Family,” by Edward Ball. In chapter 7 he gives the most thorough explanation of this I have ever heard.

“The coast of Loango, included a port settlement, Cabinda. The Royal African Company, which brought slaves to Charleston, made the Loango coast its trading base, so much so that the company’s records from the 1720s show that all of its ships going to central Africa during that time listed Cabinda as a destination.

Whites had long ago given up making raids themselves and instead operated forts on the coast known as “factories.” These were heavily armed buying centers to which black slave-handlers delivered their merchandise in exchange for guns, rum, and fabric. The captives brought by the black middlemen to the factories had previously been held by chiefs and headmen farther interior, away from the coast. These chiefs rounded up victims in several ways – by staging raids on villages for the purpose of getting prisoners of war, by punishing people in debt through sale into slavery, and sometimes by selling members of their own tribe for personal profit. With this involvement at the source of the capture business, slavery became a shared venture.

Forced labor was practiced in West Africa before the Europeans began to carry people off, but it was not plantation slavery like that in America. West African slavery consisted of the subjugation of whole villages by invading chiefdoms, which led to arrangements that resembled the vassal societies of feudal Europe. As it was in medieval England, the vanquished were required to make oaths of obedience to a piece of land and to work it, giving tribute to the lords in services and crops but holding on to personal identity. By contrast, American slavery meant the denuding of individuals of all rights and property, one person at a time.

In the Asante kingdom of southern Nigeria, for example, a slave could own property, own a slave him or herself, intermarry with the kin of the ruling family, and be an heir to his or her master – none of which rights were held by captive American blacks. When the Europeans arrived on the African coast, this patriarchal system became rapidly more harsh, and the pace and methods of slave capture were sharpened to suit white demand.”

I have believed and am now even more convinced that American slavery was its own evil, not to be compared to or blamed on anyone else.

Notice the double standard

When whites do something bad like slavery ?

All of sudden. History now matters. And they look for evidence to see if black people have done anything like it.

When whites do something good like an invention ?

All of a sudden. History does not matter. And they deny any evidence of black people doing the same thing.

Arabs started enslaving Blacks earlier, took more Black slaves, and still are taking Black slaves in some regions.

Now, what did Arabs invent, in comparison to Europeans?

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

1.) Portuguese, and Spaniards both started the Atlantic Slave Trade, and took the most Black slaves out of Europe too.

2.) Some Black slaves taken would have otherwise been sacrificed by African tribes as POWs.

3.) The Black slave population in the U.S.A, grew faster than Europe's population.
So, it doesn't seem that Black slaves had it quite so bad for that time period as you think.

Your post is false; The Spanish did not begin the trans-Atlantic slave trade. All the major European powers were involved in this enterprise, but by the early 18th century, England became the world's leading slave trading power. It's estimated that English ships were responsible for the forced transportation of at least 2-3 million Africans in that century.

So dominant were English ships and merchants that they carried away African captives not only to English colonies in North America and the Caribbean but even to the colonies of their main economic rivals, the French and Spanish, as well as to others.

The Spanish were the first European country to ban slavery while the descendants of the English in the USA continued slavery until they had a war to stop it between 1861 and 1865.

Funny how you left out the Portuguese, who were the biggest slave traders, and who ended slavery in Brazil after the U.S.A had.

Your post was erroneously blaming mostly the Spanish for the slave trade when the English/USA were far more pro-slavery.

I said Portuguese, and Spaniards took the majority of Black slaves, which is true, when looking at the combined totals the majority of Black slaves taken out of Europe were taken by these 2 Mediterranean nations.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

Prince George's County, Maryland is an excellent demonstration of the Black problems even in high income areas.

No it's not.

Prince George's County, Maryland has an income level about 30% higher than the U.S.A average, and also a murder rate about 30% higher than the U.S.A average.

Could it's large Black population have something to do with it?

In 2015 the murder rate of PG county was 16 per one million. That's basically 33 percent less than the national average.

You got this wrong.

How do you figure that?
Prince George's county, Maryland has just over 900,000, and had 60+ murders in 2015.

Homicides on the rise in Prince George's Co., but overall crime is dropping

That's close to a 7 out of 100,000 murder rate, which is higher than the U.S.A average.

Now ask yourself is 7 out of 100,000 a really high number. There are 365 days in a year and lets say they had 70 murders. That a murder ever 5th day and you u se that to make a racist claim and you actually think that has validity? And where your claim becomes dishonest is the fact that most of the killings were in pats the county hat bordered Washington DC and not on the black suburban areas. What you did was exaggerate to male a racist argument. A county of 900,000 people with 60 plus murders in a year does not have a major problem with murder.

For example a majority white city, Tulsa has a murder rate of 14 per 100,000.double that f Prince Georges county.

Omaha Nebraska 73 percent white with a 10.6 per 100,000 murder rate.

Oklahoma City 62 percent white with an 11.6 murder rate per 100,000

These numbers are higher than the national average. So is Albuquerque, Anaheim, Aurora Colorado, Bakersfield, Columbus Ohio and a whole lot of others.

I can keep going but the point is that your claim about Prince Georges county is bogus and without merit.

On top of that your link showed crime had decreased in the county.

Prince George's County, Maryland has a murder rate similar to some of the worst problem area cities in Europe, like Limerick, Ireland, Glasgow, Scotland, Birmingham, England, Moscow, Russia, or Saint Petersburg, Russia.

So, basically Europe's greatest White trash in cities in Europe, are equal to African Americans most affluent county.

As for the cities you listed, while being White majority, the Blacks there presumably commit the majority of murder, like it is in the U.S.A collective.

 

[Eloy]

1.) Portuguese, and Spaniards both started the Atlantic Slave Trade, and took the most Black slaves out of Europe too.

2.) Some Black slaves taken would have otherwise been sacrificed by African tribes as POWs.

3.) The Black slave population in the U.S.A, grew faster than Europe's population.
So, it doesn't seem that Black slaves had it quite so bad for that time period as you think.

Your post is false; The Spanish did not begin the trans-Atlantic slave trade. All the major European powers were involved in this enterprise, but by the early 18th century, England became the world's leading slave trading power. It's estimated that English ships were responsible for the forced transportation of at least 2-3 million Africans in that century.

So dominant were English ships and merchants that they carried away African captives not only to English colonies in North America and the Caribbean but even to the colonies of their main economic rivals, the French and Spanish, as well as to others.

The Spanish were the first European country to ban slavery while the descendants of the English in the USA continued slavery until they had a war to stop it between 1861 and 1865.

Funny how you left out the Portuguese, who were the biggest slave traders, and who ended slavery in Brazil after the U.S.A had.

Your post was erroneously blaming mostly the Spanish for the slave trade when the English/USA were far more pro-slavery.

I said Portuguese, and Spaniards took the majority of Black slaves, which is true, when looking at the combined totals the majority of Black slaves taken out of Europe were taken by these 2 Mediterranean nations.

You are misinformed by combining the Portuguese with the Spanish.
As I said earlier, it was the English who controlled the majority of the slave trade even taking slaves to Portuguese and Spanish, French and Dutch colonies and the English successors were the American Confederates who fought to keep slaves long after slavery was banned by the Spanish.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

1.) Portuguese, and Spaniards both started the Atlantic Slave Trade, and took the most Black slaves out of Europe too.

2.) Some Black slaves taken would have otherwise been sacrificed by African tribes as POWs.

3.) The Black slave population in the U.S.A, grew faster than Europe's population.
So, it doesn't seem that Black slaves had it quite so bad for that time period as you think.

Your post is false; The Spanish did not begin the trans-Atlantic slave trade. All the major European powers were involved in this enterprise, but by the early 18th century, England became the world's leading slave trading power. It's estimated that English ships were responsible for the forced transportation of at least 2-3 million Africans in that century.

So dominant were English ships and merchants that they carried away African captives not only to English colonies in North America and the Caribbean but even to the colonies of their main economic rivals, the French and Spanish, as well as to others.

The Spanish were the first European country to ban slavery while the descendants of the English in the USA continued slavery until they had a war to stop it between 1861 and 1865.

Funny how you left out the Portuguese, who were the biggest slave traders, and who ended slavery in Brazil after the U.S.A had.

Your post was erroneously blaming mostly the Spanish for the slave trade when the English/USA were far more pro-slavery.

I said Portuguese, and Spaniards took the majority of Black slaves, which is true, when looking at the combined totals the majority of Black slaves taken out of Europe were taken by these 2 Mediterranean nations.

You are misinformed by combining the Portuguese with the Spanish.
As I said earlier, it was the English who controlled the majority of the slave trade even taking slaves to Portuguese and Spanish, French and Dutch colonies and the English successors were the American Confederates who fought to keep slaves long after slavery was banned by the Spanish.

Portuguese, and Spaniards (Iberians) combined took the majority of Black slaves in the Atlantic Slave Trade.

Portuguese were clearly the biggest slave traders out of Europe.

 

[Eloy]

Your post is false; The Spanish did not begin the trans-Atlantic slave trade. All the major European powers were involved in this enterprise, but by the early 18th century, England became the world's leading slave trading power. It's estimated that English ships were responsible for the forced transportation of at least 2-3 million Africans in that century.

So dominant were English ships and merchants that they carried away African captives not only to English colonies in North America and the Caribbean but even to the colonies of their main economic rivals, the French and Spanish, as well as to others.

The Spanish were the first European country to ban slavery while the descendants of the English in the USA continued slavery until they had a war to stop it between 1861 and 1865.

Funny how you left out the Portuguese, who were the biggest slave traders, and who ended slavery in Brazil after the U.S.A had.

Your post was erroneously blaming mostly the Spanish for the slave trade when the English/USA were far more pro-slavery.

I said Portuguese, and Spaniards took the majority of Black slaves, which is true, when looking at the combined totals the majority of Black slaves taken out of Europe were taken by these 2 Mediterranean nations.

You are misinformed by combining the Portuguese with the Spanish.
As I said earlier, it was the English who controlled the majority of the slave trade even taking slaves to Portuguese and Spanish, French and Dutch colonies and the English successors were the American Confederates who fought to keep slaves long after slavery was banned by the Spanish.

Portuguese, and Spaniards (Iberians) combined took the majority of Black slaves in the Atlantic Slave Trade.

Portuguese were clearly the biggest slave traders out of Europe.

It is laughable that you think the Portuguese who were enemies of the Spanish were alike. Your efforts to minimize the biggest slave traders who were the English and their American successors shows that you believe propaganda more than historical fact. Spain led the banishment of slavery long before the American Confederates.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

Funny how you left out the Portuguese, who were the biggest slave traders, and who ended slavery in Brazil after the U.S.A had.

Your post was erroneously blaming mostly the Spanish for the slave trade when the English/USA were far more pro-slavery.

I said Portuguese, and Spaniards took the majority of Black slaves, which is true, when looking at the combined totals the majority of Black slaves taken out of Europe were taken by these 2 Mediterranean nations.

You are misinformed by combining the Portuguese with the Spanish.
As I said earlier, it was the English who controlled the majority of the slave trade even taking slaves to Portuguese and Spanish, French and Dutch colonies and the English successors were the American Confederates who fought to keep slaves long after slavery was banned by the Spanish.

Portuguese, and Spaniards (Iberians) combined took the majority of Black slaves in the Atlantic Slave Trade.

Portuguese were clearly the biggest slave traders out of Europe.

It is laughable that you think the Portuguese who were enemies of the Spanish were alike. Your efforts to minimize the biggest slave traders who were the English and their American successors shows that you believe propaganda more than historical fact. Spain led the banishment of slavery long before the American Confederates.

Enemies, or not, Portuguese, and Spaniards are similar genetic, and cultural relatives.

No, the English really weren't the biggest slave traders, but rather Portuguese were.

I'm not English, and hardly consider myself American.

In fact, I'd consider myself more Polish.

I'm so glad Poland didn't go nuts in colonialism, or go nuts in multiculturalism today.

I really can't stand Western Europeans, what a primitive race.