Zone1 Paying Reparations for the Past

[bigrebnc1775]

Racism has cost Black Americans $70 trillion since the start of slavery — here's how that cost breaks down​

The 'Black Tax' starts with slavery​

"The wealth gap between Black and white America was first established through 250 years of unpaid labor. While it's hard to quantify the exact cost of slave labor, Rochester said economists have estimated anywhere from $24 to $97 trillion of labor was extracted from enslaved Africans from 1619 to 1865, so he uses an average number of $50 trillion in his calculations. And while Black people built this country with free labor, they haven't been on the receiving end of America's wealth.

"In terms of the proportional amount of the Black population actually owning part of the economy, that doesn't exist. That's just based on the legacy of slavery and colonialism. In the United States, Black people only own about 2% of US wealth."

We are 13 percent of the population as the racists here are so quick to say when they want to talk about inherent black violence and think thats not racist. So if we are 13 percent, we should have 13 percent of the wealth. We do not have that and it is not for any of the reasons stated by right wing members of this forum.

Black Americans were denied access to government-sponsored wealth-building tools​

"For centuries, Black Americans have been left out of government programs designed to help citizens build wealth.

In 1863, Black Americans were denied access to the Homestead Act, which promised 160 acres of land to citizens in exchange for a small fee and five years of cultivating the land. Over 70 years, 1.6 million mostly white homesteaders claimed 270 million acres — about 10% of US land — valued at $1.6 trillion.

Many Black Americans were also excluded from the Social Security Act in 1935 — agricultural and domestic workers were left out of the act — resulting in a $143 billion loss to the community. Through a payroll tax, the Social Security Act provided unemployment benefits and financial benefits to retired workers over 65. And the GI Bill in 1944 — which effectively excluded Black veterans — provided funds for college education, housing, and unemployment insurance, and cost Black Americans another $45 billion."

Black enterprise was never allowed to thrive​

"Each of these government programs designed to help Americans build wealth was withheld from Black people, causing each generation to fall further behind. But even when Black people have tried to start their own businesses and networks to create wealth, their progress has been blocked or dismantled, often violently.

Rochester said, "Throughout history, we've had massive, intentional disruptions in the growth and development of Black businesses. You've also had massive deprivation of [Black] customers. When you start talking about post-emancipation and entering the early 1900s to the middle 1900s, you have Black people relegated to the lowest-paying occupations in the country, which has nothing to do with skill or capabilities. So now you starve the customers and resources, and it's very difficult for businesses to thrive."

"To get to the $70 trillion estimate, Rochester added the trillions lost during the Jim Crow and Civil Rights eras, noting that from the 1870s to 1960s, Black people were racially and economically segregated and excluded from participating in the American economy as equal citizens."

The 'Black Tax' today​

"Today, Rochester says the "Black Tax" is perpetuated by a conscious and unconscious bias against Black people, and it happens in almost every area of life."

"Black people face discrimination getting hired, and face a wage gap when they do get hired. A study found that white applicants are 50% more likely to get a callback for a job based on their name alone. In terms of wages, Black employees with a bachelor's degree earn, on average, $50,108 compared to their white coworkers' $61,176."

Racism has cost Black Americans $70 trillion since the start of slavery — here's how that cost breaks down

Shawn Rochester, author of "The Black Tax," explains how slavery, government-sponsored wealth-building programs, and more, have cost Black Americans.

www.businessinsider.com

You guys do not have any logical arguments to offer in opposition. More and more people recognize this once the facts are presented. The day WILL come that reparations will be paid.

Fuck off get a fucking job you lazy ass bitch. You are owed nothing.

 

[Captain Caveman]

The opposition to black reparations is based on sheer racist hatred. Precedents have been set as other groups who have been harmed by the government have received reparations. As for the tired worn out excuse of “why should I pay for something I did not do,” here is an example of reparations made in modern times for things done by past generations:

I am quite sure no one living in 1980 was alive when the U.S. government made the Fort Laramie treaty with the Sioux Nation or were participants in Custers violation of that treaty. Nor were they alive when President Grant decided it was OK to let settlers and people prospecting for gold tresspass into land promised to the Sioux thereby violating the treaty. No one in 1980 was alive when the U.S. government decided to take the land from the Sioux by military force. No one in 1980 was alive when the U.S. government decided to cut off supplies they promised the Sioux as condition for their surrender after whipping the U.S. Army at The Battle of Little Bighorn. But in 1980, the government of the United States decided reparations were due to the Sioux Nation for what was done to them in the 1800’s. They awarded the Sioux nation 105 million dollars. Now to our Sioux Nation brothers and sisters, let me say that money is just a pittance of what you are truly owed, but my point here is to render the excuses made in opposition to reparations for blacks to what it is, the racist refusal to take responsibility for what this government has done to black citizens of this nation.

United States v. Sioux Nation of Indians :: 448 U.S. 371 (1980) :: Justia US Supreme Court Center, United States v. Sioux Nation of Indians, 448 U.S. 371 (1980)

When mentioning situations like the one cited above, I get told how the government made treaties with the First Nations and how treaties are not reparations. Inevitably there is always one person who calls themselves being a smart aleck who will ask me to show any treaties blacks made with the government. This dumbing down of our culture is the result of listening to victimhood radio, better known as right wing talk radio.

The Webster’s definition of reparations: a repairing or keeping in repair, b. reparations plural : REPAIRS 2a: the act of making amends, offering expiation, or giving satisfaction for a wrong or injury; b: something done or given as amends or satisfaction, 3: the payment of damages : INDEMNIFICATION specifically : compensation in money or materials payable by a defeated nation for damages to or expenditures sustained by another nation as a result of hostilities with the defeated nation. The treaties made to First Nations set the precedent for American government payment of reparations. The government has consistently paid citizens of the First Nations reparations although the truth of the matter is that there will NEVER, EVER be enough United States currency printed to provide the proper reparations the First Nations deserve. Still whatever feeble effort that has been made has also been done in recent times to repay for things no one today was alive do do. Therefore the opposition to black reparations based on that argument is without merit.

I think wanting people of today to pay any repatriations to any group ridiculous.

My ancestors suffered at the hands of Caesar and the Roman army. Can I have some money for that please?

I think if people want money, they should go and get a job.

 

[Captain Caveman]

So you want people who never owned slaves.
To give money to people who were never slaves? ...

That has to be the top post on this subject.

 

[Hellbilly]

Put on your warpaint and scalp a few white people and only the butt-fucking libs will be in your corner

Scalping is a white invention.

And in the meantime what do you hope to accomplish?

All we have to do is keep existing and never stop speaking out.

 

[irosie91]

I think wanting people of today to pay any repatriations to any group ridiculous.

My ancestors suffered at the hands of Caesar and the Roman army. Can I have some money for that please?

I think if people want money, they should go and get a job.

I am short and left handed-----I NEED COMPENSATION!!!!!!!

 

[woodwork201]

Racism has cost Black Americans $70 trillion since the start of slavery — here's how that cost breaks down​

The 'Black Tax' starts with slavery​

"The wealth gap between Black and white America was first established through 250 years of unpaid labor. While it's hard to quantify the exact cost of slave labor, Rochester said economists have estimated anywhere from $24 to $97 trillion of labor was extracted from enslaved Africans from 1619 to 1865, so he uses an average number of $50 trillion in his calculations. And while Black people built this country with free labor, they haven't been on the receiving end of America's wealth.

"In terms of the proportional amount of the Black population actually owning part of the economy, that doesn't exist. That's just based on the legacy of slavery and colonialism. In the United States, Black people only own about 2% of US wealth."

We are 13 percent of the population as the racists here are so quick to say when they want to talk about inherent black violence and think thats not racist. So if we are 13 percent, we should have 13 percent of the wealth. We do not have that and it is not for any of the reasons stated by right wing members of this forum.

Black Americans were denied access to government-sponsored wealth-building tools​

"For centuries, Black Americans have been left out of government programs designed to help citizens build wealth.

In 1863, Black Americans were denied access to the Homestead Act, which promised 160 acres of land to citizens in exchange for a small fee and five years of cultivating the land. Over 70 years, 1.6 million mostly white homesteaders claimed 270 million acres — about 10% of US land — valued at $1.6 trillion.

Many Black Americans were also excluded from the Social Security Act in 1935 — agricultural and domestic workers were left out of the act — resulting in a $143 billion loss to the community. Through a payroll tax, the Social Security Act provided unemployment benefits and financial benefits to retired workers over 65. And the GI Bill in 1944 — which effectively excluded Black veterans — provided funds for college education, housing, and unemployment insurance, and cost Black Americans another $45 billion."

Black enterprise was never allowed to thrive​

"Each of these government programs designed to help Americans build wealth was withheld from Black people, causing each generation to fall further behind. But even when Black people have tried to start their own businesses and networks to create wealth, their progress has been blocked or dismantled, often violently.

Rochester said, "Throughout history, we've had massive, intentional disruptions in the growth and development of Black businesses. You've also had massive deprivation of [Black] customers. When you start talking about post-emancipation and entering the early 1900s to the middle 1900s, you have Black people relegated to the lowest-paying occupations in the country, which has nothing to do with skill or capabilities. So now you starve the customers and resources, and it's very difficult for businesses to thrive."

"To get to the $70 trillion estimate, Rochester added the trillions lost during the Jim Crow and Civil Rights eras, noting that from the 1870s to 1960s, Black people were racially and economically segregated and excluded from participating in the American economy as equal citizens."

The 'Black Tax' today​

"Today, Rochester says the "Black Tax" is perpetuated by a conscious and unconscious bias against Black people, and it happens in almost every area of life."

"Black people face discrimination getting hired, and face a wage gap when they do get hired. A study found that white applicants are 50% more likely to get a callback for a job based on their name alone. In terms of wages, Black employees with a bachelor's degree earn, on average, $50,108 compared to their white coworkers' $61,176."

Racism has cost Black Americans $70 trillion since the start of slavery — here's how that cost breaks down

Shawn Rochester, author of "The Black Tax," explains how slavery, government-sponsored wealth-building programs, and more, have cost Black Americans.

www.businessinsider.com

You guys do not have any logical arguments to offer in opposition. More and more people recognize this once the facts are presented. The day WILL come that reparations will be paid.

Black people have not created 13% of the wealth so they are not entitled to 13% of the wealth. As you have previously stated, the South was a different country and fought to retain slavery while the North didn't fight to end slavery, they fought to defeat the South. So any claim slavery might bring to black people would be against the Confederate States of America and, based on your very own words and arguments about the war, since the North, which did not support slavery and was a wholly different country from the South that did, expended massive amounts of money and blood in order to defeat the South and did, in fact, free all the slaves, then any reparations you might get from the Confederate States of America must be used first, to repay the United States of America and the families of those who died defeating that awful slave-holding nation.

 

[woodwork201]

Racism has cost Black Americans $70 trillion since the start of slavery — here's how that cost breaks down​

The 'Black Tax' starts with slavery​

"The wealth gap between Black and white America was first established through 250 years of unpaid labor. While it's hard to quantify the exact cost of slave labor, Rochester said economists have estimated anywhere from $24 to $97 trillion of labor was extracted from enslaved Africans from 1619 to 1865, so he uses an average number of $50 trillion in his calculations. And while Black people built this country with free labor, they haven't been on the receiving end of America's wealth.

"In terms of the proportional amount of the Black population actually owning part of the economy, that doesn't exist. That's just based on the legacy of slavery and colonialism. In the United States, Black people only own about 2% of US wealth."

We are 13 percent of the population as the racists here are so quick to say when they want to talk about inherent black violence and think thats not racist. So if we are 13 percent, we should have 13 percent of the wealth. We do not have that and it is not for any of the reasons stated by right wing members of this forum.

Black Americans were denied access to government-sponsored wealth-building tools​

"For centuries, Black Americans have been left out of government programs designed to help citizens build wealth.

In 1863, Black Americans were denied access to the Homestead Act, which promised 160 acres of land to citizens in exchange for a small fee and five years of cultivating the land. Over 70 years, 1.6 million mostly white homesteaders claimed 270 million acres — about 10% of US land — valued at $1.6 trillion.

Many Black Americans were also excluded from the Social Security Act in 1935 — agricultural and domestic workers were left out of the act — resulting in a $143 billion loss to the community. Through a payroll tax, the Social Security Act provided unemployment benefits and financial benefits to retired workers over 65. And the GI Bill in 1944 — which effectively excluded Black veterans — provided funds for college education, housing, and unemployment insurance, and cost Black Americans another $45 billion."

Black enterprise was never allowed to thrive​

"Each of these government programs designed to help Americans build wealth was withheld from Black people, causing each generation to fall further behind. But even when Black people have tried to start their own businesses and networks to create wealth, their progress has been blocked or dismantled, often violently.

Rochester said, "Throughout history, we've had massive, intentional disruptions in the growth and development of Black businesses. You've also had massive deprivation of [Black] customers. When you start talking about post-emancipation and entering the early 1900s to the middle 1900s, you have Black people relegated to the lowest-paying occupations in the country, which has nothing to do with skill or capabilities. So now you starve the customers and resources, and it's very difficult for businesses to thrive."

"To get to the $70 trillion estimate, Rochester added the trillions lost during the Jim Crow and Civil Rights eras, noting that from the 1870s to 1960s, Black people were racially and economically segregated and excluded from participating in the American economy as equal citizens."

The 'Black Tax' today​

"Today, Rochester says the "Black Tax" is perpetuated by a conscious and unconscious bias against Black people, and it happens in almost every area of life."

"Black people face discrimination getting hired, and face a wage gap when they do get hired. A study found that white applicants are 50% more likely to get a callback for a job based on their name alone. In terms of wages, Black employees with a bachelor's degree earn, on average, $50,108 compared to their white coworkers' $61,176."

Racism has cost Black Americans $70 trillion since the start of slavery — here's how that cost breaks down

Shawn Rochester, author of "The Black Tax," explains how slavery, government-sponsored wealth-building programs, and more, have cost Black Americans.

www.businessinsider.com

You guys do not have any logical arguments to offer in opposition. More and more people recognize this once the facts are presented. The day WILL come that reparations will be paid.

I especially like the part of your post that talks about how black people are relegated to the worst, lowest paying jobs... you know, like Brain Surgeon, or Secretary of Housing and Urban Development. Or President of the United States of America... Lowly, shit paying, jobs like that and all...

We should start a list of all the jobs that black people, unfairly and because of white racism, can't get. I offered the top 3.. How about you add the next 3. Or even add 7 and take us to the top 10.

Top 10 jobs that black people in America are banned from getting:

10.
9.
8.
7.
6.
5.
4.
3. Secretary of Housing and Urban Development
2. Brain Surgeon

And the number 1 top job that black people are not permitted to have in the United States is...

1. President of the United States of America.

 

[MizMolly]

Wrong. The only demographic that has been coddled is yours, we're going into the 246th yeat of that coddling. 750,000 whites did not die for my ancestors freedom. Stopp repeating those tired ass lies.

Yes they did.

“The American Civil War was fought between the United States of America and the Confederate States of America, a collection of eleven southern states that left the Union in 1860 and 1861. The conflict began primarily as a result of the long-standing disagreement over the institution of slavery.”

10 Facts: What Everyone Should Know About the Civil War

The Civil War profoundly shaped the United States as we know it today. Nevertheless, the war remains one of the most misunderstood events in American history. Here are ten basic facts you need to know about America's defining struggle.

www.battlefields.org

 

[woodwork201]

The government made slavery legal in America. Don't play that stupid white --- bs. Africans did not make U.S laws. So if slavery was just an African thing then it would never had happened here. Your argument makes me laught.

More lies. I didn't say slavery was just an African thing. I said it was created by the the British, the Dutch, the Portugese, the Africans.. I may or may not have mentioned other nations but, in any case, the United States ended slavery; they didn't create it.

 

[woodwork201]

The Origins of American Slavery from AP Central: (The bolding is mine so in case someone does not like to read too much, they will not miss the really important parts which address the above about slavery not being exclusive to white people. It points out aspects of American Slavery that do indeed differ from that of other places.)

Over the course of the Middle Ages, Christians always committed awful atrocities on each other, but increasingly they avoided enslaving one another. Apparently, a sense of unity had emerged in Christian Europe that effectively barred the enslavement of those deemed fellow Europeans. Christianity's long struggle with Islam no doubt played a major role in this development. That from 1500 to 1800 Muslims enslaved well over a million Western Europeans, many of whom were subsequently ransomed and celebrated as symbols of freedom, was a major element in the growing sense that Europeans should never be slaves. Nevertheless, these so-called free labor nations would develop some of the harshest slave regimes in the Americas. As David Brion Davis puts it, "it is an astonishing paradox that the first nations in the world to free themselves of chattel slavery—such nations as England, France, Holland, and even the Scandinavian states—became leaders during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries in supporting plantation colonies based on African slave labor."

If the sheer availability of African slaves and the lack of available alternatives is the primary explanation for the development of racial slavery in the New World, did racism have nothing to do with it? Did antiblack racism or protoracism point particularly to African slaves to supply the immense labor demands of the New World? Or did racism intensify only after long-term interaction with black slaves had occurred? Was it there from the beginning, or was it a consequence? This is a complicated subject, and space will not permit a full accounting here. Ancient Greco-Roman art and writing offers caricatures of black Africans, although their relative scarcity is perhaps most telling. Medieval images of Africans ranged from the black magis to agents of the Devil. In various settings—in medieval Europe where peasants were often depicted as "black" because of working in the sun and in close proximity to dirt, or in modern Russia where noblemen even claimed that Russian serfs had black bones—blackness and debasement had a long connection. In western culture the color black evokes a highly negative symbolism, conjuring up images of death and sin.

New World slavery's other most distinctive aspect was its highly commercial character. While it is true that plantations—that is, large agricultural enterprises, managed for profit, producing a crop for export, with a hierarchically stratified labor organization—existed outside the New World, they reached their apogee there. The economies of scale, the expansion in unit size, the almost exclusive use of black slaves, a highly regimented and commodified labor force, and a system of close management all raised profit levels significantly. Such a productive system placed enormous demands on its laborers. As early as the 1630s a visitor to a Jesuit-owned sugar plantation in Brazil vividly described the unbearable horror of what had transpired: "People the color of the very night, working briskly and moaning at the same time without a moment of peace or rest, whoever sees all the confused and noisy machinery and apparatus of this Babylon, even if they have seen Mt. Etna and Vesuvius will say that this indeed is the image of Hell"

Variations over time and space existed within New World slavery. Three stand out. First, although all New World regions imported more African men than women (thereby in part explaining the harshness of New World slavery because of the policing problems associated with large gangs of men), over time the gender ratio among New World slaves became increasingly balanced. In that regard, the North American slave population is most notable, because, as its number of slave women increased the most rapidly, so it became one of the few self-reproducing slave populations in world history. This early and rapid natural increase explains why North America received such a small percentage of the overall transatlantic slave trade—about 5 percent. Second, North America was also distinctive in being much less tolerant of racial intermixture than Latin America or the Caribbean. Once again demography—particularly the ratio of white men to white women (more balanced in North America than in Latin America and the Caribbean) and the availability of black women—was a crucial part of the explanation, but also important were the role of the Church and cultural mores, based as much in Old World patterns of racial coexistence or segregation. The Spanish had mixed with Muslims for centuries; the English had created a Pale in their settlement of Ireland. Only in North America did the extremely arbitrary concept of "Negro"—denoting anyone with allegedly visible African ancestry—assume such a marked stigma. Third, the chances of gaining freedom varied from one society to the next. Except for the period surrounding the American Revolution, the North American colonies, and later the states, imposed the severest restrictions on the chances of a slave becoming free. Again, demography—the proportions of whites and blacks in the population—has some explanatory power as do economic and cultural forces


Racial slavery played an intrinsic and indispensable part in New World settlement. The institution was no abnormality, no aberration, no marginal feature; rather, its development is the grim and irrepressible theme governing the development of the Western Hemisphere. The truly distinctive features of North American (and to varying degrees, New World) slavery were its racial bedrock and its thoroughly commercial character. Increasingly, the stark polarity between freedom and bondage became glaringly evident, for the debasement of slaves liberated others to take control of their destiny and to dream of liberty and equality. This profound contradiction lay at the heart of the United States, a country conceived in freedom but based on slavery. The American dream always had its dark underside. Yet the dreamers would eventually try to rid themselves of the nightmare—with considerable prodding from the victims, it might be added.

What a crock of shit. The first nation to escape slavery was, if I'm not mistaken and in any case it was thousands of years before Europeans escaped Muslim slavery, Israel.

Then a whole bunch more rambling on your part or the uncredited source of your nonsense.

Then you claim that the arbitrary concept of "negro" was made up to apply to anyone of African descent. More shit. Negro is black in Spanish. Who sold the first African slaves in America? The Portuguese. What language do they speak? And because of the Spanish language roots of the Portuguese language, what is the Portuguese word for black? Negro!

Slavery started in the Americas because some Portuguese sailors went to Africa and saw Africans with African slaves.... Your article does mention the commercial side of it versus the usual military aspect of historic slavery, and the Portuguese said to themselves, "Selves, we could make a lot of money if we bought some of these African slaves and took them to America where they'll still be slaves but they'll be in America." And, thus, slavery in America was created.

Of course, history tells us that after buying slaves in Africa, the Portuguese and other Europeans, as well as the African slave holders and other tribes in Africa, all fell in love with the commercialization of slavery, as did the Europeans in America, and more Africans, free Africans, were also captured by other Africans, purchased by other Europeans, and commercial slavery expanded to the shame of them all.

 

[Captain Caveman]

I am short and left handed-----I NEED COMPENSATION!!!!!!!

From the tall right handed people

 

[IM2]

Leftists are idiots and easy to intimidate..........thats why BLM protest in blue shithole cities...............Down here.......

We gonna sell tickets to water cannon bowling.



Nice Face plant........lmao

BLM had protests everywhere. But BLM has nothing to do with this. I live in a red state. You guys are punks.

 

[eagle1462010]

BLM had protests everywhere. But BLM has nothing to do with this. I live in a red state. You guys are punks.

Whatever. It's always in blue shithole cities.

Now see ya.........already been thrown out of 2 of your threads .......lmao

 

[IM2]

What a crock of shit. The first nation to escape slavery was, if I'm not mistaken and in any case it was thousands of years before Europeans escaped Muslim slavery, Israel.

Then a whole bunch more rambling on your part or the uncredited source of your nonsense.

Then you claim that the arbitrary concept of "negro" was made up to apply to anyone of African descent. More shit. Negro is black in Spanish. Who sold the first African slaves in America? The Portuguese. What language do they speak? And because of the Spanish language roots of the Portuguese language, what is the Portuguese word for black? Negro!

Slavery started in the Americas because some Portuguese sailors went to Africa and saw Africans with African slaves.... Your article does mention the commercial side of it versus the usual military aspect of historic slavery, and the Portuguese said to themselves, "Selves, we could make a lot of money if we bought some of these African slaves and took them to America where they'll still be slaves but they'll be in America." And, thus, slavery in America was created.

Of course, history tells us that after buying slaves in Africa, the Portuguese and other Europeans, as well as the African slave holders and other tribes in Africa, all fell in love with the commercialization of slavery, as did the Europeans in America, and more Africans, free Africans, were also captured by other Africans, purchased by other Europeans, and commercial slavery expanded to the shame of them all.

Wrong. The Affican slave trade with Europe did not happen as right wing whites describe. Alson, 389,000 slaves were shipped to America. By the Civil War, there were 4 million. Africans did not implement the slave breeding industry in this country. Africans did not force girls as young as 12 to have children. Africans did not force slave women to mass produce chiildren to sell as slaves. Africans did not make those women birth 10-15 kids. Many of these women died as a result of forced breeding.

Africans did not create seasoning camps where slaves were brutally tortured and made to adapt to being slaves. Now you guys really need to drop your disingenuous bullshit to avoid the fact of what whites have done.

 

[IM2]

You are about to read an account from an African about what happened when Europeans showed up in Africa. His ancestors passed this story to each generation, and it was told to him by his elders.

“Even in this modern world, there are wars and rumors of war almost everywhere you go. There were wars in Europe in those days and there were wars in America. There were wars almost everywhere in the world. There were tribal wars in Africa too. The difference between the tribal wars in Africa and the wars in the outside world was that, in the outside world, the conquered were often butchered (due in part to the highly sophisticated weapons of war used) whereas the conquered in Africa (excluding Arabs/Muslims in the north) became part of the conqueror. In other words, while no enemy was left standing in the outside world, the conquered enemies were left to live and serve in Africa.

So it is true there were some "slaves" in Africa in those days before the white man came. However, those "slaves" were not taken purposely to become "slaves" of another kingdom or empire. They were just victims of tribal wars and it was somehow "better" than what was happening in the outside world where no enemy was allowed to live.

Was Africa one nation? Were Africans one people? Were the Europeans in Africa just to trade? If Africans willingly participated in the "trade" then why would the Europeans bring battle troops and weapons of war all the way from Europe to Africa? Why the so many "Europeans against Natives" wars in African history and what were the Europeans fighting for in Africa? Were the European currencies of any value to Africans? Was there a common currency in Africa? Which currency was used to buy slaves in Africa? Did Africans willingly trade ship-loads of "valuable" slaves for just bottles of wine? Does the Bible permit slavery and slave trade? Why did the church participate in the slave trade?

I read an article online today and I was shocked to read so many people believe Africans sold their own brothers and sisters into slavery just like that. I wanted to comment on the article but the comment section had been disabled and that is why I am making this post to let people know that we Africans (my ancestors) weren't that stupid to have sold our own brothers and sisters into slavery just like that. We were stupid to have allowed ourselves to be manipulated by the foreigners (my people used to refer to the white men as "white strangers" so pardon me if you see a "white stranger" in my post). We were stupid to have trusted the "white stranger" in the first place and we were stupid to have allowed the "white stranger" into our land. My people allowed the white strangers into our land because they (the white strangers) said they "come in peace".

Before I continue, I am not a historian and I don't claim to be one. However, I am an African and I cherish our oral traditions. I did study history in school (in Africa) and I was taught by someone who actually knew what he was talking about.

In continuation, please note that there were 2 types of slave trading in Africa. The one introduced mostly by the coming of Islam through the Arab raiders and traders from the Middle East and North Africa or the Trans-Saharan slave trade and the one introduced by the coming of the Europeans or the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade (the one I am talking about). The Trans-Saharan Slave Trade is deeply rooted in the Islamic cultures of several countries in the North (especially in the Maghreb region or the "Berber world") and still practiced although "silently" by Muslim-dominant countries such as Mauritania and Libya.

According to my grandfather, In those days when there were no Christianity and no modern day government systems in Africa, Kings, Queens, and other traditional rulers ruled their kingdoms as heads of state and judged cases according to the rules and regulations of the land. Those who disobeyed the laws of the land were punished and those who obeyed and sacrificed for the land were rewarded accordingly. Although every land had some "prison" facilities, those prisons weren't meant for large groups of criminals so those who killed were killed. Those who stole paid dearly for it. Those who slept with people's wives were banished from the land. Children who disobeyed elders were punished accordingly. And so on.

My country Ghana in West Africa was a major Slave Trading Post (Headquarters) where slaves from different parts of Africa were brought and arranged before shipping abroad.

When the white strangers first came to Africa, We (my ancestors) were not sure about their intentions so most communities drove them away from their land. However, the white strangers managed to convince some of our traditional rulers that they had not come to cause any harm but just to preach the good news (the Bible) and also to trade with the local people. It was barter trading where goods were exchanged for goods. My country Ghana was called "Gold Coast" because gold was in abundance. Although my ancestors valued gold as a precious metal, the white strangers valued it more as a precious mineral worth more than blood in some cases. In other words, my ancestors had the gold and the white strangers needed the gold and had to trade things like bottles of wine, clothing and textiles, guns and ammunitions, etc. for pieces of gold. That was how the "trade" started.

Some of the local chiefs along the coast started accepting the white strangers by giving them place to stay. The white strangers started building missionary centers where they stayed and preached the gospel and also traded with the local people. The white strangers later on expanded those missionary centers (including churches and cathedrals) into forts and castles where they packed slaves before shipping them abroad.

The white strangers did not understand the local language and the local people did not understand a word the white strangers were saying so it made communication very difficult. To help break the language barrier, the white strangers went to the local rulers and asked the local rulers to give them some of the local people to train so they could speak the foreign language which would make communication easier but none of those local rulers were ready to give their people out to go stay with strangers.

Later on, some of the local rulers came up with an idea that, instead of killing those criminals, they could actually give those criminals to the white strangers so the white strangers could preach the good news they said they came to preach to those criminals, change them into good people and also train them in the foreign language in order to aid communication which was better than killing those criminals. So the traditional rulers gave those criminals out to the white strangers and to show appreciation, those white strangers gave gifts like textiles, bottles of wine, mirrors, etc. to the traditional rulers. That was how the white strangers got their first "local servers."

Those local people (the criminals) lived and served the white strangers in the castles and forts and learned the foreign language which enabled them to serve as mediators translating the local language for the white strangers and the foreign language to the local people. This helped a lot in communication.

As I mentioned earlier on, those local servers living with the white strangers were the criminals in the society and although they served as mediators and made communication a whole lot easier, they also made life a living hell for the local people (some as a form of revenge). For example, when the white strangers sent them to go collect taxes (lets say 5 pieces of gold), those criminals added their own taxes and made it 8 pieces of gold. At times too, they mis-translated just so they could get more power. Some of those criminals even became more powerful than the traditional rulers. In other words, the white strangers, after preaching the good news to those criminals, turned them into even far more dangerous monsters than they were before. Why? Because only the white man had guns at that time and they shot anyone the criminals considered "criminals."

Those criminals were the few "Africans" who helped the white strangers to get more slaves. However, don't forget the fact that they were criminals condemned to death in their various societies for being "Un-African."

Those local people living with the white strangers served and "worshiped" them so well to the point where the white strangers began asking for more. Because of the benefits they derived from those local servers, some of the white strangers took some local servers with them on their return home. Back home (abroad), they found those local servers (the black men from Africa) very useful and decided to come back for more. They realized they could use them to work on their plantation farms back home to make more money. They also realized they could sell some of those 'local servers' to their friends and countrymen and make more money and that was why most of them (the white strangers but this time around slave traders) returned with the intention of picking more local servers (this time around, slaves).

So they returned for slaves but no local ruler was ready to give their people out except those criminals I mentioned earlier on and prisoners of war (tribal wars). In my country for example, the Ashantis and those living in the interior parts of the country did not want to have anything to do with the white strangers. In fact, the first white stranger that set foot on the Ashanti empire did not return.

However, the white strangers needed slaves and more slaves but there was no easy way of getting slaves in Africa. So what they did was that, they created confusion among the various tribes so that there would be more tribal wars and more war prisoners so they could get more "slaves" and that was exactly what they did.

Before the white man came to Africa, tribal wars were mostly fought with swords, spears, bows and arrows. Although these weapons were lethal they were nowhere near as quick and fatal as the gun. The problem here was that, only the white strangers had guns and decided which tribal group to support in times of battle. Any tribal group the white strangers supported with their powerful cannons, guns and ammunitions, easily conquered their enemies. This also created another major problem. The white strangers did not support any tribal group for free. In fact, the white strangers started demanding taxes (which included pieces of gold and prisoners of war) and total submission after victory. Any tribal group or community which failed to submit to the Europeans and pay taxes were wiped out. Sometimes the leaders of those communities were executed publicly as a form of warning to neighboring communities. Most communities in Africa were turned into concentration camps with European authorities in place.

Although not often mentioned in history books, there were well trained and well equiped European troops all across Sub-Saharan Africa and they fought several battles with native tribes who refused to submit to European authority and that explains the several "European against natives" wars in the African history.

In other words, my ancestors were not ready to give their own brothers and sisters out into slavery. In fact, most fought and died in battle just to save their communities from the hands of those white strangers. Rather, the white strangers were the ones who "demonically" manipulated my people by creating so much confusion between the various tribes and creating so many tribal wars all in an effort to get slaves.

In Ghana for example, because the Ashanti empire was so powerful to defeat, the white strangers created so much confusion and so many wars between the Ashantis and the neighboring tribes and in most cases supplied some of those neighboring tribes with guns to enable them defeat the Ashantis. The white strangers continued this until they were able to defeat the Ashantis and took away the king of the Ashantis (Nana Prempeh I) and the queen mother (Nana Yaa Asantewaa) and several others into exile just to break the Ashanti kingdom apart even after slavery so they could colonize and control the Ashanti gold,etc.

To conclude, my ancestors did not sell their own brothers and sisters into slavery just like that. They were deceived and "demonically" manipulated by those white strangers who visited our land."

Africans did NOT sell their own people into slavery, Africans did NOT sell their own people into slavery

 

[$ecular#eckler]

Wrong. And you're a red pussy. So stop pretending that you red pricks are tough.

Zone One violation. Better get your comment in quick at my thread, otherwise, your cooling-off suspension will be very agrivating.

Zone1 - Reverence for Juneteenth

I distinctly remember President and Mrs. Obama championing Juneteenth one year, and I thought that that was good. I sincerely believed that it could be something that Black people could build to accommodate their sense of a non-white holiday that they can use to show how cool Black people are...

www.usmessageboard.com

 

[Lastamender]

Zone One violation. Better get your comment in quick at my thread, because it is really going to make your cooling-off suspension difficult.

Zone1 - Reverence for Juneteenth

I distinctly remember President and Mrs. Obama championing Juneteenth one year, and I thought that that was good. I sincerely believed that it could be something that Black people could build to accommodate their sense of a non-white holiday that they can use to show how cool Black people are...

www.usmessageboard.com

He could say his keyboard did it because guns kill people and cars drive drunk.

 

[LOIE]

You are about to read an account from an African about what happened when Europeans showed up in Africa. His ancestors passed this story to each generation, and it was told to him by his elders.

“Even in this modern world, there are wars and rumors of war almost everywhere you go. There were wars in Europe in those days and there were wars in America. There were wars almost everywhere in the world. There were tribal wars in Africa too. The difference between the tribal wars in Africa and the wars in the outside world was that, in the outside world, the conquered were often butchered (due in part to the highly sophisticated weapons of war used) whereas the conquered in Africa (excluding Arabs/Muslims in the north) became part of the conqueror. In other words, while no enemy was left standing in the outside world, the conquered enemies were left to live and serve in Africa.

So it is true there were some "slaves" in Africa in those days before the white man came. However, those "slaves" were not taken purposely to become "slaves" of another kingdom or empire. They were just victims of tribal wars and it was somehow "better" than what was happening in the outside world where no enemy was allowed to live.

Was Africa one nation? Were Africans one people? Were the Europeans in Africa just to trade? If Africans willingly participated in the "trade" then why would the Europeans bring battle troops and weapons of war all the way from Europe to Africa? Why the so many "Europeans against Natives" wars in African history and what were the Europeans fighting for in Africa? Were the European currencies of any value to Africans? Was there a common currency in Africa? Which currency was used to buy slaves in Africa? Did Africans willingly trade ship-loads of "valuable" slaves for just bottles of wine? Does the Bible permit slavery and slave trade? Why did the church participate in the slave trade?

I read an article online today and I was shocked to read so many people believe Africans sold their own brothers and sisters into slavery just like that. I wanted to comment on the article but the comment section had been disabled and that is why I am making this post to let people know that we Africans (my ancestors) weren't that stupid to have sold our own brothers and sisters into slavery just like that. We were stupid to have allowed ourselves to be manipulated by the foreigners (my people used to refer to the white men as "white strangers" so pardon me if you see a "white stranger" in my post). We were stupid to have trusted the "white stranger" in the first place and we were stupid to have allowed the "white stranger" into our land. My people allowed the white strangers into our land because they (the white strangers) said they "come in peace".

Before I continue, I am not a historian and I don't claim to be one. However, I am an African and I cherish our oral traditions. I did study history in school (in Africa) and I was taught by someone who actually knew what he was talking about.

In continuation, please note that there were 2 types of slave trading in Africa. The one introduced mostly by the coming of Islam through the Arab raiders and traders from the Middle East and North Africa or the Trans-Saharan slave trade and the one introduced by the coming of the Europeans or the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade (the one I am talking about). The Trans-Saharan Slave Trade is deeply rooted in the Islamic cultures of several countries in the North (especially in the Maghreb region or the "Berber world") and still practiced although "silently" by Muslim-dominant countries such as Mauritania and Libya.

According to my grandfather, In those days when there were no Christianity and no modern day government systems in Africa, Kings, Queens, and other traditional rulers ruled their kingdoms as heads of state and judged cases according to the rules and regulations of the land. Those who disobeyed the laws of the land were punished and those who obeyed and sacrificed for the land were rewarded accordingly. Although every land had some "prison" facilities, those prisons weren't meant for large groups of criminals so those who killed were killed. Those who stole paid dearly for it. Those who slept with people's wives were banished from the land. Children who disobeyed elders were punished accordingly. And so on.

My country Ghana in West Africa was a major Slave Trading Post (Headquarters) where slaves from different parts of Africa were brought and arranged before shipping abroad.

When the white strangers first came to Africa, We (my ancestors) were not sure about their intentions so most communities drove them away from their land. However, the white strangers managed to convince some of our traditional rulers that they had not come to cause any harm but just to preach the good news (the Bible) and also to trade with the local people. It was barter trading where goods were exchanged for goods. My country Ghana was called "Gold Coast" because gold was in abundance. Although my ancestors valued gold as a precious metal, the white strangers valued it more as a precious mineral worth more than blood in some cases. In other words, my ancestors had the gold and the white strangers needed the gold and had to trade things like bottles of wine, clothing and textiles, guns and ammunitions, etc. for pieces of gold. That was how the "trade" started.

Some of the local chiefs along the coast started accepting the white strangers by giving them place to stay. The white strangers started building missionary centers where they stayed and preached the gospel and also traded with the local people. The white strangers later on expanded those missionary centers (including churches and cathedrals) into forts and castles where they packed slaves before shipping them abroad.

The white strangers did not understand the local language and the local people did not understand a word the white strangers were saying so it made communication very difficult. To help break the language barrier, the white strangers went to the local rulers and asked the local rulers to give them some of the local people to train so they could speak the foreign language which would make communication easier but none of those local rulers were ready to give their people out to go stay with strangers.

Later on, some of the local rulers came up with an idea that, instead of killing those criminals, they could actually give those criminals to the white strangers so the white strangers could preach the good news they said they came to preach to those criminals, change them into good people and also train them in the foreign language in order to aid communication which was better than killing those criminals. So the traditional rulers gave those criminals out to the white strangers and to show appreciation, those white strangers gave gifts like textiles, bottles of wine, mirrors, etc. to the traditional rulers. That was how the white strangers got their first "local servers."

Those local people (the criminals) lived and served the white strangers in the castles and forts and learned the foreign language which enabled them to serve as mediators translating the local language for the white strangers and the foreign language to the local people. This helped a lot in communication.

As I mentioned earlier on, those local servers living with the white strangers were the criminals in the society and although they served as mediators and made communication a whole lot easier, they also made life a living hell for the local people (some as a form of revenge). For example, when the white strangers sent them to go collect taxes (lets say 5 pieces of gold), those criminals added their own taxes and made it 8 pieces of gold. At times too, they mis-translated just so they could get more power. Some of those criminals even became more powerful than the traditional rulers. In other words, the white strangers, after preaching the good news to those criminals, turned them into even far more dangerous monsters than they were before. Why? Because only the white man had guns at that time and they shot anyone the criminals considered "criminals."

Those criminals were the few "Africans" who helped the white strangers to get more slaves. However, don't forget the fact that they were criminals condemned to death in their various societies for being "Un-African."

Those local people living with the white strangers served and "worshiped" them so well to the point where the white strangers began asking for more. Because of the benefits they derived from those local servers, some of the white strangers took some local servers with them on their return home. Back home (abroad), they found those local servers (the black men from Africa) very useful and decided to come back for more. They realized they could use them to work on their plantation farms back home to make more money. They also realized they could sell some of those 'local servers' to their friends and countrymen and make more money and that was why most of them (the white strangers but this time around slave traders) returned with the intention of picking more local servers (this time around, slaves).

So they returned for slaves but no local ruler was ready to give their people out except those criminals I mentioned earlier on and prisoners of war (tribal wars). In my country for example, the Ashantis and those living in the interior parts of the country did not want to have anything to do with the white strangers. In fact, the first white stranger that set foot on the Ashanti empire did not return.

However, the white strangers needed slaves and more slaves but there was no easy way of getting slaves in Africa. So what they did was that, they created confusion among the various tribes so that there would be more tribal wars and more war prisoners so they could get more "slaves" and that was exactly what they did.

Before the white man came to Africa, tribal wars were mostly fought with swords, spears, bows and arrows. Although these weapons were lethal they were nowhere near as quick and fatal as the gun. The problem here was that, only the white strangers had guns and decided which tribal group to support in times of battle. Any tribal group the white strangers supported with their powerful cannons, guns and ammunitions, easily conquered their enemies. This also created another major problem. The white strangers did not support any tribal group for free. In fact, the white strangers started demanding taxes (which included pieces of gold and prisoners of war) and total submission after victory. Any tribal group or community which failed to submit to the Europeans and pay taxes were wiped out. Sometimes the leaders of those communities were executed publicly as a form of warning to neighboring communities. Most communities in Africa were turned into concentration camps with European authorities in place.

Although not often mentioned in history books, there were well trained and well equiped European troops all across Sub-Saharan Africa and they fought several battles with native tribes who refused to submit to European authority and that explains the several "European against natives" wars in the African history.

In other words, my ancestors were not ready to give their own brothers and sisters out into slavery. In fact, most fought and died in battle just to save their communities from the hands of those white strangers. Rather, the white strangers were the ones who "demonically" manipulated my people by creating so much confusion between the various tribes and creating so many tribal wars all in an effort to get slaves.

In Ghana for example, because the Ashanti empire was so powerful to defeat, the white strangers created so much confusion and so many wars between the Ashantis and the neighboring tribes and in most cases supplied some of those neighboring tribes with guns to enable them defeat the Ashantis. The white strangers continued this until they were able to defeat the Ashantis and took away the king of the Ashantis (Nana Prempeh I) and the queen mother (Nana Yaa Asantewaa) and several others into exile just to break the Ashanti kingdom apart even after slavery so they could colonize and control the Ashanti gold,etc.

To conclude, my ancestors did not sell their own brothers and sisters into slavery just like that. They were deceived and "demonically" manipulated by those white strangers who visited our land."

Africans did NOT sell their own people into slavery, Africans did NOT sell their own people into slavery

I always believed that when people said the problem was Africans selling their own into slavery that some details had to be missing. It is so easy to simply repeat something like a parrot. This article gives reasons and explanations and people should be willing to believe the words of an African, who like you said, had been taught the truth of the matter from his elders.

Sometimes I wonder in this day of alternate facts and reality TV if truth will endure and be passed on to our children. The scripture tells us that the truth will set us free. I hope people's eyes will be opened to these truths and that their hearts will be open to a deeper understanding of what really happened. Then perhaps they can stop the blame game.

 

[irosie91]

I always believed that when people said the problem was Africans selling their own into slavery that some details had to be missing. It is so easy to simply repeat something like a parrot. This article gives reasons and explanations and people should be willing to believe the words of an African, who like you said, had been taught the truth of the matter from his elders.

Sometimes I wonder in this day of alternate facts and reality TV if truth will endure and be passed on to our children. The scripture tells us that the truth will set us free. I hope people's eyes will be opened to these truths and that their hearts will be open to a deeper understanding of what really happened. Then perhaps they can stop the blame game.

"SOLD THEIR BROTHERS AND SISTERS" of course that is nonsense-----they sold the "brothers and sisters" on the other side of the hill. NOTHING NEW ----it had been going on for THOUSANDS OF YEARS

 

[IM2]

"SOLD THEIR BROTHERS AND SISTERS" of course that is nonsense-----they sold the "brothers and sisters" on the other side of the hill. NOTHING NEW ----it had been going on for THOUSANDS OF YEARS

Things did not happen that simply.