Byrdeye said...
In Carolingian Europe approximately 20% of the entire population consisted of slavesDuring the long period of war between the Germans and Slavs, which lasted until the tenth century, the Slavonic territories in the north and southeast furnished the Germans large numbers of slaves. The Venetian and other Italian cities on the coast took numerous Slavonic captives from the opposite side of the Adriatic whom they resold to other places. The Slavs frequently shared in the seizure and export of their countrymen as slaves. The Naretani, a piratical Slavonic tribe living in the present district of Southern Dalmatia, were especially notorious for their slave-trade. Russian princes exported large numbers of slaves from their country. The result is that the name Slav has given the word slave to the peoples of Western Europe.
As you can see, the whole issue of American slavery has been taken out of context from its far more globalized and diverse backdrop.
11 comments:
In Carolingian Europe approximately 20% of the entire population consisted of slaves
During the long period of war between the Germans and Slavs, which lasted until the tenth century, the Slavonic territories in the north and southeast furnished the Germans large numbers of slaves. The Venetian and other Italian cities on the coast took numerous Slavonic captives from the opposite side of the Adriatic whom they resold to other places. The Slavs frequently shared in the seizure and export of their countrymen as slaves. The Naretani, a piratical Slavonic tribe living in the present district of Southern Dalmatia, were especially notorious for their slave-trade. Russian princes exported large numbers of slaves from their country. The result is that the name Slav has given the word slave to the peoples of Western Europe.
As you can see, the whole issue of American slavery has been taken out of context from its far more globalized and diverse backdrop.
When the British ended their involvement in the international slave trade, representatives from Africa came to Europe to protest. The Arabs ignored all of this and continued to take part. Saudi Arabia did not outlaw slavery until 1962.
Thailand still enslaves little girls to this day. And men from all over the so-called "civilized" world fly there to watch those little girls pop ping pong balls out of their twats in night clubs.
"representatives from Africa came to Europe to protest." C1
Wait a minute C. Let's break this little meme of your down a bit:
Did "representatives of Africa" come to Europe to protest ... or did straight-the-fuck-up SLAVE TRADERS come to Europe to protest?
4 Africans working for slave traders, duped into making a statement on behalf of their employers, do not = "Representatives of Africa".
DV,
Bad wording, representatives from those tribes who were involved in the slave trade. Specifically tribal leaders from what are now Gambia, Congo, Dahomey ( now Republic of Benin) and others who had profited from the slave trade. The rulers of Senegal demanded they be reclassified as a protectorate and not a colony so they could continue the slave trade. The British also found an intense blowback against banning slavery in Sudan.
Thailand still enslaves little girls to this day.
Actually, if you do a little research behind the headlines into that, you'll find that most of it is overblown feminist propaganda. Most sex workers are not "underage" (which varies culturally)...or unwilling slaves. Many in fact enjoy their profession, which they find both lucrative and glamorous.
But in feminist hands, it becomes just like rape/DV paranoia...
More cleverly-exploited ammo to simultaneously indict innocent men as violent savages as a class while drumming up undying support and funding for feminism. It's no different than the neocon's illusory "Al Quda" - which serves to both condemn Muslims and inflate defense budgets..
DV...
"Slave auction. Not what normally comes to mind"
Maybe not to your mind, DV, but it is impossible to understand the enslavement of Africans by Europeans without understanding European history and the enslavement of Europeans by each other.
Until 1861 when the last vestiges of legal European slavery were swept aside by the Russian Czar Alexander II officially freeing the millions of Russian serfs, Europe had been the most vicious and cruel laboratory of human enslavement on the planet.
The disdain for human life by the masters who set up a System of Nobility/Blue Blood Supremacy was without equal.
The system was so vicious, however, that not much could be done in terms of advancement. The ruling classes constantly had to deal with substantial rebellions such as the peasants' war in Germany in 1525 and the continuous wars against each other. No wonder every European town of some significance was surrounded by defensive walls.
It was the expansion of the Europeans into Africa, above all, that enabled them to gradually set aside the internal slavocratic class structure by exporting it to Africa. The introduction of the African slave trade and the enslavement of "black" Africans (taught to the Southern Europeans by the Arabs, which Southern Europeans taught, by example, the Northern REuropeans) were the foundation upon which intra-European slavery could, and indeed was, abolished and the average lower-class European (and former serf/slave) could be united behind a more sophisticated and expansive form of the original System of Nobility/Blue Blood Supremacy, namely what is known as the System of Racism/White Supremacy.
Thus as a result of this expansion, you find all of the "racial" arguments about the supposed inferiority of non-whites to be just transfered from the original argument about the supposed innate inferiority of European serfs/slaves in comparison with the innate superiority of their European rulers.
Fish.
I can't help but notice you have failed to listen to the Tony Martin lecture below.
Either that or you are ignoring it and choosing not to incorporate it into your thesis.
Which seems determined to conclude a gross categorical over-simplification: "Whites Victimized Non-Whites".
I submit that the vast majority of historical "whites" have lived lives no better off than the vast majority of historical "blacks".
Insisting blacks be viewed as the "most victimized" ... is not empowering.
DV...
"I can't help but notice you have failed to listen to the Tony Martin lecture below.
Either that or you are ignoring it..."
DV, I've studied Dr. Martin for 20 years. That lecture below I've read and heard years ago. So I don't need to hear it right now.
In any case, as to the role of the "white" people who classify themselves as "Jews". So what? They are "white" people and as such part and parcel of the System of Racism/White Supremacy. The value of Dr. Martin's exposition solely lies in the fact that any protestations of the white people classifying themselves as Jews as not being complicit in the System of Racism/White Supremacy is shown to be bladderdash. But that's all.
On balance it matters little what one gang of people who classify themselves as "white" do versus another gang of people who classify themselves as "white". At the end of the day, when it comes to "non-white" people, they usually set their differences aside and all unite against non-white people.
"I submit that the vast majority of historical "whites" have lived lives no better off than the vast majority of historical 'blacks'"
Maybe, maybe not. But, bottom line, who cares?
We are dealing withe the here and now. And here and now globally "non-whites" in the aggregate live like shit compared to "whites".
Now you can attribute this to the supposed innate inabilities of non-whites as David Mills, David Duke, and David Mamet do, or you can look at it logically and discount that biological inferiority thesis and thus look at a social system of rule.
Post a Comment