SLAVERY WAS GOOD FOR THE BLACK MAN!!!!

[Cawar]

Grant

Thats nit picking from your part.
Islam doesnt allow slavery like fah said, except when enemies are captured in a war..and even then..those are not slaves..And I use the term "allow" loosley here.

[BABYGIRL123]

The writer is a self hating Moron, has he ever being through slavery its horror and suffering the millions that were drowned in the oceans the abuse and inhumane treatment, they have suffered.. the long hours of working and mistreatment that comes with it the dividing of family members who will never see each other the rape and disrespect they have being through.. not looking up and certainly not allowed to talk back being slapped whipped or even killed for being a slave the mentality of society thinking your inferior and always at the bottom of society poor and dependent on a master god knows how many evil masters existed back there.

Grant why do you mention islam the article has nothing to do with religion, islam does not allow slavery but allows those who fights muslims to be turned into slaves.. get it right it was your white people who has committed this crime against humanity your people are not better than hitler lol he was one of you no difference at all.!!

[Grant]

Cawar,

It's the Wahaabbis and Takfiris who are doing the nit-picking. That really is their position on slavery. I'm pleased to see the concept offends you.

BG,

Slavery and it's resultant class structures in post-slavery societies have offended me for a long time. Someone said slavery was abolished in the Ottoman Empire before it was in the US. Good for them. I believe the Brits started stamping it out about 1807 and it ended in the US in 1865. My only point was that the only legal slavery that exists today claims Islamic religious justification and that a fatwa by a Saudi cleric with an official state position supports that legality.

Those who find only Europeans culpable in the slave trade need to read more history.

[Haddad]

The writer is a self hating Moron, has he ever being through slavery its horror and suffering the millions that were drowned in the oceans the abuse and inhumane treatment, they have suffered.. the long hours of working and mistreatment that comes with it the dividing of family members who will never see each other the rape and disrespect they have being through.. not looking up and certainly not allowed to talk back being slapped whipped or even killed for being a slave the mentality of society thinking your inferior and always at the bottom of society poor and dependent on a master god knows how many evil masters existed back there.

I concur. He makes it like African Americans enjoy quality lifestyle and are better educated than most (or all) black Africans. He couldn't be more than wrong. There are numerous pockets in Africa where Africans enjoy a better lifestyle than millions of Whites (let alone African Americans) in North America and Europe. Furthermore, he ignores the fact that Africa wouldn't be where and how it's today without the White man's exploitations (slavery, colonialism, trade/commerce monopoly, involvement in Africa's internal affairs, sowing discord, coup d'etats, insecurity, etc). The fact that the White man still dominates Africa's kheyraad (gold, diamond, oil, precious gems & stones, economy, etc) must have slipped his mind. An excerpt from the article that caught my attention:

Have we ever stopped to consider where we black people, especially those of us in the West, would be right now if it weren't for the Atlantic Slave Trade? What state do you think black Africa would be in today? Do you think that we would have been better off without slavery? I don't think so!

[Padishah]

Poor man is obviously deluded.

West African slavery destroyed the source of civilising impulses in the region; trade. All throughout West Africa, there was a sophisticated and almost free market system of trade, which given time, would have brought the level of civilisation into equilibrium with others. Local rulers and political powers were kept honest because they dared not disrupt the trade too much, or they would suffer.

Now, bring in a new political player into the equation, and things go to hell. No longer is the incentive to trade and maintain relative peace; now the incentive is to raid, fight, subdue and sell the members of enemy tribes, unfriendly tribes, more commercial and less martial tribes, to these new peoples, and turn as good a profit, if not more.

Now, give this new dynamic some time, and it will succeed in clearing West Africa of a majority of its population, as it did in reality. While this is happening, back at home in Europe, Classical Liberalism, with all its attended Free Market principles and Natural Rights theory, begins objecting to the idea that a human being can be owned. So, these Classical Liberals agitate for the reduction of tarrifs, elimination of government monopolies and other Mercantilist ideas, and the dismantling of slavery, with geat difficulty. Eventually, the British unilaterally banned slavery in its Empire. The French did so concurrently, the Ottoman Padishah is pressured into it (or sees its inefficacy, whichever), and the rest of Europe followed.

What does this mean for those tribes whose living is made from selling other African tribesmen into slavery? The market has just drastically sunk, and now those pesky Europeans have come, with this horrifying (to those Africans) idea that slavery is immoral and illegal (which it is)! What are these avaricious Cheifs to do? Absolutely nothing! Their ancestors destroyed the sophisticated trade network in the area when they first began to deal in the slave trade. Whatever remains of the local economy just tanks, predictably, because the number one marketable export just became illegal.

Of course, full blown Colonialism begins now, to help these 'poor primitives' into the 19th Century, starting with massive government infrastructure projects and the production of raw materials for export. Of course, European countries had comparative advantage, at the time, when it came to manufacturing. However, trade barriers, import restrictions, outright protectionism and the European 'White Burden' idea prevents the full development of African industry, in any field. This is, for the most part, what African countries still do today, and they still face the same restrictions, plus crippling Foreign Aid, and food subsidies.

Colonialism was just a case of intervening once again, to fix the ills of the first intervention, which was the slave trade. If this guy opened a book once in a while, he'd know this information. Colonialism! Can you believe people still advocating it!

[Anab]

When the Europeans went to Africa to buy slaves, what did they find? They found a society and people vastly inferior to theirs. -

Well i was enjoying the article until i reached this above quote, then i puked. Obviously this dude is suffering from serious inferiority complex. How can one take serious, someone who thinks of themselves as 'inferior' in the first place? I mean, had he said--the europeans had found a primitive society, or ethnic or native society that would have been appropriate and certainly would have displayed his objectiveness without conterminating the article with his severe insecurities. No, he had to use that elitist word, ' inferior' to make his point.But then again, we r talking about a jamaican here, apeology theory? Need i say more?