Africans sold Africans to Europeans, but to what extent?

[Family Man]

CACs, in their infinite evil, develop the concept of chattel slavery and racism. The slavery that was going on in much of the civilized world at that time was different than the one the evil, hateful, and savage white man pioneered. CACs are truly a devilish race.

 

[GetInTheTruck]

It was always about the money...always was, always will be.

 

[the cac mamba]

whats the ratio? as far as slaves that were sold vs slaves that were captured, is there any type of figure on that?

 

[theworldismine13]

what the europeans did was increase the level of slave trading by buying up all the slaves and telling the kings and chief that they were willing to buy more

but the elites of africa have been violating the individual and human rights of black even before the european, even the supposed kinder and gentler slavery was a gross violation of human rights

the most famous african slave traders were the dahomey http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dahomey

The Atlantic slave trade was the primary international trade from the kingdom for much of its history. The slave trade was heavily organized by the king himself and the money provided him with significant funds to purchase guns, iron, and cloth.[10] Although the king did make some money from domestic taxation, most of the funds to the king derived from the slave trade. The Dahomey coast was known in many European accounts at this time as the "Slave Coast" because of the active trade.[5] Dahomey contributed possibly as much as 20% of the total Atlantic slave trade making it one of the largest suppliers to the trade.[1] Historian Akinjogbin did contend that the entry into the slave trade by Dahomey was hesitant and that the early kings of Dahomey, primarily Agaja, were simply trying to improve the economic state of the kingdom and only engaged in the slave trade when other options did not work.[15]

The slave trade had significant impacts on the kingdom. Historian Robin Law contends that the international slave trade provided a likely justification for much of the military policies of the kingdom.[2] Similarly, when King Adandozan was unable to supply enough war captives for the international slave trade, domestic household and plantation use, and for sacrifices, he was replaced by Ghezo with the support of Francisco Félix de Sousa, a Brazilian slave trader, primarily to increase the trade.[2]

Starting in the 1840s, the British empire began trying to suppress the Atlantic slave trade. Multiple missions tried to convince King Ghezo to end the trade, but he responded that domestic political pressure prevented him from ending the trade. However, he did increase palm oil plantations in order to try and develop economic alternatives.[8] In 1851-1852, the British instituted a naval blockade on Dahomey in order to prevent the slave trade forcing Ghezo to promise to end the slave trade. Major military operations were halted at the same time.

 

[MaLi]

who cares what the extent was?

Some of you stay trying to excuse black crimes and savagery. It's the reason why in that other thread people were praising Robert Mugabe. It's the reason why Mansa Musa is praised by some of the same idiots who claim to be angered about the Trans-Atlanic Slave Trade. How can you have a Mansa Musa pic as your avi and claim to be upset about Blacks being enslaved when during his time he was notorious for keeping Blacks as slaves..even using them as a form of payment upon reaching Arabia to perform his Hajj.

All them ancient and historic tribes and people you Afrocentrics love to revere...engaged in slavery, imperialism and genocide.

1) Who cares about 90% of the shyt we talk about on here? This place is for discussion and nobody is forcing you to reply. I could be wrong, but your posts suggests that you're angry that this is even a discussion. If I'm wrong and you would like to contribute:

Whos an afrocentric and why is that negative? We live in a eurocentric society where we revere Alexander the Greek, Caesar, Napoleon, and I can go on. I'd like to know what the brothers and sisters of HL know about OUR leaders and how slavery differed.

Again, if you'd like to contribute:
What do your parents and grandparents say about slavery in West Africa?
What did Africans gain from Europeans? I keep seeing "money", but Africa was/is the richest continent in the world and Africans were doing just fine without Europeans.
Do you feel African American slaves and their descendants are tainted? Do you look down on us?
Did you go to school in west Africa? If so, what do they teach with regards to the history of Euro Slave trade?

Any books, lectures, links would be appreciated.

 

[MaLi]

It was always about the money...always was, always will be.

Whos money and what currency? Africa has more natural minerals than anywhere else on the earth.

 

[MaLi]

By definition, they did. "Slaves" that received payment were not slaves. Indentured servants or the like.

As far as why they were sold, your guess is as good as mine, but most injustices can be traced back to greed. I will say its obvious that they didnt share your viewpoint as far as "selling their own." Again, these were mostly captured enemies from rival tribes. They didnt consider the slaves any more "their own" than the Euros. So you get rid of your rivals in exchange for various payments/goods, good deal.

I know. Plenty African tribes exchanged slaves based on this thinking. Some were "slaves" or indentured sevants, but still treated like humans. They could get married, have their own property, pay off their debt etc. The Euro slave trade didn't continue the standard. Yes I know African leaders still had criminal and war slaves that were treated like shyt. But some people believe the African leaders did in fact sell their own "indentured servants" aswell

 

[Elle Driver]

Yes. African nations would enslave prisoners of war.

However, Europeans treated Africans like subhumans based on their skin color, not their crimes. Slavery wasn't based on race until European leaders convinced the world we weren't human.

You hit the nail right on the head, they literally destroyed a people and went to Africa to avoid work and yet black people get lazy stereotype.

 

[Propaganda]

Not every slave had their human rights violated. Many slaves were still able to keep their language and last name. Some slaves could own land, pay off debt, and receive compensation. Slavery imposed on the Africans by Europeans in America is a lot different than African on African slavery.

In your opinion, why would they need money when they were sitting on a natural treasure chest? What did the Europeans offer that the Africans wanted and were willing sell their own for?

that's gotta be one of the most ridiculous sentences ever written.

 

[Shogun]

It's true..African tribes didnt really have prisoners..if you did something seriously wrong..they would kill you on the spot..lesser..blind you or cut off a limb..or even less..take ya cattle..that was their justice system..what they didnt do was make you suffer every single day and torture you everyday or imprison like western slavery..

Blinding someone isn't making them suffer evey day? Y'all will say anything to convince yourself only white people do bad shyt.

 

[Broke Wave]

This is probably one of the worst threads on the Coli. First of all Slavery was turned into an industry therefore people started wholesale capturing slaves then selling them to European slave traders. Sometimes it was Arabs capturing slaves, othertimes it was Africans and sometimes it was Europeans themselves, but they created this massive demand for African slaves so the entire blame goes TO THEM.

What a disgusting looptyloop thread smh.

 

[NZA]

africans were not racist, so they did not consider their slaves to be "their own people" when they were selling them to europeans. they considered their slaves to be conquered foreigners and other undesirable types. it was like a roman enslaving a barbaric german and then selling him to an persian merchant, nobody would say the romans were selling out their own people. the race angle is important because the africans treated their slaves like a source of wealth and prestige, but not as animals. it gets more complicated when you look at the conduct of islamicized african slave traders. they can take on some of the more disturbing racial characteristics of the european and arab slave trade.

that being said, being a slave under any circumstances is nothing good, and any attempts to sugar coat any system of slavery is pretty disrespectful to the human spirit.

only after the world became eurocentric/racist did we begin to think that africans had somehow betrayed their own people because the people they sold had a similar skin tone. africans are just like everybody else in the sense that they dont necessarily like the guy that looks like them but speaks a different language. i seriously doubt they knew the full extent of what would happen in the americas since chattel slavery involves the racial aspect combined with a far more developed economic incentive that africans would have little context to digest. few africans would be well versed in european culture or psychology...

on afrocentrics, you will see AAs with avatars of rampant african slave traders and whatnot because our cultures were destroyed, and many of us are desperate to identify with something other than CACery, so you are going to see some really conflicted and schitzo stuff in the diaspora. when your culture was created by people who depsise you, you have to go through a hell of a journey to get right. we are barely celebrating the 50th anniversary of the march on washington, in a historical sense, we have come a long way in a very short amount of time, but we still have a bit more to do before we have ironed out some fundamental issues of identity and culture. have some patience with wounded people, brehs

 

[bouncy]

Slavery goes back as far as recorded history can be traced. Its existed on every continent and among all races.

Which makes me wonder why are we the only species to do this?.

Are we emulating this from someone who did this to us?. I know a lot on here hate religion or anything that isn't about evolution but, when you look at ancient scrolls or even the bible in it's proper context, man was made to do work for the "Gods". Maybe when we were kicked out of eden, we started doing what was done to us. It may seem weird but, look at how many people end up treating each other the way their oppressors treated them. Blacks are the perfect example of this. You can be black but, one SMALL difference in yourself from another black, and they would treat that black like a white racist would treat them, as if they are not black themselves. Once we left the plantation, instead of fixing what was wrong, we embraced it. Maybe we really were slaves to the gods, and reenacting things as they once were. Even something as wearing clothes seem like it isn't natural for us to do since our skin is meant to deal with sunlight. If you wear clothes, you block this ability which in the end effects your health for the worst. Somewhere along the line humans got fukked up in the head by following someone, and we are seeing the effects of this. Maybe this person wasn't made to live on earth and this is why they had clothes, and workers, while we as humans don't need to live like this. IDK, just something I always think about.

 

[Brown Ant]

Which makes me wonder why are we the only species to do this?.

Are we emulating this from someone who did this to us?. I know a lot on here hate religion or anything that isn't about evolution but, when you look at ancient scrolls or even the bible in it's proper context, man was made to do work for the "Gods". Maybe when we were kicked out of eden, we started doing what was done to us. It may seem weird but, look at how many people end up treating each other the way their oppressors treated them. Blacks are the perfect example of this. You can be black but, one SMALL difference in yourself from another black, and they would treat that black like a white racist would treat them, as if they are not black themselves. Once we left the plantation, instead of fixing what was wrong, we embraced it. Maybe we really were slaves to the gods, and reenacting things as they once were. Even something as wearing clothes seem like it isn't natural for us to do since our skin is meant to deal with sunlight. If you wear clothes, you block this ability which in the end effects your health for the worst. Somewhere along the line humans got fukked up in the head by following someone, and we are seeing the effects of this. Maybe this person wasn't made to live on earth and this is why they had clothes, and workers, while we as humans don't need to live like this. IDK, just something I always think about.

Ants have slaves also.

 

[bouncy]

africans were not racist, so they did not consider their slaves to be "their own people" when they were selling them to europeans. they considered their slaves to be conquered foreigners and other undesirable types. it was like a roman enslaving a barbaric german and then selling him to an persian merchant, nobody would say the romans were selling out their own people. the race angle is important because the africans treated their slaves like a source of wealth and prestige, but not as animals. it gets more complicated when you look at the conduct of islamicized african slave traders. they can take on some of the more disturbing racial characteristics of the european and arab slave trade.

Which makes you think maybe the hebrew israelites were right when they say the blacks in the Americas are not related to the blacks in west africa totally(since you will have some mingling going) and we are the true Israelites.