Africans sold Africans to Europeans, but to what extent?
- Thread starter MaLi
- Start date
observe
Banned
The first slaves were rounded up by Magellan and brought to the Pope at that time who liked the black slaves so much he mandated that it was ok to enslave black people in particular. Cacs went to the coast of Africa to round up slaves. It wasnt until Columbus found America for cacs that the Race began to colonize the Americas using the new labor theyd become accustomed to. With the church, heads of various cac nations and England allowing random cacs to setup franchises there was a boom. Obviously, it wasnt enough to just grab a few slaves around the coast so they setup deals with africans, raided weaker villages, setup division/wars among africans to obtain slaves from the losing side, etc, to get the demand for black labor which was going for around 25 dollars per slave. They'd expect them to work for a year (because they'd die after that typically) but many lived past this time, so even if they died the slave owner wasbecause he got a return on his investment, PLUS some before his slave died.
Damn..I just finished a book on a magellan a few weeks ago..sucks that they left that part out..it talked about him going to Africa to fight wars in the beginning when he was in the Portuguese army..
Well thats the cac that gave europeans their first taste of slavery and got the ball rolling.
Last edited:
observe
Banned
The only part about slavery it mentioned is that he had a slave that he got from Africa back in the days..he even took the slave with him on his voyage and promised him freedom and money when the trip was done..more like a servant than a slave actually.when they got to the Philippines the slave spoke their language, which was weird, so magellan thought that slave must of came from the Philippines, tho it didn't mention his color in the book..but that slave turned on them cacs in the Philippines..lol..
Just shows you how they viewed human beings. Like animals. Like bruh, you just enslaved me, you think cuz we're kicking it on the ship for a few years its all good? Stop it. But yea, if you research the history of the catholic church and slavery, he was the fukkboy, that gave them that rush.
Lemme say off top that I don't like or support c00ning, self-hate, or meaningless bickering.
This thread isn't about the Africans that were stolen by Europeans. This is referring to the Africans that were sold or traded by our own.
European Americans favorite phrase when the topic of slavery comes up is "Africans sold other Africans into slavery" like it's some veto for the all the destruction their ancestors inflicted. But I seriously doubt Africans realized how inhumane those Euros would treat slaves in the Americas.
I'd like to address us selling our own, and hopefully learn something from the different perspectives of HL.
African American descendants of the slave trade:
Why do you think we were "picked" out of all the Africans?
Were we criminals and captives of war?
Were we Hebrews with no real connection to the native Africans?
Do you feel any animosity towards our brothers and sisters across the atlantic?
Africans that maintained their family names:
What do your parents and grandparents say about slavery?
Do they feel any guilt for their direct ancestors supposed role in the Euro slave trade?
If you went to school in (West) Africa, what did they teach with regards to human history, and specifically the Euro slave trade?
What did Africans gain by selling their own? It isn't like they needed anything else...
Do you feel African American slaves and their descendants are tainted? Do you look down on us?
Links and references are also welcome
there version of slavery more closely resembled the European landlord system.
it was all slavery though.
PoPimp84
All Star
very interesting
PoPimp84
All Star
poignant
Yea pretty much....slavery's not some new concept its been around as long as humanity's been around. Pretty much every empire/region's been involved in slavery at some point so to say "Africans sold slaves" really means nothing cause it was basically big business back then. The distinction comes in because Europeans made slavery strictly about race/skin color when it had been mostly about social class/criminals/prisoners of wars up to that point. And also that America still practiced a brutal form of slavery on large scale well past the point where most modern countries had abolished slavery.
that's gotta be one of the most ridiculous sentences ever written.
Haha when read alone yes I agree. Do you consider indentured servitude a type of slavery? Why or why not?
I never heard of any major dna test LOOKING for jewish ancestry in blacks in the USA. Even then you would have to be particular in where to look since there are over 40,000,000 black people, and the backgrounds will be mixed up, due to most living amongst each other from the way the u.s. is set up. Just because it isn't found YET, doesn't mean it isn't there.
The closest thing you could do is find a dominant gene and connect that with an area but, it doesn't negate the presence of something else but, that would mean more research which means more money, and NOTHING is done unless a profit would be made, and I don't think finding out if blacks in the u.s. have jewish ancestry is going to be a money maker. In fact it will probably kill the person doing the research business, since Jews don't play when it comes to that.
True is meant to determine a blood line to the original priests like the test done on the group in south africa.
Like I stated the importance is not to see who is the original or not but, to prove the lie of white supremacy because that is the system that is ruling the world, even though a lot of people don't want to admit it out of fear of acknowledging they have been duped into seeing the world in a certain way. The personal reason is to use the knowledge to see the world for what it is on a deeper level but, I KNOW that conversation won't go well in here so I won't even do it. I don't want to learn this stuff just to say I know it or just to argue with people, that is a fools game because new information is always coming out or being manipulated so you would be arguing all day, which means no growth as a person and I feel that is what certain powers want but, again, I won't go into all of that.
I asked what others were being taught and how they came to this knowledge. I revealed some of what I was taught, hoping others would either expand, or maybe get me to think about something I didn't consider.
I see your issue and I somewhat agree. We should be equal. But how can we be equal when the bulk of our African history revolves "white man enslaved us"? How can we be equal when we're taught that our slave masters "freed" us, but they omit the slave rebellions. We're basically taught that we had no choice in the matter, and that implies that we as a people are powerless. I get your angle, we're not powerless, and we had more influence on the slave trade than we've been taught. To what extent is all I'm looking to discuss.
You being a direct result of West Africans might have a different perspective and education on how it went down. I'm not looking to argue, or shyt on anyones beliefs, I'm looking to read about yours and others experiences with this topic.
I meant who on this board do you consider an afrocentric? Whats your definition, examples?
Thanks for answering those other questions.