How Race was invented

[IllmaticDelta]

Can we really call those phenotypical differences racial then? I'd say they definitely associated some physical traits with particular groups, but without them pairing these traits with specific hereditary behaviors or qualities, I don't think it reflects a racial outlook on differences.

I don't think the assigning of specific behavioral traits is needed to establish racial types based on phenotype; now, if you're talking more in a social sense, AEs did do this but they did this equally to all of their enemies regardless of complexion/features. The difference between the AEs and the Arab/North Africans that followed, is the AEs never had any disdain for others simply because of their skin color/features.

 

[DJK]

Africa is a giant, sprawling vast continent, going South to North.
With significant differences in climate, language and culture.
In the past it was difficult for an African to first see himself as an "African" in the Western nation-state context.
It was just as difficult for someone to see himself first as "Black" and therefore "from Africa."
This is how the Europeans gained power.
They defined the groups.

The Europeans called its own group "White."
The White group first defined itself as "not Black."
And soon it added "most powerful" and "supreme over Black."

This occurred even though Europeans warred against each other countlessly.
The 'White' group never had to be united with other.
They just had to be united against anyone they called "Black."

 

[MischievousMonkey]

Need start boning up on the trans-Saharan trade in context to the moors and reconquista. Doing roundabout research, but would like to know what made Africans a specific target and not Arabs after the Iberian peninsula was reclaimed. Maybe it had to do with the power of the caliphates and Barbary pirates being major forces in the region from 1440 on to the end of the Ottoman empire. Something tells me there was an agreement between Arabs and Europeans specifically, not to mention the trans-Saharan trade brought Africans into India.

Makes me wonder if there were organizations like this among the caliphates.

When you say what made Africans a specific target and not Arabs, do you mean by the Spanish? Because if that's the case, Arabs definitely were a target as well. All Muslims (and Jews) were.

 

[Amo Husserl]

When you say what made Africans a specific target and not Arabs, do you mean by the Spanish? Because if that's the case, Arabs definitely were a target as well. All Muslims (and Jews) were.

What specifically put Africans on those boats? After defeating the moors who came from North Africa, what caused the Spanish and Portuguese to specifically go to West Africa for slaves? That's what I'm asking.

They didn't attack the caliphates? The Arab Muslim world seemed to be unscathed compared to Africans via Trans-Atlantic trade and colonialism. Jews had trade networks from the Netherlands all the way into West Africa as lancados.

 

[MischievousMonkey]

What specifically put Africans on those boats? After defeating the moors who came from North Africa, what caused the Spanish and Portuguese to specifically go to West Africa for slaves? That's what I'm asking.

They didn't attack the caliphates? The Arab Muslim world seemed to be unscathed compared to Africans via Trans-Atlantic trade and colonialism. Jews had trade networks from the Netherlands all the way into West Africa as lancados.

Got you.

I'd reframe the Portuguese involvement in the African slave trade as an economic endeavor here. I don't have numbers in mind and I know that even though the Portuguese were engaged in wars against and kidnapping of Africans, they first came to West Africa looking for commodities and new routes. The trading posts they set up to achieve this connected to trade routes where slaves were already exchanged.

The caliphates had laws against selling Muslims into slavery (as did some parts of Africa) and the remaining power to enforce it.

There might also be the negrophobic element inherited from Arabs but I'm not sure if or how much part it would have played at this point.

https://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/agex/hd_agex.htm

Launching the Portuguese Slave Trade in Africa · African Laborers for a New Empire: Iberia, Slavery, and the Atlantic World · Lowcountry Digital History Initiative

 

[Amo Husserl]

Got you.

I'd reframe the Portuguese involvement in the African slave trade as an economic endeavor here. I don't have numbers in mind and I know that even though the Portuguese were engaged in wars against and kidnapping of Africans, they first came to West Africa looking for commodities and new routes. The trading posts they set up to achieve this connected to trade routes where slaves were already exchanged.

The caliphates had laws against selling Muslims into slavery (as did some parts of Africa) and the remaining power to enforce it.

There might also be the negrophobic element inherited from Arabs but I'm not sure if or how much part it would have played at this point.

https://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/agex/hd_agex.htm

Launching the Portuguese Slave Trade in Africa · African Laborers for a New Empire: Iberia, Slavery, and the Atlantic World · Lowcountry Digital History Initiative

On the face of what you're saying I respect, however the Portuguese were also involved in defeating the moors. Expanding into trade was indeed economic, but I can't dismiss the role they played. Following wars are economic booms. I don't want to sound redundant, the question is rhetorical at this point, how was the Arab world skipped over? What made them say, "we'll go West Africa after this war instead of directly benefitting from the Arabs we just beat"? Proximity? What exactly made Portugal and Spain look westward (to establish that papal bull)?

I'm asking a deeper question I've yet to find the answer to. It's one thing to travel for trade, it's another to dismiss the idea of warring against the states that conquered your territory for over seven hundred years.

I have a theory that somehow whatever was happening toward the middle of the 1400s sent Portugal and Spain to North Africa and from there a deal was brokered or something happened that preserved the Islamic world at the expense of West Africa. Last I remember West Africans didn't make it to the Iberian Peninsula, so why were they so aggressively enslaved? Toby Green's book was pretty good for pointing out what you mentioned, there were even contracts for trade in Spain and Portugal so things were lucrative. I'm reading George Brooks' book right now and the pieces are coming together but I'm missing that one piece.

Something isn't making sense that the Arab world wasn't immediately dealt with at least Spain and Portugal extending the Reconquista into North Africa. Negrophobia? Maybe, the only group who really knew of blacks in West Africa were the Arabs through the Trans-Saharan Trade. Arab Muslims were in West Africa, North Africa and the Iberian Peninsula.

Something is missing, something that spared the Arab world. What was it?

Before we get too far off in how race was invented, we need context as to why the Arab world was spared after they were defeated in war.

Example: the United States defeats Japan in WWII but all of a sudden the United States decides to subject China to the penalties of Pearl Harbor. That's not logical unless a deal were brokered between the US and Japan at the expense of China.

 

[MischievousMonkey]

On the face of what you're saying I respect, however the Portuguese were also involved in defeating the moors. Expanding into trade was indeed economic, but I can't dismiss the role they played. Following wars are economic booms. I don't want to sound redundant, the question is rhetorical at this point, how was the Arab world skipped over? What made them say, "we'll go West Africa after this war instead of directly benefitting from the Arabs we just beat"? Proximity? What exactly made Portugal and Spain look westward (to establish that papal bull)?

I'm asking a deeper question I've yet to find the answer to. It's one thing to travel for trade, it's another to dismiss the idea of warring against the states that conquered your territory for over seven hundred years.

I have a theory that somehow whatever was happening toward the middle of the 1400s sent Portugal and Spain to North Africa and from there a deal was brokered or something happened that preserved the Islamic world at the expense of West Africa. Last I remember West Africans didn't make it to the Iberian Peninsula, so why were they so aggressively enslaved? Toby Green's book was pretty good for pointing out what you mentioned, there were even contracts for trade in Spain and Portugal so things were lucrative. I'm reading George Brooks' book right now and the pieces are coming together but I'm missing that one piece.

Something isn't making sense that the Arab world wasn't immediately dealt with at least Spain and Portugal extending the Reconquista into North Africa. Negrophobia? Maybe, the only group who really knew of blacks in West Africa were the Arabs through the Trans-Saharan Trade. Arab Muslims were in West Africa, North Africa and the Iberian Peninsula.

Something is missing, something that spared the Arab world. What was it?

Before we get too far off in how race was invented, we need context as to why the Arab world was spared after they were defeated in war.

Example: the United States defeats Japan in WWII but all of a sudden the United States decides to subject China to the penalties of Pearl Harbor. That's not logical unless a deal were brokered between the US and Japan at the expense of China.

What makes you tie the Reconquista in with the Portuguese exploration of the African West coast and subsequent involvement in the slave trade? Aren't they independent?

It seems to me that improvements in naval technology, search for trade opportunities and new sea routes explain well enough the Portuguese enterprise in West Africa, which also cut the North African middleman. Why see it as a punishment?

 

[frankster]

Below I describe a earlier antecedent in the development of Racism based on Color/featurism - phenotype

Racism started out as Colorism/Hueism over 3500 years ago in India....It was a misinterpretation of the Laws of Manu used to maintain power in the hands of lighter skinned(northern) Aryan as opposed to darker skinned(southern) Dravidians. This Misinterpretation was a political ploy and has little or nothing to do with the original intent of Manu's Laws. From this the Caste System was born, a state from which it is believed one or ones descendants cannot escape.

The Muslim invasion of India led to the spread of Colorism to Arabia, Africa and Europe....where for economic reasons Colorism coupled with Caste became Racism. Both Racism and the Caste System are social conventions created by Man based on featurism/texturism and or cultural historicity.

Prejudice and bigotry has always existed in every part of the World where different peoples come into contact with each other this is known as Communalism.

 

[frankster]

On the face of what you're saying I respect, however the Portuguese were also involved in defeating the moors. Expanding into trade was indeed economic, but I can't dismiss the role they played. Following wars are economic booms. I don't want to sound redundant, the question is rhetorical at this point, how was the Arab world skipped over? What made them say, "we'll go West Africa after this war instead of directly benefitting from the Arabs we just beat"? Proximity? What exactly made Portugal and Spain look westward (to establish that papal bull)?

I'm asking a deeper question I've yet to find the answer to. It's one thing to travel for trade, it's another to dismiss the idea of warring against the states that conquered your territory for over seven hundred years.

I have a theory that somehow whatever was happening toward the middle of the 1400s sent Portugal and Spain to North Africa and from there a deal was brokered or something happened that preserved the Islamic world at the expense of West Africa. Last I remember West Africans didn't make it to the Iberian Peninsula, so why were they so aggressively enslaved? Toby Green's book was pretty good for pointing out what you mentioned, there were even contracts for trade in Spain and Portugal so things were lucrative. I'm reading George Brooks' book right now and the pieces are coming together but I'm missing that one piece.

Something isn't making sense that the Arab world wasn't immediately dealt with at least Spain and Portugal extending the Reconquista into North Africa. Negrophobia? Maybe, the only group who really knew of blacks in West Africa were the Arabs through the Trans-Saharan Trade. Arab Muslims were in West Africa, North Africa and the Iberian Peninsula.

• Something is missing, something that spared the Arab world. What was it?

Before we get too far off in how race was invented, we need context as to why the Arab world was spared after they were defeated in war.

Example: the United States defeats Japan in WWII but all of a sudden the United States decides to subject China to the penalties of Pearl Harbor. That's not logical unless a deal were brokered between the US and Japan at the expense of China.

The socalled Discovery of the New World

 

[Amo Husserl]

The socalled Discovery of the New World

Did some brief research, Spain and Portugal didn't want any smoke with the Ottoman empire and chose to go west instead.

 

[frankster]

Did some brief research, Spain and Portugal didn't want any smoke with the Ottoman empire and chose to go west instead.

Great...do you mind sharing this brief research that led to that assumption.
It was immensely less risky not to mention much more profitable to go West after the New World became accessible.

 

[Amo Husserl]

Great...do you mind sharing this brief research that led to that assumption.
It was immensely less risky not to mention much more profitable to go West after the New World became accessible.

Reconquista - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

See "Granada War and the end of Muslim rule". Treaty of Granada can also fill in some gaps. The background to Romanus Pontifex and Inter Caetera are other points of interest.

 

[Cryptocurrency Scarface]

The Philosopher the video mentions at the start said every race has something that makes them genetically special

everyone turning into mixed mulattos wouldn't make them superior over anyone who was purely African or Asian, no race is inherently superior. The only trait I'd say is an advantage is increased melanin to protect one from the sun.