The Arabic Slave Trade of Africans

Samori Toure

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
Apr 23, 2015
Messages
20,286
Reputation
6,285
Daps
100,880
and .... ?

You do realise that those Africans who sold slaves may have later become slaves themselves and with time AA's, Caribbeans, Brazilians or other diaspora.

Just because someone got sold that doesn't mean they didn't sell anyone else before they themselves got captured. Group A sold some people from Group B and then Group B sold some people from Group A.

Most of those ethnic groups that were the backbone middlemen of the organizations that pushed that trade were still there after slavery ended. In West Africa the organizations within the Oyo, Ashanti, Dahomey, Aro Confederacy, Dagomba, Fulani jihadist clerics, etc., were still there after slavery ended. You are pointing to individuals here and there, but in reality slave trading in African societies was structured and in many cases State sponsored.
 

null

...
Joined
Nov 12, 2014
Messages
29,526
Reputation
5,039
Daps
46,758
Reppin
UK, DE, GY, DMV
Most of those ethnic groups that were the backbone middlemen of the organizations that pushed that trade were still there after slavery ended. In West Africa the organizations within the Oyo, Ashanti, Dahomey, Aro Confederacy, Dagomba, Fulani jihadist clerics, etc., were still there after slavery ended. You are pointing to individuals here and there, but in reality slave trading in African societies was structured and in many cases State sponsored.

Sorry I don't follow. You are saying that the winners always won ... ? Every little skirmish / victim hunting attack ?
 

Samori Toure

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
Apr 23, 2015
Messages
20,286
Reputation
6,285
Daps
100,880
Sorry I don't follow. You are saying that the winners always won ... ? Every little skirmish / victim hunting attack ?

I wrote when will the discussion turn to Africans that enslaved other Africans. People keep writing about Muslims and Christians, but no one ever speaks about the main culprits in the slave trade which were Africans themselves.
 

null

...
Joined
Nov 12, 2014
Messages
29,526
Reputation
5,039
Daps
46,758
Reppin
UK, DE, GY, DMV
I wrote when will the discussion turn to Africans that enslaved other Africans. People keep writing about Muslims and Christians, but no one ever speaks about the main culprits in the slave trade which were Africans themselves.

Well again,

It's not just Africans.. Current AA's, Caribbeans, Brazilians are descended from some of those slaver-co-operators as well.

Also,

"and..."

Africans were not the main culprits in "slavery". They were culprits in terms of people being captured.

The 400-year thing, the racial science, the abuses etc were gringos and arabs to an overwhelming degree.

The cleavage to a system of WS including the marginalisation of black people to this day, that prevents TA slavery "being in the past" is overwhelmingly gringo driven.

So yeah it's something like 99.9% gringo and arab blame, 0.009 percent Africans and 0.001 Diaspora blame, at a rough guess.
 

Waterproof

Warrior Lifestyle
Joined
Dec 28, 2012
Messages
12,684
Reputation
2,381
Daps
35,485
I wrote when will the discussion turn to Africans that enslaved other Africans. People keep writing about Muslims and Christians, but no one ever speaks about the main culprits in the slave trade which were Africans themselves.

Africans didn't enslaved other Africans they enslaved Hebrews, and The Arabs didn't enslaved African's they Enslaved Hebrews, The Arabs called those who enslaved The People Of The Book the Book they talking about is The Torah
 

Samori Toure

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
Apr 23, 2015
Messages
20,286
Reputation
6,285
Daps
100,880
Well again,

It's not just Africans.. Current AA's, Caribbeans, Brazilians are descended from some of those slaver-co-operators as well.

Also,

"and..."

Africans were not the main culprits in "slavery". They were culprits in terms of people being captured.

The 400-year thing, the racial science, the abuses etc were gringos and arabs to an overwhelming degree.

The cleavage to a system of WS including the marginalisation of black people to this day, that prevents TA slavery "being in the past" is overwhelmingly gringo driven.

So yeah it's something like 99.9% gringo and arab blame, 0.009 percent Africans and 0.001 Diaspora blame, at a rough guess.

That is absurd. There would not have been a Transatlantic slave trade without Africans. Africans captured people. Africans controlled the middle market and transported people from the interior lands to the coastal slave forts. Therefore Africans were the main culprits in the slave trade. They literally traded humans for material goods.

The fact that they Africans did not get as rich from the slave trade as Europeans is irrelevant. The fact of the matter is that White people would not have had slaves except for the efforts of Africans. Some of the African Kingdoms saw what was happening, which is why they stopped engaging in slave trade. However, by that time the cat was out of the bag and other people were more than willing to take their place which ended up destabilizing the entirety of West and most of Central Africa.
 

null

...
Joined
Nov 12, 2014
Messages
29,526
Reputation
5,039
Daps
46,758
Reppin
UK, DE, GY, DMV
That is absurd. There would not have been a Transatlantic slave trade without Africans. Africans captured people. Africans controlled the middle market and transported people from the interior lands to the coastal slave forts. Therefore Africans were the main culprits in the slave trade. They literally traded humans for material goods.

The fact that they Africans did not get as rich from the slave trade as Europeans is irrelevant. The fact of the matter is that White people would not have had slaves except for the efforts of Africans. Some of the African Kingdoms saw what was happening, which is why they stopped engaging in slave trade. However, by that time the cat was out of the bag and other people were more than willing to take their place which ended up destabilizing the entirety of West and most of Central Africa.

No wheels == no tanks... right. The people who invented wheels are not responsible tor the atrocities committed with tanks.

Knife manufacturers are not responsible for the murders committed with their knives.

Those who originated the worker-employer relationship are not responsible for the modern implementation of it.

Those who sold people into slavery are not responsible for the way that slavery was implemented and/or used.

in short:

The abusers are responsible for their abusing. Forced labor does not automatically include all of the additional abuses.

-
also:

When you say "slavery" you don't just mean the enslavement of people you mean all the other stuff too.

To quote a wise man,

"Africans however for obvious reasons could not have known or in all likelihood been party to the establishment of Brand Black. First off one would imagine that in large part they would have, if they cared at all, assumed that the slavery that they were selling other Africans into was something approximating their understanding of slavery.

They would not have known that the system that they were aiding in establishing would be then misappropriated to consign their own descendants to the status of indelible genetic second-class global citizens. As we have already discussed the establishment of Brand Black is separate and distinct from Slavery itself. Unlike that old “Love and Marriage” refrain “You can have one without the other”.

So Yes. Africans sold Africans into Slavery BUT did not sell them into the prevailing Global Racial Hierarchy (where Brand Black consigns brehs to the bottom) and that is the biggest problem facing brehs today."
 

Dafunkdoc_Unlimited

Theological Noncognitivist Since Birth
Joined
Jul 25, 2012
Messages
45,063
Reputation
8,154
Daps
122,275
Reppin
The Wrong Side of the Tracks
Waterproof said:
Africans didn't enslaved other Africans they enslaved Hebrews, and The Arabs didn't enslaved African's they Enslaved Hebrews, The Arabs called those who enslaved The People Of The Book the Book they talking about is The Torah

Nonsense. There were over 20 million Africans transported via the Trans-Atlantic and Arabic trades over the course of several centuries so, unless you wish to prove that anything more than an insignificant fraction of them were Hebrews, your entire post is a stretch of imagination (and the truth) created by a charlatan named Rudolph R. Windsor.

Africans enslaved other Africans for millenia.​
 

Samori Toure

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
Apr 23, 2015
Messages
20,286
Reputation
6,285
Daps
100,880
No wheels == no tanks... right. The people who invented wheels are not responsible tor the atrocities committed with tanks.

Knife manufacturers are not responsible for the murders committed with their knives.

Those who originated the worker-employer relationship are not responsible for the modern implementation of it.

Those who sold people into slavery are not responsible for the way that slavery was implemented and/or used.

in short:

The abusers are responsible for their abusing. Forced labor does not automatically include all of the additional abuses
.

-
also:

When you say "slavery" you don't just mean the enslavement of people you mean all the other stuff too.

To quote a wise man,

"Africans however for obvious reasons could not have known or in all likelihood been party to the establishment of Brand Black. First off one would imagine that in large part they would have, if they cared at all, assumed that the slavery that they were selling other Africans into was something approximating their understanding of slavery.

They would not have known that the system that they were aiding in establishing would be then misappropriated to consign their own descendants to the status of indelible genetic second-class global citizens. As we have already discussed the establishment of Brand Black is separate and distinct from Slavery itself. Unlike that old “Love and Marriage” refrain “You can have one without the other”.

So Yes. Africans sold Africans into Slavery BUT did not sell them into the prevailing Global Racial Hierarchy (where Brand Black consigns brehs to the bottom) and that is the biggest problem facing brehs today."

Your argument is getting weaker and weaker. First of all the abuse started in Africa with Africans. Since people did not willing become slaves they meant that people had to be forced into slavery. A typical slave raid involved Africans attacking the villages of other Africans during which time people were injured or killed. The survivors were hauled away chained at their necks and with their hands either tied behind them or to the devices attached to their necks.

People were sold multiple times through middle markets owned by other Africans until they eventually got to the coast. So Africans had other Africans enslaved the whole time as their captives and those captives were not free to leave. So that was slavery in Africa and ultimate sale to the White men at the coast did not place you into slavery for the first time, because Africans had enslaved Africans during the whole process leading up to the sale to the Whites.

That Global Racial Hierarchy nonsense that you are discussing is due to Africans not seeing the big picture and being victims of their own shortsightedness, because they (Africans) were the ones that brought about their own colonization by the Europeans which put them (Africans in Africa) on the bottom of the Global Racial Hierarchy. The absurdity in your whole premise of trying compare human behavior to the manufacture of a product was lost on me.
 

null

...
Joined
Nov 12, 2014
Messages
29,526
Reputation
5,039
Daps
46,758
Reppin
UK, DE, GY, DMV
Your argument is getting weaker and weaker. First of all the abuse started in Africa with Africans. Since people did not willing become slaves they meant that people had to be forced into slavery. A typical slave raid involved Africans attacking the villages of other Africans during which time people were injured or killed. The survivors were hauled away chained at their necks and with their hands either tied behind them or to the devices attached to their necks.

People were sold multiple times through middle markets owned by other Africans until they eventually got to the coast. So Africans had other Africans enslaved the whole time as their captives and those captives were not free to leave. So that was slavery in Africa and ultimate sale to the White men at the coast did not place you into slavery for the first time, because Africans had enslaved Africans during the whole process leading up to the sale to the Whites.

That Global Racial Hierarchy nonsense that you are discussing is due to Africans not seeing the big picture and being victims of their own shortsightedness, because they (Africans) were the ones that brought about their own colonization by the Europeans which put them (Africans in Africa) on the bottom of the Global Racial Hierarchy. The absurdity in your whole premise of trying compare human behavior to the manufacture of a product was lost on me.

Let's try again ..

The Germans were enslaved by the Romans.
The southern Indians were enslaved by the Northern Indians.
The Native Americans were enslaved by the Columbus insurgents.
The Gypsies (Romani) were enslaved by Romanians.
The Brits were enslaved by the Romans.

etc.

The difference between those enslavements and black transatlantic-enslavement is that black transatlantic-enslavement (in addition to scale) was not just "enslavement".

The above listed enslavements are in the past (to varying but significant degrees) because of the small footprint effect that they have on current global life. The Romanian Gypsy who is looked down on in Western Europe can escape this in South America, Canada, Australasia or the Middle East. The native american who has issues in northern America can escape much of this within Europe.

Black enslavement effects are ever-present (everywhere) PRINCIPALLY BECAUSE of the stuff that happened in addition to forced labour. A black man is considered inferior even if his bloodline was never enslaved. That is not because of slavery (forced labour) but because of 400-odd years of the manufacturing of a negative image of all black people done by non-black people. Whites especially and Arabs worked for centuries (and continue to do so) to label all black people as irredeemably genetically compromised.

If we removed the genetic and race concepts from humanity we would be left with the economic consequences of slavery and a clear free way for black people to extricate themselves from it unhindered by the burden of RACISM.

Instead what we have is a system that actively confounds all black people, everywhere on the basis of the additional non-forced labour century-long focus by white scientists, politicians, sociologists, military and religious figures to establish that ALL black people are deserving of their position indelibly because of what we are.That mark from fake science is what means that nations which have had little to nothing to do with the slave-trade itself find themselves trading in this "science", which in turn serves to make the racial hierarchy global and resistant to change.

Unlike economic, cultural or tribal slavery (as evidenced by the fact that past conquerors would often take the women and kill the men), this new European invention was of a more fundamental nature.

Remove that hierarchy and the world would be a very different place, and "slavery" would be far less "with us" than it is. It would no longer be the case that the richest black man could be brought lower than the poorest white man based on the colour of his skin. That stuff that happened to Oprah, Dre, Obama etc would not happen. As a black man your right to a good job, home or a position of authority would not be questioned. If you passed the exams, passed the interview and have the ability you would be as welcomed as anyone else. Unfair trade could no longer hide behind the race-hewn fig-leaf of the widely held and deeply buried assumption of "it is somehow their own fault" and "nothing to do with good old us".

Under those conditions slavery would largely be a matter for economic policy (reparations), remorse/contrition and would begin to recede into history, rather than be the ever-present 24/7 constant thrum of of day-to-day institutional and societal exclusion which blights HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of lives every day (including millions of africans) and which shows little sign of improvement. In fact some might feel it reasonable to suggest that it is getting worse.

The blame for this 24/7 war of psychological, mental, emotional and exclusionary attrition falls squarely at the feet of the people that created it and who propagate it daily, right the way up until today. The fact that they include Africans as targets as well, shows that while it is routinely conflated with the slavery timeline (and effects), in common parlance, it is a separate, larger and supplemental war that didn't have to come along with "forced labour".

While these deeds may have hitched-a-ride on the "forced labour" actions they are not targeted at the group demarcated by those who were in the victims of this "forced labour". It is an all-encompassing attack on all black people, the driver of which in no way shape of form, can be attributed to the black victims of that attack - a group of victims which happens to include africans themselves.

"The absurdity in your whole premise of trying compare human behavior to the manufacture of a product was lost on me."

These definitions might help you:

abetting
enabling

In other words fitting analogies based on these commonalities. I know some have issues with analogical reasoning so ...

"shortsightedness"

Normal human gifts would not enable them to see 400 years into the future.

Gifted as they might have been the concepts of scientific race+racism, genetics etc were probably beyond them (and everyone else on earth) at that point in time.
 
Last edited:
Joined
May 16, 2012
Messages
39,602
Reputation
-17,841
Daps
84,258
Reppin
NULL
Last edited:

Thanos

?
Joined
Nov 21, 2016
Messages
5,445
Reputation
843
Daps
17,280
Reppin
Atlanta
Thread went from Arab Slavery on African people to what about African on African with not much understanding of the nuances. Anyway, it's better discussed on the root.
 
Joined
May 16, 2012
Messages
39,602
Reputation
-17,841
Daps
84,258
Reppin
NULL
Chancellor Willams goes in-depth on the story of tippu tip. He was the son of a an Arab slave trader and a black slave.

Actually both his parents were Arabs. Did you not even read his Wiki page? His mother was from Oman. While his father was a Arab trader on the Swahili coast.

There are a lot of black Arabs in countries like Oman. You can't just assume because they are black they were slaves. That is the white supremacist European way of looking at things. Lot of the black Arabs in the Gulf countries are rich as fukk. Even a couple are crown princes in countries like Kuwait.
 
Joined
May 16, 2012
Messages
39,602
Reputation
-17,841
Daps
84,258
Reppin
NULL
Facts... it’s fukk Arabs for Eternity

The "Arabs" enslaving them are also black. Its no different than the situation between North and South Sudan when the media made it out to be Arab vs Black when it was really Black vs Black (just different ethnicities).

Arab is no different than Hispanic. Its a ethnic group binded by language not race. There are black Hispanics just as there are black Arabs.
 
Top