In general, the countries that abolished slavery first tended to be white majority countries.
WHITE POWER! God bless Western Civilization!
Something I realized
Posts
Total:
18
Slavery is legal in China.
Also, white countries still exploit poor countries.
Slavery was never abolished anywhere, by the way.
Parents still assume that they own their children, and many countries will forcefully conscript you to fight in war.
53 days later
To state the obvious, it was a coincidence.In general, the countries that abolished slavery first tended to be white majority countries.WHITE POWER! God bless Western Civilization!
Yes, thanks to the philosophers. They did this, and there was improvements in India and the far east under the influence of... more philosophers.
It's almost like ethics is a branch of philosophy and people behave more ethically when they actually think about ethics.
Also, what slavery means in different cultures isn't the same thing. For example, in the Ottoman empire being a Janissary (IE a slave soldier) was a desirable profession. They were well paid, well taken care, of and had real possibilities for career advancement. In some descriptions, parents sold their children into slavery as Janissaries willingly because it was a better life. I don't know if I buy that, but just to highlight that it wasn't some horrible fate. And it was absolutely nothing like what white people were doing.
So banning of slavery in other countries doesn't have the same meaning as it does for those white countries. Because the white countries were whipping their slaves to death to make them work harder. Other countries' versions of slavery didn't really do that. Chattel slavery is mostly a white person thing.
-->
@HistoryBuff
just to highlight that it wasn't some horrible fate
Now if you pointed out that some American slaves freed themselves, and then bought slaves... would that be slavery apologetics? What about the fact that some were paid?
So stop apologizing for slavery in the ottoman empire.
You know the arab empires castrated their black slaves right? Also turks are pretty light skinned.And it was absolutely nothing like what white people were doing.
Because the white countries were whipping their slaves to death to make them work harder. Other countries' versions of slavery didn't really do that.
You're nuts. (whipping to death was rare everywhere and there were plenty of slaves worked to death outside of Europe & colonies)
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
Now if you pointed out that some American slaves freed themselves, and then bought slaves... would that be slavery apologetics? What about the fact that some were paid?
my point was that the form of slavery used by white people was horrifying and much, much worse than the forms other cultures used.
So stop apologizing for slavery in the ottoman empire.
i'm not. Slavery is bad. Full stop. The form of slavery used by white people is the absolute worst form of slavery ever conceived. It was many times worse than the forms used by other cultures.
You know the arab empires castrated their black slaves right? Also turks are pretty light skinned.
I'm not really seeing how this connects to my point. Read a little about how slaves were treated in places like Haiti or the belgian congo. Nothing in the rest of the world compares to the horror of what was done to slaves in "western" countries.
You're nuts. (whipping to death was rare everywhere and there were plenty of slaves worked to death outside of Europe & colonies)
you may want to learn more about slavery, because no it was not. Maybe it was in the specific area you are thinking of. Most americans only think about slavery in terms of cotton fields, so i'm guessing that is what you are thinking of. But read a bit about other places white people colonized too. Haiti and the Belgian congo are some of the worse examples. And maiming, beating slaves to death and just random murders of slaves were not uncommon in these places.
-->
@HistoryBuff
Now if you pointed out that some American slaves freed themselves, and then bought slaves... would that be slavery apologetics? What about the fact that some were paid?my point was that the form of slavery used by white people was horrifying and much, much worse than the forms other cultures used.
That's bullshit.
The cruelest slavery has always been and still is west and north African slavery. The cruelty of colonial American slavery (including the Spanish, and Portuguese colonies) was imported from there where the slaves came from.
That cruelty was heavily attenuated by European sensibilities and the christian emphasis on universal love.
The slavery of classical European civilizations was far less cruel and more comparable to the slavery in India and China. The 'slavery' of medieval Europe was so regulated as to make it reasonable to deny it was slavery (serfs and indentured servants).
Any practice in any civilization will show a range of degree across any measurable quantity and the same is true of slavery. The worst of the slavery in the united states is of course worse than the best slavery in west Africa or the arab empires, but it's not worse than the worst of those regions.
The average experience of the American slave is not even close to being "whipped to death". Most went years without being whipped and many were never whipped, not because their master didn't have a legal right but because it takes a certain structure of diffused responsibility, short sighted ambition, or psychopathy to think whipping someone repeatedly is the best way to get productivity out of them. In other words a giant plantation where the whipping is to put fear into the others and the master imported especially cruel men to do the dirty work.
When John Brown offered American slaves rifles they did not take them. He did not expect that. Did he underestimate their fear or overestimate their dissatisfaction?
The evil in slavery is in the deprivation of the objective right to liberty. Cruelty has got nothing to do with that, but by comparing cruelty (and being wrong on it to boot) you obscure that fact.
You know the arab empires castrated their black slaves right? Also turks are pretty light skinned.I'm not really seeing how this connects to my point.
Castration is cruel.
Nothing in the rest of the world compares to the horror of what was done to slaves in "western" countries.
In the houses of wealthy citizens, it is not unusual to find twenty to thirty slaves attending upon a family. Even citizens in the humbler walks of life deem it necessary to have each a slave or two. The price of a slave varies, of course, according to age, health, strength, and general appearance. The average price is from fifty to one hundred dollars, but in time of war, or revolution, poor parents, on the verge of starvation, offer their sons and daughters for sale at remarkably low prices. I remember instances of parents, rendered destitute by the marauding bands who invested the two southern Kwangs in 1854–55, offering to sell their daughters in Canton for five dollars apiece. ...
The slavery to which these unfortunate persons are subject, is perpetual and hereditary, and they have no parental authority over their offspring. The great-grandsons of slaves, however, can, if they have sufficient means, purchase their freedom. ...
Masters seem to have the same uncontrolled power over their slaves that parents have over their children. Thus a master is not called to account for the death of a slave, although it is the result of punishment inflicted by him.
In former times slaves were slain and offered in sacrifice to the spirit of the owner when dead, or by him to his ancestors: sometimes given as a substitute to suffer the death penalty incurred by his owner or in fulfilment of a vow. It used to be customary in Kuei-chou (and Szü-chuan too, I believe) to inter living slaves with their dead owners; the slaves were to keep a lamp burning in the tomb....
During the millennium long Chinese domination of Vietnam, Vietnam was a large source of slave girls who were used as sex slaves in China.
Could keep going on like that for dozens of pages.
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
The cruelest slavery has always been and still is west and north African slavery. The cruelty of colonial American slavery (including the Spanish, and Portuguese colonies) was imported from there where the slaves came from.
where did you get this idea from? It is absolutely not true.
That cruelty was heavily attenuated by European sensibilities and the christian emphasis on universal love.
what?!?!?! Europeans absolutely did not have sensibilities of Universal love. Anyone with even a passing understanding of History would know that.
The 'slavery' of medieval Europe was so regulated as to make it reasonable to deny it was slavery (serfs and indentured servants).
serfdom isn't slavery. The people were not owned. They were not property. They were certainly treated like crap, but they were not the property of their lord.
The worst of the slavery in the united states is of course worse than the best slavery in west Africa or the arab empires, but it's not worse than the worst of those regions.
This is objectively not true. The worst of slavery in the United states isn't as bad as other European colonies like Haiti or the Belgian congo, but it is still just as brutal as anything africans ever did.
Castration is cruel.
I never said it wasn't. I said that Europeans were worse. Again, read about Haiti and then tell me that isn't worse.
Nothing in the rest of the world compares to the horror of what was done to slaves in "western" countries.
I was talking about slavery, you then brought up war. Those are completely different topics and shows that you either don't take this conversation seriously, or you know your point is so weak that you need to move the goalposts.
Could keep going on like that for dozens of pages.
Again, I never said slavery in other places was fun. But you didn't show me anything worse than what Europeans did. Europeans were much worse. Again, read about Haiti or the belgian congo and then come back and show me what is worse than that. You're talking about dehumanizing people. That's bad. In haiti, field slaves were treated worse than animals.
The cruelest slavery has always been and still is west and north African slavery. The cruelty of colonial American slavery (including the Spanish, and Portuguese colonies) was imported from there where the slaves came from.where did you get this idea from?
General impression of original sources.
That cruelty was heavily attenuated by European sensibilities and the christian emphasis on universal love.what?!?!?! Europeans absolutely did not have sensibilities of Universal love. Anyone with even a passing understanding of History would know that.
Universal love is from Christianity not Europe. It just so happened that Europeans were Christians at the time they adopted chattel slavery from Africa.
The 'slavery' of medieval Europe was so regulated as to make it reasonable to deny it was slavery (serfs and indentured servants).serfdom isn't slavery.
See what I mean.
The people were not owned. They were not property. They were certainly treated like crap, but they were not the property of their lord.
What is ownership? Lords could transfer lands and serfs were attached to the land. Serfs were bound to obedience and to productivity and there were severe punishments for those who flaunted their purported duties. Still the argument that they were not slaves is that it was not a crime (for most of the period) to leave if you're willing to abandon everything but the clothes on your back.
The worst of the slavery in the united states is of course worse than the best slavery in west Africa or the arab empires, but it's not worse than the worst of those regions.This is objectively not true.
Then find your worst and I'll find my worst.
The worst of slavery in the United states isn't as bad as other European colonies like Haiti or the Belgian congo, but it is still just as brutal as anything africans ever did.
If it was in the Congo there is an excellent chance it was africans doing it. You don't get to attribute a race (or culture group) with special cruelty because a few benefited from ongoing cruelty outside their group.
Castration is cruel.I never said it wasn't. I said that Europeans were worse.
If they were worse why is there an especially cruel practice Europeans never engaged in?
I was talking about slavery, you then brought up war.
You think there wasn't war in Haiti?
Those are completely different topics and shows that you either don't take this conversation seriously, or you know your point is so weak that you need to move the goalposts.
That you ignored the quotes from the second link shows that you don't take this conversation seriously or you know your point is so weak that you need to ignore counterexamples.
Could keep going on like that for dozens of pages.Again, I never said slavery in other places was fun.
You said it was better.
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
General impression of original sources.
so you pulled it out of your ass, gotcha.
Universal love is from Christianity not Europe. It just so happened that Europeans were Christians at the time they adopted chattel slavery from Africa.
Christianity is supposed to be about universal love. It literally never is. From the crusades to the Spanish inquisition, Christianity has always been about blood, conquest and submission to authority.
serfdom isn't slavery.See what I mean.
that you don't understand what the word slave means? Yes I see what you mean.
What is ownership?
owner ship means that it is your personal property. You can sell it or buy it whenever you want.
Lords could transfer lands and serfs were attached to the land. Serfs were bound to obedience and to productivity and there were severe punishments for those who flaunted their purported duties.
correct. The land was property. The people were not. You have correctly identified what made them not slaves. And workers have always been bound to obedience to others and punished if they weren't productive. You could describe modern workers in much the same way, like when amazon workers have to pee in bottles or get fired.
f it was in the Congo there is an excellent chance it was africans doing it.
jesus, you can't be this dense. Belgian congo. You really think that name means africans are running the show? It was the personal property of the king of belgium. Then when his cruelty disgusted even slavers, the belgian government had to take it away from him.
If they were worse why is there an especially cruel practice Europeans never engaged in?
I'm sorry, how is that "especially cruel" but the dismembering Europeans did isn't?
I was talking about slavery, you then brought up war.You think there wasn't war in Haiti?
I mean, once the slaves fought back against the Europeans, yeah of course there was. But we were discussing slavery. You brought up war out of the blue.
Could keep going on like that for dozens of pages.Again, I never said slavery in other places was fun.You said it was better.
I said it was less terrible. And nothing you have described is as bad as what white people did to their slaves. If you choose to interpret that as "better" that's on you, not me.
-->
@HistoryBuff
Universal love is from Christianity not Europe. It just so happened that Europeans were Christians at the time they adopted chattel slavery from Africa.
Mother Theresa? That priest who claimed the natives (on Haiti) were being mistreated?
See if you were the rational one, you wouldn't make absolute categorical statements that are so easily disproved.
And workers have always been bound to obedience to others and punished if they weren't productive.
Punished by ceasing trade. That is not what I'm referring to.
You could describe modern workers in much the same way, like when amazon workers have to pee in bottles or get fired.
Getting fired is the cessation of trade. Amazon doesn't own the apartment and can't publicly shame the worker in a stockade.
You really think that name means africans are running the show?
I think there is an excellent chance the the overseers whipping people are natives.
Then when his cruelty disgusted even slavers, the belgian government had to take it away from him.
Those European sensibilities I talked about.
If they were worse why is there an especially cruel practice Europeans never engaged in?I'm sorry, how is that "especially cruel" but the dismembering Europeans did isn't?
There was never a widespread practice of dismembering anyone in Europe or European colonies. Castration of slaves was widespread in Arab empires. The worst of the ottoman empire was abducting and endlessly raping christian boys but I didn't mention that because it was not wide spread.
You brought up war out of the blue.
The actions of the mongols include what they did after they won the war. It wasn't good.
Could keep going on like that for dozens of pages.Again, I never said slavery in other places was fun.You said it was better.I said it was less terrible.
Which is better.
And nothing you have described is as bad as what white people did to their slaves.
Death, rape, starvation, mutilation. Can't get much worse.
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
Mother Theresa? That priest who claimed the natives (on Haiti) were being mistreated?
mother theresa pretty famously believed that suffering was important to get into heaven. She certainly didn't have universal love. "That priest" that I am assuming you are talking about was 1st a conquistador that helped to slaughter the local inhabitants of Hispaniola. for his service in slaughtering them, he was rewarded with land and slaves. And he profited off of their suffering for years before finally deciding that it was wrong. Slaughtering the locals and enslaving them wasn't very "universal love" of him.
See if you were the rational one, you wouldn't make absolute categorical statements that are so easily disproved.
lol you "disproved" it by showing 2 people who did terrible things but also did some good things. That doesn't prove what you seem to think it does.
Getting fired is the cessation of trade. Amazon doesn't own the apartment and can't publicly shame the worker in a stockade.
no, they can fire them and force them into poverty where they could lose their home, their family etc. The wealthy have found better ways to force the poor into doing their bidding.
I think there is an excellent chance the the overseers whipping people are natives.
Even if that were true, what would that prove? White people ordered terrible things, and then terrible things were done. You think the white people aren't monsters in this scenario?
Those European sensibilities I talked about.
lol. A european slaver was so evil that other European slavers (who were killing slaves too) were disgusted by it. Just because there are lesser evils and greater evils among european slavers does not make the european slavers less evil.
There was never a widespread practice of dismembering anyone in Europe or European colonies.
again, read about haiti. You keep saying things that aren't true.
-->
@HistoryBuff
Mother Theresa? That priest who claimed the natives (on Haiti) were being mistreated?mother theresa pretty famously believed that suffering was important to get into heaven. She certainly didn't have universal love.
Famously to propagandists. She helped a lot of people who couldn't give her anything in return.
"That priest" that I am assuming you are talking about was 1st a conquistador that helped to slaughter the local inhabitants of Hispaniola.
let me guess, your ass?
lol you "disproved" it by showing 2 people who did terrible things but also did some good things.
You just said that mother Theresa did terrible things. You know I'm never ever going to let you forget that right?
I think there is an excellent chance the the overseers whipping people are natives.Even if that were true, what would that prove?
That the worst of slavery was born of west african culture like I said.
White people ordered terrible things, and then terrible things were done.
I doubt the king of the netherlands (or whatever) was sending letters "whip them harder". Much more likely "make more product" and in the last 2 or 3 layers that translated to cruelty in the minds of cruel people from a cruel culture.
You think the white people aren't monsters in this scenario?
I think you're a million miles away from proving a relative racial predisposition to cruelty in slavery or anything else.
Just because there are lesser evils and greater evils among european slavers does not make the european slavers less evil.
The fact that European civilization was the first to insist on liberty makes it less evil than civilizations which did not.
There was never a widespread practice of dismembering anyone in Europe or European colonies.again, read about haiti.
Give me an original source.
"That priest" that I am assuming you are talking about was 1st a conquistador that helped to slaughter the local inhabitants of Hispaniola.let me guess, your ass?
what? That wasn't a response to what I said. I assume you are referring to Bartolomé de Las Casas. He was a spanish priest who was against slavery. He also was a soldier that invaded the Caribbean and took part in the slaughter and enslaving of the locals. He owned lots of slaves himself before changing his mind.
You just said that mother Theresa did terrible things. You know I'm never ever going to let you forget that right?
google mother teresa controversies. She did terrible things.
That the worst of slavery was born of west african culture like I said.
let me get this straight. If a white person order terrible things to be done, and the person who carried out the order happened to be african, then africans are terrible and the white man ordering it is innocent? What is wrong with you?
I doubt the king of the netherlands (or whatever) was sending letters "whip them harder". Much more likely "make more product" and in the last 2 or 3 layers that translated to cruelty in the minds of cruel people from a cruel culture.
you know, google is a thing. You could actually look up the terrible, terrible things the white people did in the congo instead of talking out of your ass.
I think you're a million miles away from proving a relative racial predisposition to cruelty in slavery or anything else.
when did I say there was a racial predisposition to cruelty. I said Europeans were the worst. They were the cruelest. I didn't say being white made them that way. You really see everything in racial terms don't you?
-->
@HistoryBuff
"That priest" that I am assuming you are talking about was 1st a conquistador that helped to slaughter the local inhabitants of Hispaniola.let me guess, your ass?what? That wasn't a response to what I said. I assume you are referring to Bartolomé de Las Casas.
You just said that mother Theresa did terrible things. You know I'm never ever going to let you forget that right?google mother teresa controversies. She did terrible things.
Digging the hole deeper.
That the worst of slavery was born of west african culture like I said.let me get this straight. If a white person order terrible things to be done, and the person who carried out the order happened to be african, then africans are terrible and the white man ordering it is innocent? What is wrong with you?
What's wrong with me is that I'm rational and I live in a world full of people like you who would setup obvious strawmen and red herrings because they can't defend their assertions.
I said nothing about anyone being innocent of anything.
You've passed the point where my patience allows for further correction. Read again, if you have a more intelligent/honest response I'll consider it.
I think you're a million miles away from proving a relative racial predisposition to cruelty in slavery or anything else.when did I say there was a racial predisposition to cruelty. I said Europeans were the worst.
Post #6:
it wasn't some horrible fate. And it was absolutely nothing like what white people were doing.
You didn't say "Europeans" I said Europeans because "white people" is a race and thus a useless category.
You were racist, I shifted the context to be not-racist (by talking about culture groups and not genetic groups).
You really see everything in racial terms don't you?
Confession by projection.
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
google mother teresa controversies. She did terrible things.Digging the hole deeper.
clearly you are too lazy to google the things she did.
I said nothing about anyone being innocent of anything.
how do you figure? I said that the white people running a slave colony did and ordered terrible things. Your response was essentially "I bet black people carried it out cause they're bad". You want slavery and the atrocities Europeans committed to be the fault of black people.
when did I say there was a racial predisposition to cruelty. I said Europeans were the worst.Post #6:
lol. You think "chatel slavery was a white person thing" is talking about racial predisposition? That is not at all what I said. I said white people did a thing and you interpret that as "white people are genetically predisposed to doing a thing". You're the only one bringing up genetics.
You were racist, I shifted the context to be not-racist (by talking about culture groups and not genetic groups).
man, pretty much your whole post here is wildly racist. How you could possibly think you were shifting away from racism is beyond me. Your whole point is that it was the evil black people who tricked the kind, loving white people into enslaving and murdering them.
You really see everything in racial terms don't you?Confession by projection.
nope. Just calling out your obvious racism.
clearly you are too lazy to google the things she did.
Clearly you're afraid to make any claims knowing they will have extremely flimsy evidence.
I said that the white people running a slave colony did and ordered terrible things.
and I said that the same kinds (if not worse) terrible things were already common place in west/central Africa, and further implied that it was plausible that the europeans ordered less terrible things that were used to justify more terrible things by the especially cruel slaver drivers of the region (who were locals) because the locals had an especially cruel form of slavery normalized in their culture.
You want slavery and the atrocities Europeans committed to be the fault of black people.
I don't recognize a moral actor called "black people", I'm just pointing out your racist assertions are wrong on but one of the many levels they are wrong on.
You think "chatel slavery was a white person thing" is talking about racial predisposition?
Yes, that is what referencing a race means. If you say "watermelons are a black person thing" you're making a racial statement. If you don't want to make a racial statement locate the subject of your sentence and make sure it isn't a race.
That is not at all what I said.
Unfortunately for you, you can't edit it away on this site: https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/10231/posts/426488
Chattel slavery is mostly a white person thing.
It's precisely what you said. Ctrl-F.
man, pretty much your whole post here is wildly racist.
Said the racist.
How you could possibly think you were shifting away from racism is beyond me.
Europe is a region. European can refer to populations and to culture groups and one can talk about the merits of europeans and european culture without making an association with race. "White" (as stupid as the word is for indoeuropean genetics) refers to race.
Your whole point is that it was the evil black people who tricked the kind, loving white people into enslaving and murdering them.
No that is the mirror of your point within the domain of racist ideology. I am not racist and have not made any points within the racist ideology. You only perceive that to be the point because you are trapped in the racist ideology.