I've heard this argument before and as other posters it is a simplistic and inherently flawed argument because as other posters noted it doesn't consider how things might've been in Africa if the slave trade never existed.
Even though its called guess the jew...Daniel Carver is this guy not in disguise. <iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/fboXaOSY9LY" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Sorry, didn't mean to say the arguement is 'valid.' What I meant was I understand their line of logic, but do not agree with it. It's NOT a valid arguement, but I see how dumb people can justify their opinions with that line of reasoning.
Good God...........so many stupid statements made in this thread...idk where to start. Holy **** give me a few minutes.
Okay......I will try to fix this thread that is FUBAR. Let's get a couple of things clear: 1) The poverty you see on the African continent today didn't just happen by chance. That poverty is the direct result of the colonization of the continent by European powers combined with puppet/corrupt leaders in these nations recent past. Contrary to popular belief, the majority of the borders you see drawn on the African continent were not drawn by African people. These borders were drawn by European powers in order to keep them from fighting amongst themselves while they were exploiting the African continent and taking her resources...just like they did her people a few centuries prior. This still happens today, although now it is not as obvious and China is getting in on the act. 2) It is difficult to imagine what the African continent would have looked like if Africans would have been able to defeat colonialism and the idea of Pan-Africanism had existed in the 1600s. Assuming certain ethnic groups and kingdoms hadn't engaged in the trade of outsiders with Europeans, the african population of the continent would be larger than it was when the Europeans came to colonize. Perhaps more technological advances would have been made.....its difficult to say. You have to account for not only those who were shipped away, but also for those who died along the internal slave trading routes and in the dungeons.
Not even sure where to start here......the continent is not in "utter chaos" there are developed and undeveloped regions to be sure but that is to be expected when your dealing with nations that are under 70 years old and under constant outside pressure for their natural resources. Also....assuming the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade never occurred, The Colonization of Africa never happened and the Arabic Slave Trade didn't extend further into the continent to take the place of the other two...there is no telling how the African continent and her people would look today. However, I think its save to assume that had Africa and her people be left to their own devices...we would have been just fine. The same could be said of the First Nation people of the Americas....obviously that did not happen.
"Positive benefits" Think about those words... From slavery, for today's African Americans. IPlease think about what you just said in a worldly context. An anthropoloical context, If you will.
True, perhaps. It's just something that can't be said in today's culture. It's never going to be taken the right way, and that person should have known that. By necessity, you have to amend that argument with, "Whatever benefit African-Americans have from being brought from Africa to the U.S. is negated by the enslavement of an entire population.."- whether it is right that we have to qualify this is for another discussion. But it is what it is- and your assertion is the truth. Then again, as others have said, we have no idea how Africa would have turned out had this not happened. All we know is that the only correct thing to assert is that slavery was, and is, evil.
We have our ancestors to thank for that. Afro-descendants didn't benefit from enslavement......we benefited from our ancestors ability to SURVIVE enslavement. Quite a few Africans committed suicide and infanticide rather than live a life of servitude....however some found a way to live on, fighting constantly and thus making a better way for us. That did not happen because of slavery....that happened DESPITE slavery. Learn and appreciate the difference!
There is nothing true about that assertion because it is speculative and unable to be proven. It depends totally on the idea that in an alternate reality where slavery didn't exist then things in the US and Africa would be the same as they are now so the descendents of those who might've been sold into slavery would exist in the same conditions as Africans today and that the US would be the US of today. Consider that the US development benefited from slave labor so for all we know if slavery didn't exist maybe the US is worse off than Africa in that reality.
I think nobody thinks this guy is right. I also don't think one can say how Africa would look like if foreign powers had not messed with it. If one wants to go there, I guess one could speculate how America would look today if the Indians still ruled the place. Etc. etc. Doesn't make much sense to go there.
If you want to chime in late to the conversation, make sure you read all the comments first. Not going to waste my time repeating what I said and arguing with a troll. Also, take a look at the death rates. Most of the countries with the highest death rate are in Africa. Maybe not chaos, but not paradise either.
and on top of that they would have a stronger educated base here also... Look at the higher education rates between African immigrants and African Americans.
It's also important to note how white governments wrecked, colonized, manipulated, exploited and drained Africa or many of its resources as well.
The idea that all descendants of African slaves would be here if not for slavery is ludicrous. I agree with the idea that the theory being put forth is flawed, but it's flawed because it buys into the fallacy of the predetermined outcome.
So since it is OFTEN brought up that Obama is half white, I wonder which side of Obama (right or left side) benefitted the most? Clearly, being a descendent of a minority is such a huge advantage ...as even brought up by Romney pining that he'd wished his parents were Mexican. Whites in America should be thanking blacks for the service as blacks helped to BUILD this nation. If you take away all blacks from America and remove all the influences and contributions made by blacks, blacks probably wouldn't WANT to live here. America would be a shell of itself. Furthermore, if you removed the negative effects that whites had on Africa, that statement rings even more true. To say that current blacks should be thankful is to say that the man that built his own house with his bare hands should thank the guy that owns the hardwood store that sold him the nails. We are a nation of immigrants. We are one people now. It is impossible to cleanly unwind history in such a manor. Any effort to do so serves no other purpose than to drudge up the worst parts of our history that doesn't even provide any sort of constructive purpose particularly since the point is fully irrelevant. Bigtexxx, let this one go. There is not one portion of this "point" that will make you look better or even neutral. ...not that you care. But fair warning.
