Is This a Fair Comparison

Racist???
Now this is Str8 Comedy

Rocket River
I'm out of this thread

 

I think you all are underestimating the deaths that occurred during the middle passage, but I haven't been able to find a diffinitive link or article that can give an accurate number. I've seen some places say 1 to 2 million while others say 12 to 15 million and others say it's immeasureable.

However, if you think about it, the slave trade amassed over 200 years (lets say ... 1600s to 1800s). If it were correct that 1 million died in that time span, then thats saying that 5000 slaves died per year. If you say that atleast 10 boats carried slaves per year then that would mean only 500 died per boat. From everything I've ever learned, read and/or heard that figure seems entirely too small and this is a low estimate, because I almost positive more than ten boats traveled with slaves per year.

I'd go on to say that the number is MUCH higher than 1 million just from the fact that the period of time that the slave trade happened was soooo long. I could fathom a figure of 6 to 8 million just on these few assumptions made above.

Just a little something to think about. What do you guys think?

 

This might sound horrible, but I personally feel that decendants of slaves today may be better off than if they had stayed in Africa. I have been to areas in Africa and have seen the most deplorable conditions of anywhere I have been to in the world.

At least those in the US are citizens, have rights such as a free education, the right to vote as well as the civil liberties and lifestyle associated with that of the USA.

Infant mortality, disease and famine are rampant along with violence and chaos in many of the African nations. Versus in the US we are blessed with freedoms (after much work for it), many social services and a vibrant economy that allows those who wish to work and profit to do so.

I in no way believe slavery was right. It was a horrible, despicable action that should be seen as a scar on our beloved nation, but I truly feel that the decendants "today" are better off than if their ancestors wouldn't have been slaves and had remained in Africa.

Just in the same instance that if my family had not come here, then I would not be as fortunate.

Instead of harboring on the past, lets look at the positives that decendants of slaves recieve by being US citizens.

 

We don't diminish kidnapping and murder by saying the descendants of the kidnapped and murdered are better off with their new surroundings. As your family members had the ability to choose where to live so too could Africans make the decision to move to the United States on their own. These people would have been better off being able to make their own choices as with everyone else who comes to this country, then they would have a history, an identity, and a culture not affected by such a crime.

 

I agree with this post. I wonder what people in Africa would say about African-Americans' life in America. Probably would be extremely jealous and would give anything for it.

 

This is very true.

My aunt works for the state department and is currently in Nairobi, Kenya overseeing their immigration practices and tells me that people over there will do anything to get to the US.

They offer every penny they have, they offer their lives in forfeit for their families ability to come to the US and anything to get out of the deplorable conditions in Africa.


Timing,

I agree that it was a wrong action. It was dispicable and brutal. But because of that, the decendants are recieving a benefit that many would die for their families to have.

And its not that easy to just make the choice to come over here. If we opened the flood gates, 90% of that continent would be over here in a heartbeat. This country is a melting pot and the idea that culture and such was lost is a situation that every immigrant population goes through whether you are Irish, African or South American.

I'm sure many in Africa would give up many traditions in order to not starve to death or live in disease and chaos.

 

Lots of interesting stuff; too bad I missed a day.

I'd say you're right in a way, but wrong in several others. One, the deplorable condition of modern Africa is partly due to the imperialism of the last several centuries -- the same imperialism that created the slave trade in the first place. Hypothetically removing that condition may put Africa in a much better place in the modern world. Two, I think that such an statement ignores the status of an individual within his society. In Africa, a black man can be respected or privileged or influential within his country even if he is poor compared to Americans. But, in the States, a black man can have air conditioning, a high school education, and money to blow every Friday night and still not have the respect of his society. I don't think that respect should be discounted. Three, the standard of living here, even among blacks, is better than most of the world, but can you really say it is "worth it" to go through generations of slavery so that your descendants can some day eventually have nice things? Some day, Africans will have all the things we have today; should they just gut it out for now and it'll be worth it in the end?

rfw2, I won't bet my life on the numbers I quoted. I did a little digging and found a couple of reputable-looking sources quoting those numbers. I don't know if those are right. They might be too low. My wife doesn't think they are right either.

Lil Pun, one thing I think you need to define better is what and whose indentured servitude are you talking about. I think about the Latin American context of it, but it is something many societies have practiced. I'm sure some were more voluntary than others.

FranchiseBlade, I don't know what you mean. I understand that slaves destined to the Americas were targetted because they were black, but they weren't enslaved 'as a group.' Many Africans were not enslaved. I don't see how Portugese slavers raiding the African coast is much different from Moors raiding the Mediterrranean coasts. People enslaved 'as a group' I would think would include groups like the Helots in the Greek world or the Jews in Egyptian captivity.

 

TJ tattled again.

 

I understand your point I just disagree. African culture wasn't lost but rather it was forcefully whitewashed. Immigrants certainly become "Americanized" in time but that's not exactly the case here. The severity of the problems in the African-American community largely stem from slavery and the ongoing racism resulting from that situation. An African made a slave who's descendants endure the resulting American experience may very well benefit from American prosperity but he hasn't so much given up traditions as given up his identity, self-respect, and even a part of his soul. In a way boarding a rudderless, flagless ship without a past and without a destination. I think you underestimate the price being paid for American prosperity and whether or not it's really worth it.

 

Or it may have put them in a worse place, or in the same place. There isn't really a good reason to believe they'd be better off. And this really doesn't have anything to do with whether or not African-AMERICANS are better off or not. Had we not had slaves here, imperialist colonialism still would have existed there. America didn't have colonies there.

Potentially true. But in Africa they would be more likely to have no respect/influence if they are a member of a certain tribe/religion than they are here in the US. But you're also ignoring the non-A/C benefits of the US over Africa where AIDS and other disease, civil and religious strife, genocide, famine and other horrid conditions abound.

Its not like there was a choice. It happened. Now the question is are they better off or not. There are substantial arguments that they are. No one is justifying slavery or saying was a good thing. As for sacrificing for future generations, ask the Chinese or the Irish or any number of other group that suffered intolerable conditions so their future generations could eventually have nice things, and I think their answer will be 'yes, it was worth it.'

 

This is kind of off a little, but I have a question.

American schools and society try to teach history and teach the mistakes of the past. That is why everybody from a young age is taught about slavery and that it was wrong...so we don't repeat the mistakes of our past...yada yada yada.

OK..

So do African nations teach the same evil they commited in their countries? I mean...MOST slaves were sold into slavery originally, by other Africans...to slave traders. Warring tribes would sell their prisoners, they would sell their criminals, and the such.

The traders procured the slaves from Africans more often than not. Do these African nations recognize their own sins against their own countrymen that originally took a free individual, captured him or her, and sold him or her to a trader from across the ocean???

Just wondering?

 

I wanted to avoid this topic because I really don't like getting into any debate on slavery, but I think you raise an interesting point. It wasn't like Euros were going deep into Africa to capture slaves, they had coastal tribes doing it for them. Of course, you have to have a market to engage in commercial activity, thus putting the majority of blame on the Europeans who trafficked in slaves, but without the help of the native African tribes who waged war purely to capture slaves, it would not have been possible.

A little off the subject, I saw a documentary on the History Channel, with James Woods hosting about the slave trade. They brought up that rum and guns were often exchanged for slaves, so they made the point that the slaves working the sugar cane fields were in fact working to give the Europeans money to enslave more of their people. I think that is horrifically ironic.

 

Doubtful. But that's not surprising. Our own coverage of topics like treatment of Indians, etc are hardly balanced, although the versions swing wildly from one side to the other.