3 ms·
>Slaves were treated far worse than that. Perhaps like some used trash you were selling to a junkyard. How can you know that? Do you have book references or so
by sirk390 8y ago
>Slaves were treated far worse than that. Perhaps like some used trash you were selling to a junkyard.
How can you know that? Do you have book references or something?
- lostlogin 8y agoThe link gives me this impression. The death rate alone suggests this.
- speleding 8y agoA live slave is worth more than a dead one. These were business men. There is no reason to think that they would be happy to sail all across the ocean only to then throw their cargo overboard before collecting payment. There is no reason to think these slave traders were acting against their own self-interest. Unless you have evidence to the contrary, I assume they simply worked out that providing better accommodations would cost more than the potential return in live slaves.
- lostlogin 8y agoThe practice of killing slaves and claiming the insurance payout was eventually banned, but is exactly what you say didn’t happen. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zong_massacre https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zong_massacre https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Slave_Ship https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Slave_Ship
- speleding 8y agoThose are incidents, and still show that the slave traders are acting in their own self-interest. It is not realistic to think that insurance companies would stand for this if it was standing practice.