6 ms·
Too bad the text becomes inaccurate and political towards the end.
by coffeeblack 4y ago
Too bad the text becomes inaccurate and political towards the end.
- Veen 4y agoIt's somewhat odd that the article addresses slavery without mentioning that Mansa Musa owned many thousands of slaves and that slavery was prevalent in West and Central Africa during the Medieval, pre-Colonial period.
- coffeeblack 4y agoNeither it mentions the extensive slave trade with North Africa and Arabia, only the gold trade. Also telling that my criticism in that regard was immediately downvoted.
- truculent 4y agoI would suggest that he downvotes have as much to do with the lack of elaboration or supporting argument as the judgement itself.
- coffeeblack 4y agoTrue. I found it so obvious that I didn’t see a reason to point it out explicitly.
- autopilot23 4y agoSlavery existed in every region of the world. This does not negate the destructive affects the Atlantic slave trade had on the continent, its kingdoms and resources. The article did not argue that "Slavery didn't exist under pre-Colonial rule". Side point, it's always funny to me how a lot of Westerns are hesitant to admit that African societies in Pre-Colonial times had history, science, culture, etc. just as any other society, but very eager to exclaim that they had slavery. It's also as if the existence of slavery does not require a certain type of social organization to have been already developed, which then they claim Africans didn't have.
- Veen 4y ago> Slavery existed in every region of the world. This is perhaps a provocative point, but legal slavery has not existed in England for about 900 years. The rest of your points are an irrelevant and inaccurate response to my comment, so I won't address them.
- vanattab 4y agoI mean they called them indentured surfs but I am not sure it was much different. Also the British were the main actors in the slave trade until 1800s
- arrosenberg 4y agoI suppose, technically, Ireland isn’t in England. Feels like a distinction without a difference.
- Veen 4y agoNo one who lives in either place would consider it a distinction without a difference. Ireland abolished slavey in 1171, although, like the English, they were involved in the Atlantic slave trade.
- arrosenberg 4y agoI’m referring to the plantations of Ulster. You know, the place where the world plantation got its current context.
- Veen 4y agoIt’s not surprising I didn’t get the reference: there was no slavery on the Ulster plantation. That was about Protestant colonisation. The local Gaelic Catholics were displaced by Scottish and English colonists, not enslaved. Plantation implies slavery in the US, but not everywhere.
- notright 4y ago
- andrepd 4y agoWhat exactly is the part that offended you? I can't see anything particularly "political". You're probably being down voted for that, for vague shit-stirring rather than a concrete discussion.
- coffeeblack 4y ago
- ajdude 4y agoNot everyone may find it obvious. Additionally, not elaborating puts the weight on commenters of your post to guess on what you were bringing up to address it.