Quantcast

Wasn't slavery in Africa more humane than slavery in America?

The 1

General Manager
BANNED
Joined
Dec 26, 2012
Messages
1,544
Reaction score
Reactions
161 10 16
145
Alleybux
0
Africa experts help me out here!

Every time a white folk goes ' well black folk enslaved each other too!', my blood boils! I've done some research and slavery in Africa was completely different, the slaves were more like 'servants' and they could pay their freedom. So why do these ignorant folk continue to try to compare apples and oranges?

None of that White America style slavery (using black babies as crocodile bait etc)

Enlighten me! :glasses-nerdy:


To add: I'm referring to black slavery not Arab, I know they were very violent
 

CountingStars

Being Mad Because You’re a Gangstalker is Weird
Joined
Aug 30, 2012
Messages
17,241
Reaction score
Reactions
65,516 2,461 2,096
64,981
Alleybux
192,256
Prisoners of war
Indentured servants
Extended family/others taken in

Could start there.
 

Eddie Burke

Donkey Killer
Joined
Aug 29, 2012
Messages
13,966
Reaction score
Reactions
5,566 847 2,459
1,416
Alleybux
29,795
Gotta love the "this oppression was worse than that oppression" debates that usually spring up. I don't think slaves were castrated on a large scale in America, though.
 

AMIRI BARAKA

General Manager
Joined
May 25, 2013
Messages
2,245
Reaction score
Reactions
138 14 8
130
Alleybux
350
For the most part, yes. However, it varied along cultures. The worst system of slavery was in South America.
 

AMIRI BARAKA

General Manager
Joined
May 25, 2013
Messages
2,245
Reaction score
Reactions
138 14 8
130
Alleybux
350
Gotta love the "this oppression was worse than that oppression" debates that usually spring up. I don't think slaves were castrated on a large scale in America, though.
Beside trolling this board, what do you do for fun? You did not answer the question and only posted to collect your groans and negative reps. Also, they did not castrate because doing to would be expensive. It's cheaper to rape or breed slaves than to hop on a boat and kidnap and buy some more on another continent.
 

The 1

General Manager
BANNED
Joined
Dec 26, 2012
Messages
1,544
Reaction score
Reactions
161 10 16
145
Alleybux
0
Gotta love the "this oppression was worse than that oppression" debates that usually spring up. I don't think slaves were castrated on a large scale in America, though.

Being a servant with the opportunity of being able to pay for your freedom is OBVIOUSLY better than being a slave for life (and your children, and their children etc), abused, raped and forced to work 24/7!

I'm guessing this topic is hitting a nerve? :laugh:
 

GangstaBoo

From the Streetz to the Altar! I DID IT!
Benched
Joined
Aug 22, 2012
Messages
31,507
Reaction score
Reactions
103,352 7,611 15,354
95,610
Alleybux
175,235
They were able to keep their identity
Keep their bloodline
See their family
Treated as human beings instead of less than an animal.
 

Eddie Burke

Donkey Killer
Joined
Aug 29, 2012
Messages
13,966
Reaction score
Reactions
5,566 847 2,459
1,416
Alleybux
29,795
The poster claims slaves couldn't buy their freedom in America. Majority of slave women weren't raped, the bulk of interracial affairs were in the city when white females were close to nonexistent in the early years. Read a book, damn.
 

enchanted

Fall is Beautiful
OLDHEAD
Joined
Feb 10, 2006
Messages
88,076
Reaction score
Reactions
345,871 13,203 10,054
377,405
Alleybux
2
This is a dumb ass thread. Seriously. It really is. :no:

Slavery EVERYWHERE was INHUMANE. Da fµck???? :curse:
 

arubiana

General Manager
Joined
Aug 19, 2009
Messages
4,022
Reaction score
Reactions
11,685 293 76
12,018
Alleybux
40,871
If you're serious you'd probably want to look up war customs of African tribes.
From what I know, slaves all over the world, African masters or not slaves are always treated as less than human.
 

0000000000

Team Owner
BANNED
Joined
Jul 24, 2007
Messages
6,441
Reaction score
Reactions
7,581 5 25
7,556
Alleybux
0
Prisoners of war
Indentured servants
Extended family/others taken in

Could start there.

Without going into detail, ^^^what she said. That pretty much perfectly sums it up.

They were hardly treated like slaves.
 

AMIRI BARAKA

General Manager
Joined
May 25, 2013
Messages
2,245
Reaction score
Reactions
138 14 8
130
Alleybux
350
Without going into detail, ^^^what she said. That pretty much perfectly sums it up.

They were hardly treated like slaves.
Well, they were definitely treated like slaves as the lowest social class who were not paid for their labor and thought of as property, but they were still a social class = human being.
 

Gentle Soul

Pure Heart
Joined
Dec 22, 2012
Messages
1,912
Reaction score
Reactions
187 3 9
178
Alleybux
0
Africa experts help me out here!

Every time a white folk goes ' well black folk enslaved each other too!', my blood boils! I've done some research and slavery in Africa was completely different, the slaves were more like 'servants' and they could pay their freedom. So why do these ignorant folk continue to try to compare apples and oranges?

None of that White America style slavery (using black babies as crocodile bait etc)

Enlighten me! :glasses-nerdy:


To add: I'm referring to black slavery not Arab, I know they were very violent
Idk about slaves in Africa but slavery as a whole pisses me off for the simple fact that, that's where a lot African Americans issues stem from. What I don't understand is the called black people ignorant yet they stole land and thought that because someone was a different color they weren't human or were made to be slaves. Like wtf?!!
 

0000000000

Team Owner
BANNED
Joined
Jul 24, 2007
Messages
6,441
Reaction score
Reactions
7,581 5 25
7,556
Alleybux
0
Well, they were definitely treated like slaves as the lowest social class who were not paid for their labor and thought of as property, but they were still a social class = human being.

No.

What text or source do you have to support this? I know my history extremely well, pre and post-colonial. I know the number of slaves sold by my ancestral village's local government, what they were sold in exchange for, the reasons done so for supporting this, and the conflicts and continual wars started against Britain after following their slavery opposition.

None of the slaves were treated as property and were thought of as extended relatives. They blended into their holder's village life very well but still retained a strong sense of their original identity.

Don't perpetuate the nonsense that Africans were being thought of the lowest social class by other African unless you have the empirical data to back it up. Thanks.
 

AgnesGooch

Cool With You
Joined
Feb 14, 2009
Messages
65,580
Reaction score
Reactions
640,870 19,022 12,528
655,263
Alleybux
170,505
The system of slavery in the Americas was unlike any slave system in the history of the world. Yes it was worse. Even in the Americas some places were worse than others. Slavery, indentured servitude, serfdom etc. have all existed throughout history but race based generational chattel slavery was a phenomena of the transatlantic slave trade.

The only slave system that may have been similar in brutality is slavery in ancient rome. Still even there it was not race based chattel slavery and you could buy your way out and rise in social status.

And the only reason EB gets in his feelings in threads like this is because of white guilt.
 

AMIRI BARAKA

General Manager
Joined
May 25, 2013
Messages
2,245
Reaction score
Reactions
138 14 8
130
Alleybux
350
No.

What text or source do you have to support this? I know my history very well, pre and post-colonial. I know the number of slaves sold by my ancestral village's local government, what they were sold in exchange for, the reasons done so for supporting this, and the conflicts and continual wars started against Britain after following their slavery opposition.

None of the slaves were treated as property and were thought of as extended relatives. They blended into their holder's village life but still retained a strong sense of identity.

Don't perpetuate the nonsense that Africans were being thought of the lowest social class by other African unless you have the empirical data to back it up. Thanks.

Slavery is a system under which people are treated as property to be bought and sold, and are forced to work. via Wikipedia

slave |slāv|
nounchiefly historical
a person who is the legal property of another and is forced to obey them. via Oxford Dictionary


If they are not property, then they are not a slave.
 

0000000000

Team Owner
BANNED
Joined
Jul 24, 2007
Messages
6,441
Reaction score
Reactions
7,581 5 25
7,556
Alleybux
0
Slavery is a system under which people are treated as property to be bought and sold, and are forced to work. via Wikipedia

slave |slāv|
nounchiefly historical
a person who is the legal property of another and is forced to obey them. via Oxford Dictionary


If they are not property, then they are not a slave.

So you don't have a real answer. Oh okay. That's what I thought.


Thanks for playing anyways.
 

112th Bwoy

****
Joined
Nov 30, 2010
Messages
1,567
Reaction score
Reactions
1,303 95 154
1,056
Alleybux
1,286
Depends where & what period. Oyo Empire at it's peak was greatly influenced by european slavery, Ethnic superiority, lifetime servitude etc It's probably why Nigerians are such ------ to this day.
 

AMIRI BARAKA

General Manager
Joined
May 25, 2013
Messages
2,245
Reaction score
Reactions
138 14 8
130
Alleybux
350
So you don't have a real answer. Oh okay. That's what I thought.


Thanks for playing anyways.
That response was n o n s e n s i c a l. Slavery is an institution where people are property. You can't change the meaning of a word. If they are not property, they are servants. If they are property, they are slaves.
 

0000000000

Team Owner
BANNED
Joined
Jul 24, 2007
Messages
6,441
Reaction score
Reactions
7,581 5 25
7,556
Alleybux
0
That response was n o n s e n s i c a l. Slavery is an institution where people are property. You can't change the meaning of a word. If they are not property, they are servants. If they are property, they are slaves.

In other words, you don't know. Are you even African?

I asked you of any text or source solidifying the notion that African slaves were thought as of nothing more than property by other Africans and you used a Dictionary.com source instead.

It's a lie and not at all true. I would ask you to defend that statement but you'll probably reply with a Thesaurus.com source next.

You're wrong, but again, thanks for playing.
 

AMIRI BARAKA

General Manager
Joined
May 25, 2013
Messages
2,245
Reaction score
Reactions
138 14 8
130
Alleybux
350
In other words, you don't know. Are you even African?
In other words, a slave is someone else's property.

I asked you of any text or source solidifying the notion that African slaves were thought as of nothing more than property by other Africans and you used a Dictionary.com source instead.
English must not be your first language because you did not comprehend anything I said. Let me say my point at a first grade level: Though a slave in Africa may have had less bad things happen to them before being moved to America, they were still a slave at the end of the day, and belonged to someone else.

It's a lie and not at all true. I would ask you to defend that statement but you'll probably reply with a Thesaurus.com source next.
If you are a slave, you are someone else's property.

You're wrong, but again, thanks for playing.
You can convince yourself that, but the fact you try to argue a slave is not property shows how confused and uneducated you are. I hope you crack open a dictionary and learn how words work.
 

0000000000

Team Owner
BANNED
Joined
Jul 24, 2007
Messages
6,441
Reaction score
Reactions
7,581 5 25
7,556
Alleybux
0
Go away.

You're just...wrong. You have NO idea what you're talking about. This is exactly why I started a private African group so I wouldn't have non-informed people arguing with me on what I empirically know as fact to be true.

Have fun talking to yourself.
 

0000000000

Team Owner
BANNED
Joined
Jul 24, 2007
Messages
6,441
Reaction score
Reactions
7,581 5 25
7,556
Alleybux
0
ANYWAYS OP, to actually answer your question (without referring to Dictionary.com as sources) most West African tribes lived side by side in harmony, yet solitude.

From my knowledge, the only reasons war ensued came from reasons surrounding land boundaries and food scarcity. Land, especially to tribes, was their livelihood and a connection source as grounds to their religion and ancestors from the past.

Oftentimes tribes had to alternate the land to cultivate their crops because they knew that if they till the same land over and over, the ground would become no good and would produce a weak harvest for that year or season. The more they pushed boundaries lines for agricultural purposes the more conflicts would persist. If you had "XXX" amount of people to feed and only "X" amount of land of course it would be an upcoming issue.

So tribes went to war to fight over the land, not only for agriculture, but also because this was the same land that served purpose as burial grounds to elders and ancestors of the past so it was extremely special. If the victor's won they gave the option to that other tribe to become nomads and find a new dwelling place to live, or they would acquire the former's land, livestock, and agriculture and they would also be in charge of tending the the land and raising the children just as the victor's were.

Nobody was working harder than anybody, taxed more than anybody, stripped of their culture, or treated like chattel. Navigating through the "bush" with older people, young children, or even pregnant women isn't worth it to several tribes because many would be lost or suffer through the travel. So they became "slaves" instead and joined forces with those they were defeated by.

Slavery became a completely different issue when Europe came into the picture but that's a different topic. [MENTION=129765]CreoloVoodooHo[/MENTION] (by the way, your name sucks)
 

The 1

General Manager
BANNED
Joined
Dec 26, 2012
Messages
1,544
Reaction score
Reactions
161 10 16
145
Alleybux
0
ANYWAYS OP, to actually answer your question (without referring to Dictionary.com as sources) most West African tribes lived side by side in harmony, yet solitude.

From my knowledge, the only reasons war ensued came from reasons surrounding land boundaries and food scarcity. Land, especially to tribes, was their livelihood and a connection source as grounds to their religion and ancestors from the past.

Oftentimes tribes had to alternate the land to cultivate their crops because they knew that if they till the same land over and over, the ground would become no good and would produce a weak harvest for that year or season. The more they pushed boundaries lines for agricultural purposes the more conflicts would persist. If you had "XXX" amount of people to feed and only "X" amount of land of course it would be an upcoming issue.

So tribes went to war to fight over the land, not only for agriculture, but also because this was the same land that served purpose as burial grounds to elders and ancestors of the past so it was extremely special. If the victor's won they gave the option to that other tribe to become nomads and find a new dwelling place to live, or they would acquire the former's land, livestock, and agriculture and they would also be in charge of tending the the land and raising the children just as the victor's were.

Nobody was working harder than anybody, taxed more than anybody, stripped of their culture, or treated like chattel. Navigating through the "bush" with older people, young children, or even pregnant women isn't worth it to several tribes because many would be lost or suffer through the travel. So they became "slaves" instead and joined forces with those they were defeated by.

Slavery became a completely different issue when Europe came into the picture but that's a different topic. [MENTION=129765]CreoloVoodooHo[/MENTION] (by the way, your name sucks)

Thank you soo much for the detailed reply! I knew something was being twisted! :) I really appreciate it !
 

Charming1

Shotaro's mother
Joined
Jun 16, 2011
Messages
6,437
Reaction score
Reactions
10,259 195 70
16,214
Alleybux
6,626
I know I am late.

My family did have slaves and some of those slaves are my ancestors. Many slaves in my tribe ended up marrying within the tribe. And once you were married the status was removed if you were not already free.



Different circumstances lead to slavery.
In some cases you were an offering as a peace treaty between your tribes. Some were repaying a debt or even doing penance for a crime. Others as stated were as prisoners of war. And slavery never meant you would not amount to much. Many slaves became leaders of the tribe they were enslaved into.
 

SomaliQueen

Starter
Joined
May 28, 2013
Messages
435
Reaction score
Reactions
19 2 3
16
Alleybux
350
The bantus that were slaves in Somalia got to marry their own,keep their culture but they obviously learned Somali culture and they had the chose to become Muslim.....much better then what happened to African Americans but slavery in general is fµcked up either way......the Israelites also had it pretty bad in Ancient Egypt too.
 

Similar Threads

The Culture

News Alley

Celebrity News

Ask LSA

Top Bottom