Slavery

Remove this Banner Ad

NMWBloods said:
Maybe so, but that doesn't actually address his point, which is also supported by Giles Milton's book that there were European slaves sold to Africa.

For more scholarly tomes, there is also "Christian Slaves, Muslim Masters : White Slavery in the Mediterranean, the Barbary Coast and Italy, 1500-1800 (Early Modern History)" by Robert C Davis.

Surely people have heard of the Barbary corsairs?
Click to expand...

FINALLY!!!

Well said NWMBloods, my point isnt condoning any such things, it's something not much is said about and i thought it would make an instresting read for some people.

And i agree i was sure the Barbary Raiders exploits were well known.
 
AndSmithMustScore said:
Ignorance is not considering everyones opinions ****************, white slavery happened, i dont condone anything on that site merely the first few lines which refered to people being taken from european nations you inbred halfwit.
Click to expand...
You don't condone it, yet you felt compelled to post a white-victimhood, anti-African thread and to quote from a racist website? I will never consider what a site that refers to 'girl children' that you can 'be sure they've never been with a ************ (read censored offensive name for person with black skin)' being 'delightful' has to say.

For what it's worth - I'm just glad that most of the world has caught up with the concept of human rights. Slavery has probably existed since the dawn of civilisation in at least most societies that developed past hunter-gathering. The fact that Africans did it too is neither here nor there when discussing the white slave trade. Both were/are wrong, and both must be judged within the context of their times.
 
Wildman said:
I dont know why I'd never heard of it through school and whatnot,perhaps they concentrate on more recent history.But I agree there should of been more made known of it.
Click to expand...

Probably because our education system is inherantly left-wing opinionated.

Which means we are often taught a disjointed history which lumps the "guilt" complex on us.

To show whites were slaves too would show that everyone is the same and nobody is excluded from bad things happening to them.

The horror of the attrocities to the Jews in WW2 is very well documented and taught as it should be, but are we ever taught the same fate befell the poor Gypsy peoples of Europe who were rounded up and butchered by the Nazis in their 100's of thousands, as they were seen as the lowest of the low.

We pay tribute to those Jews/And All others who lost their lives, it would be nice if the Gypsies were bestowed the same consideration and rememberance.

History shouldnt paint one picture, it should paints thousands.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

AndSmithMustScore said:
Smack that up ya clacker idiot

http://www.heretical.com/British/slavery.html
"White slaves were still held in North Africa as late as 1626."

http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=2681
Between the years 1550-1730, Algiers alone was home to around 25,000 European slaves."
Click to expand...
Of course, both of these way pre-date the abolition of slavery in the south of the United States - where slavery existed until the Civil War (1861 - 1865). Looks like a predominantly white culture was keeping black slaves for a century later than your examples.

Australian culture comes from a predominantly white, western European cultural mix so surely looking into the actions of our culture and those similar to us for the bad things is more useful than saying "it was bad, but look, they were doing it too, so its not so bad after all".
 
AndSmithMustScore said:
Nah ya stupid gob********e, though i'm surprised you can spell KKK.

Well Done.


Now off ya trot to **************** Aethists Annonymous or AAA wouldnt want you to miss the vitriole.
Click to expand...

take a pill(preferably cyanide)
 
Mr Q said:
Australian culture comes from a predominantly white, western European cultural mix so surely looking into the actions of our culture and those similar to us for the bad things is more useful than saying "it was bad, but look, they were doing it too, so its not so bad after all".
Click to expand...

Just wanted to be clear my comments above weren't expressing any view on slavery/whites/blacks/etc - it was simply a statement of the historical facts.

However, I will say that slavery is wrong (pretty obvious that), however typically I note the politically correct gang seem to jump on anything that tries to point out cases where anyone except certain minorities were persecuted. It was not racist to point out white people also had suffered from slavery - indeed it was amply demonstrated that most people did not know of it and so it was providing new information. Yet, that didn't stop people from resorting to the PC approach of dismissing the comments as racist. Mantis' distorted quote and retort exactly demonstrate that point.

It's useful to understand the history of things that happen. I think trying to exuse slavery in any way by saying that it happened to both sides is simply wrong and also completely pointless. However, understanding and analysing history doesn't need to produce this effect (even though it does far too much on these PC areas).

Discussions on aboriginal history suffer from the same problem. It is inherently difficult to find good factual historical commentaries on aboriginal history that are not polemics or apologies. The informed debate that should have been raised from Windschuttle's book simply degenerated into a useless slanging match, which means that political correctness takes precedence over learning, which is a shame.
 
Great post, NMW.
It'd be nice if people let facts speak for themselves, and allowed "truth" to inform their opinions, rather than treating all information as opportunity to advance agendas.
 
AndSmithmustscore is an assclown for quoting a racist website for an argument about white slavery which shot his argument to shreds.
In America the Irish were used to clear the marshes because the African slaves were considered too valuable to be used for such a dangerous job.
I read that in the The Great Shame by Thomas Kenneally.
 
Jeepers the Right sure love a PC whinge fest about equality nowadays don't they? 500 years ago, get over it, what do you want an apology? Why should anyone apologise for something 500 years ago???
 
NMWBloods said:
No doubt - it does help to check your sources thoroughly...
Click to expand...
And it is that disgusting site which kills off any credibility this thread might have had. It's pretty clear that the thread is an attempt to absolve 'white guilt' by adding 'black guilt' when to be truthful, neither really apply. Slavery is something that we have almost emerged from after a world history that in a modern context is shameful. The important thing isn't guilt, it's recognition.

I think Mr Q pointed out why the Western countries focus on Western black slavery perfectly; it is the least remote slavery to us. It lasted the longest, happened in the societies that are most like us. It is thus most accessible. It has nothing to do with guilt campaigns so much as ensuring that the history that is taught is what is most relevant.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

No one is attempting to excuse slavery.

But one can never understand the trans Atalantic slave trade unless they understand how slavery was an intergal part of West African culture prior to the Europeans arriving. East African as well where Islam played a critical part in the slave trade. Still does in Sudan.

There is no way one can be both PC and a historian, history is too brutal for humanity department civility.
 
Of course their were white slaves. Julius Ceaser killed 1/3rd of the Celts in modern-day France and sold another 13rd into slavery. Slaves were part of the spoils of war. The Vikings did it, everyone did it.

Also the idea that one African culture enslaved the citizens of a neighbouring culture is another cop-out. Cheiftens would sell their own people into slavery, and were complicit in the trade.
 
Weaver said:
Of course their were white slaves. Julius Ceaser killed 1/3rd of the Celts in modern-day France and sold another 13rd into slavery. Slaves were part of the spoils of war. The Vikings did it, everyone did it.

Also the idea that one African culture enslaved the citizens of a neighbouring culture is another cop-out. Cheiftens would sell their own people into slavery, and were complicit in the trade.
Click to expand...

Yes, important point.

In fact the honour of attempting to banish the slave trade must go to Christian abolishionists, and the British Navy, both of whom were instrumental in turning the world mind on the issue.

Though Greek playwrite Euripedies is the first human in recorded history to condem slavery as unnatural.
 
JW Frogen said:
Yes, important point.

In fact the honour of attempting to banish the slave trade must go to Christian abolishionists, and the British Navy, both of whom were instrumental in turning the world mind on the issue.

Though Greek playwrite Euripedies is the first human in recorded history to condem slavery as unnatural.
Click to expand...

Noit the good old British navy furthering the rights for all again? Whilst Washington was working them to death and dumping them in unmark graves growing Pot? :rolleyes:
 
Qsaint said:
Noit the good old British navy furthering the rights for all again? Whilst Washington was working them to death and dumping them in unmark graves growing Pot? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Slave pot is the best high......Ja Man!
 
Weaver said:
Of course their were white slaves. Julius Ceaser killed 1/3rd of the Celts in modern-day France and sold another 13rd into slavery. Slaves were part of the spoils of war. The Vikings did it, everyone did it.

Also the idea that one African culture enslaved the citizens of a neighbouring culture is another cop-out. Cheiftens would sell their own people into slavery, and were complicit in the trade.
Click to expand...
Right on the point here.And Australia had slaves as well,the Kanakas in the Sugar fields of Qld.
 
Bombers 2003 said:
Right on the point here.And Australia had slaves as well,the Kanakas in the Sugar fields of Qld.
Click to expand...

Good old Queensland the deep south of Australia ( well we are upside down)

http://thecouriermail.com.au/extras/oq/book2kanakas.html

Queensland veered dangerously close to slavery in the late 1860s and early 1870s when "recruiters" ranged the South Seas in search of Kanakas (Hawaiian for "men") to work the state's sugar and cotton plantations.

Former South Seas trader Capt Robert Towns began this dubious practice in August 1863 when he imported 67 Islanders from the Solomons, New Hebrides, Torres Strait Islands and New Guinea.

Towns put the Kanakas to work on his Logan River cotton plantation, paid them 10 or 12 shillings a month, then, after six months or a year, returned them to the islands — bringing more Kanakas back.


Capt Robert Towns, 1863 entrepreneur, brought the first New Hebrideans to Queensland for work on his cotton plantation in the Logan district. One of his skippers was accused of kidnapping. Some recruiters dispensed with niceties and simply hauled men on board.

As agriculture expanded, so did demand for cheap "coloured labour". More than 1200 Islanders were pressed into service in 1867 and 900 more during the first four months of 1868.

As profits increased, so did the abuses. Reports filtered through that some recruiters had dispensed with niceties and were simply hauling men on board. One newspaper in 1865 accused one of Towns's skippers of being "a blatant kidnapper" who used leg irons, whips and nooses.

Opposition to "blackbirding" came to a climax in 1884 when the recruiter and the bosun of the Hopeful, a Burns Philp schooner, received death sentences for murdering natives at Sanaroa and other islands.

After protests, the death sentences were commuted to life imprisonment. Four years later, after petitions, the men were released — along with the ship's master, recruiter and crew members who had been convicted on lesser charges.

In the end, it was Federation, not the protests of abolitionists, that brought the Kanaka era to a close — though Kanakas would continue to toil on Queensland plantations until 1907.
 
I would be willing to bet at some point in history the Kanakas or their ancestors had slaves.

Welcome to the world of Cleo, she is a bitch, and if you pretend she is a saint, you will get burned.
 
Weaver said:
Of course their were white slaves. Julius Ceaser killed 1/3rd of the Celts in modern-day France and sold another 13rd into slavery. Slaves were part of the spoils of war. The Vikings did it, everyone did it.

Also the idea that one African culture enslaved the citizens of a neighbouring culture is another cop-out. Cheiftens would sell their own people into slavery, and were complicit in the trade.
Click to expand...

Some sources claim, there were more white slaves with Muslim slave masters -

in the Mediterranean, The Barbary Coast, and Italy, 1500-1800.

Than the African slave trade.

The word apparently comes from Slavic people being slaves, around the 9th century. Also by Muslim slave masters)
 
Marcel Proust said:
Some sources claim, there were more white slaves with Muslim slave masters -

in the Mediterranean, The Barbary Coast, and Italy, 1500-1800.

Than the African slave trade.
Click to expand...

yeah but some people claim lots of stuff, nothing I seen has been well researched or documented. It's bistromathics of dubious quality

Marcel Proust said:
The word apparently comes from Slavic people being slaves, around the 9th century. Also by Muslim slave masters)
Click to expand...
traded by Christian traders.


History taught in western schools has a large western European/Australian bias. We tend to study our history, what happened in the development and history of our culture.

Whats the claim here, we should ditch Australian and European history and only teach global history?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top