"Get over it"
Better Than Canada!
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 10,821
Likes: 0
From: Baltimore, MD
You're kidding right? ever stopped to think why the blacks would do that? The colonist came into africa(and no i dont mean it in the litteral way it took lots of time for them to actually phisically go into the middle of africa) and basicly started controling the black with land, money and power. Sort of corupting them from the start.
Africans would have slaves for themselfs capturing enemy tribesmen but on a way smaller scale and keping them in there respective regions...but the only reason why slavery got so big is that the European forced them to sell them for overseas markets. They would sell them to the european is because they had to in order to keep there land. Its at a certain point became Sell Slaves to European nations or you will become the slave. Obviously the choice isint hard to make.
Yes some tribes becam richer but blamin the Africans for the downfall of it civilisation is compleatly absurd!
Africans would have slaves for themselfs capturing enemy tribesmen but on a way smaller scale and keping them in there respective regions...but the only reason why slavery got so big is that the European forced them to sell them for overseas markets. They would sell them to the european is because they had to in order to keep there land. Its at a certain point became Sell Slaves to European nations or you will become the slave. Obviously the choice isint hard to make.
Yes some tribes becam richer but blamin the Africans for the downfall of it civilisation is compleatly absurd!
They didn't keep them in the region...they often sold them or traded them. And no one really knows what the scale of this was until the Europeans got there because it wasn't documented until then. So it is hard to say how much an influence the Europeans had on the scale. It would stand to reason that they increased it simply by increasing the demand for slaves. But you saying it was only on a small scale is simply speculation. Here is an excerpt from wikipedia. Take it for what it's worth.
Originally Posted by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_slave_trade
Source of slaves
All three slave-trading routes tapped into local trading patterns. Europeans or Arabs in Africa very rarely mounted expeditions to capture slaves. Lack of people and the prevalence of disease prevented any widespread gathering of slaves by Europeans and other non-Africans. Local rulers were very rarely open to allowing groups of armed foreigners to enter their lands.[10] It was far easier and more common to make use of existing African middlemen and slave traders. Slavery has been present in Africa for millennia, and still is today even with children, though some historians prefer to describe African slavery as feudalism, arguing it was more like the system that controlled the peasantry of Western Europe during the Middle Ages or Russia into the 19th century than slavery as it was practiced in the Americas.[11]
The slaves came from many different sources. About half came from the societies that sold them. These might be criminals, heretics, the mentally ill, the indebted and any others that had fallen out of favour with the rulers. Little is known about the details of theses practices before the arrival of Europeans, and so it is difficult to tell if the number of people considered as undesirables was artificially increased to provide more slaves for export. It is believed that capital punishment in the region nearly disappeared since prisoners became far too valuable to dispose of in such a way.[12]
Another source of slaves, comprising about half the total, came from military conquests of other states or tribes. It has long been contended that the slave trade greatly increased violence and warfare in the region due to the pursuit of slaves, but it is hard to provide evidence to prove this; warfare was certainly common even before slave hunting had added such an extra inducement.[13]
For the Atlantic slave trade, captives were purchased from slave dealers in West African regions known as the Slave Coast, Gold Coast, and Côte d'Ivoire were sold into slavery as a result of a defeat in warfare. In the Bight of Biafra near modern-day Senegal and Benin, some African kings sold their captives locally and later to European slave traders for goods such as metal cookware, rum, livestock, and seed grain. Previous to the voyage, the victims were held in "slave castles" and deep pits where many died from multiple illnesses and malnutrition. Conditions were even worse in the Middle Passage across the Atlantic where up to a third of the slaves died en route.
All three slave-trading routes tapped into local trading patterns. Europeans or Arabs in Africa very rarely mounted expeditions to capture slaves. Lack of people and the prevalence of disease prevented any widespread gathering of slaves by Europeans and other non-Africans. Local rulers were very rarely open to allowing groups of armed foreigners to enter their lands.[10] It was far easier and more common to make use of existing African middlemen and slave traders. Slavery has been present in Africa for millennia, and still is today even with children, though some historians prefer to describe African slavery as feudalism, arguing it was more like the system that controlled the peasantry of Western Europe during the Middle Ages or Russia into the 19th century than slavery as it was practiced in the Americas.[11]
The slaves came from many different sources. About half came from the societies that sold them. These might be criminals, heretics, the mentally ill, the indebted and any others that had fallen out of favour with the rulers. Little is known about the details of theses practices before the arrival of Europeans, and so it is difficult to tell if the number of people considered as undesirables was artificially increased to provide more slaves for export. It is believed that capital punishment in the region nearly disappeared since prisoners became far too valuable to dispose of in such a way.[12]
Another source of slaves, comprising about half the total, came from military conquests of other states or tribes. It has long been contended that the slave trade greatly increased violence and warfare in the region due to the pursuit of slaves, but it is hard to provide evidence to prove this; warfare was certainly common even before slave hunting had added such an extra inducement.[13]
For the Atlantic slave trade, captives were purchased from slave dealers in West African regions known as the Slave Coast, Gold Coast, and Côte d'Ivoire were sold into slavery as a result of a defeat in warfare. In the Bight of Biafra near modern-day Senegal and Benin, some African kings sold their captives locally and later to European slave traders for goods such as metal cookware, rum, livestock, and seed grain. Previous to the voyage, the victims were held in "slave castles" and deep pits where many died from multiple illnesses and malnutrition. Conditions were even worse in the Middle Passage across the Atlantic where up to a third of the slaves died en route.
ZOMG Pew Pew Laserbeams
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 7,451
Likes: 0
Do any of you arguing know how flawed affirmative action is? It's to increase representation of another group not on merit but primarily on race. Affirmative Action should help people LESS FORTUNATE but ENTIRELY QUALIFIED BASED ON MERIT, so basically people from a demographic area with a history of under representation. If person A and person B were of the same merit but person B went through more hardships due to race then person B should be the beneficiary. Problem with affirmative action is it doesn't take these factors into account, just race. UCLA and other high ranking schools used to give points based on race during their admissions process. They stopped doing that in 1998 in California for Universities and guess what admittance of blacks and latinos dropped. The number has rounded back out now in California but that's because students are getting in based on merit and not race prior. Race based admissions/considerations isn't fair at all if you honestly think about it, trying to get rid of racism by institutionalizing it?
lots and lots of fail
Joined: Dec 1999
Posts: 23,004
Likes: 1
From: Deeeeeeeeeeeeeeetroit
"even though if they go to college they have a much better chance of getting scholarships than a white"
"It has nothing to do with affirmative action. I'm talking about scholarships, not jobs."
Lots of scholarship programs start off with the affirmative action in mind,
I don't know of any major corporations having anything to do with affirmative action, that simply calls for a class action lawsuit.
"It has nothing to do with affirmative action. I'm talking about scholarships, not jobs."
Lots of scholarship programs start off with the affirmative action in mind,
I don't know of any major corporations having anything to do with affirmative action, that simply calls for a class action lawsuit.
But, that's not the point of this thread now is it?
You honestly do not believe there are STILL discriminations in this world? everyone all have the same opportunity disregards to their skin colors? All men and women are treated equally?
You honestly do not believe there are STILL discriminations in this world? everyone all have the same opportunity disregards to their skin colors? All men and women are treated equally?
I'm not here to change your naive mind about how things are in the US, nor will I actually dig up sources to prove what I'm saying. If you honestly care about the whole issue, maybe just open up your eyes a bit or simply do a research.
I go duffy on dem bitches
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 28,248
Likes: 0
From: Gonzales, Louisiana