Posted on 06/08/2021 6:16:03 AM PDT by SJackson
In North American after Hernando de Soto’s death,
his slaves were auctioned. The governor’s estate
sale was the official Spanish beginning.
When a lawsuit is initiated, the lawyers go after whoever can pay the most. In a firearms lawsuit, if the defendants don’t have the dough, the shysters go after the store that sold the weapon or the gun makers.
Years ago, a dating couple went to a theme park and rode in separate bumper cars. The guy slammed the girl’s car and supposedly caused whiplash. He wasn’t sued by her lawyers, as he had nothing, the park was sued, as was the maker of the ride.
The slavery reparation scheme is designed to target the American people as they have the money, and so it paints them as the bad guys. No claim is too outrageous if it gets the ‘Ka-ching’!
bkmk
100% agree. But don't stop there. The true source of the liberation came from the 2nd Great Awakening. Basically, the abolitionist movement was largely a Christian movement that sprang from people getting closer to Jesus on an individual level, then making a difference in the world they lived in.
I know on the surface it looks like the Dims are out to destroy the white folks. In reality, they're trying to destroy the Christianity that always gives them their greatest defeats.
One of the larger traders, the Royal African Company, started by King Charles II and his brother James, Duke of York, later King James II. Slaves bore the brand RAC, Royal African Company, or DOY, Duke of York. We have a state and city named in their honor, New York. No suggestions those racist names be changed.
We are not responsible for what anyone did 402 years ago.
That is where it began. There were no Muslim slave ships.
And for that matter there were no “American” slave ships either contrary to what the 1619 project believes.(until well into the late 1700s/early 1800s.) The United States simply did not exist. America is NOT to blame here. Our guys fought against this.
All of what you’re saying is accurate, however none of it really matters until the ships started moving. There’s a clear break in the history here.
Agreed.
The US banned the slave trade in 1800, so at best there's a couple decade window where there could have been American slave ships.
True, but I’m more concerned with the Americans who fought (legislatively) British slavery and wrote up abolitionist laws in the early 1770s.
Those laws were subsequently vetoed by the King and his colonial governors.
Think of how different The United States would be if those laws would not have been vetoed prior to Independence.
So while its true that France engaged in the trade/plantations, Spain engaged in the trade/plantations, neither deserves a special kind of scorn for vetoing abolitionist laws the same way England did.
The history of slavery in the US started with Portuguese slavers on the way to Brazil being blown off course and landing their cargos in the colonies - where they were sold as indentured workers.
Permanent slavery started 1655 when one black, Anthony Johnson, sued to make another black indentured worker, John Casor, a servant for life. Johnson, himself, was a former indentured worker.
So even the date, 1619, is BS
If I’m not mistaken the Johson/Casor case established chattel slavery, prior to that it was mostly indenture. As to Portugal, of 11-12 million slaves sent to the hemisphere around 330,000 ended up in the mainland colonies, a similar number in the Carribean. 5 million in Brazil.
And some of those colonies/states banned slavery while the Revolution was ongoing. Banned in all northern states by 1805. And never mentioned by the President, slavery ended in Delaware, a slave state throughout the war, in late 1865 with the ratification of the 13th amendment. And didn't ratify the 14th till 1901, though it was law long before that.
ping
Doesn't anyone wonder why especially Brazilians are so dark while natives in the jungles are so different?
Slavery was the custom throughout recorded history worldwide.
Still is in many parts of the world but keep it mum don’t want ruin the lefts scam gig.
Slavery is entrenched in world history, Genesis told about Moses in Egypt.
An interesting book to read is 1493 by Charles Mann.
The book shows what was brought to the new world and what the new world sent to the old world.
One of the biggest imports from the old world to the new worlds was disease. Flu, measles, chicken pox, typhus, cholera and scarlet fever came from Europe. Malaria and yellow fever came from africa.
Both european and african diseases killed off 95% of indians in north and south america. African diseases killed of europeans in central south and north america.
For example, the famous Mason Dixon line that divides north from south in the civil war was the the furthest north that certain malaria carrying mosquitoes could go before the cold killed them.
Why is this important? The english had an indentured servant system in place for much of the17 & 18th century. For this system a person could have their costs for passage to the new world paid for in exchange for seven years work on a farm or plantation.
This system worked well north of the mason dixon line. But south of the mason dixon almost all of the indentured servants died because of malaria or yellow fever. They had no resistance to the african diseases. The farmers and plantation owners investment in the indentured servants sea passage didn’t payoff. So they brought in african slaves because the africans had resistance to the african diseases. Sickle cell anemia for example also serves to give africans resistance to malaria.
In another story, Napolean sent 31000 to Haiti to put down a revolt in 1801. Three quarters of them died of yellow fever. The expedition failed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.