Showing posts with label Anti-White Bias. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Anti-White Bias. Show all posts

Friday, 27 December 2013

WHEN EUROPEANS WERE SLAVES




WHEN EUROPEANS WERE SLAVES:


RESEARCH SUGGESTS WHITE SLAVERY WAS MUCH
MORE COMMON THAN PREVIOUSLY BELIEVED

COLUMBUS, Ohio – A new study suggests that a million or more European Christians were enslaved by Muslims in North Africa between 1530 and 1780 – a far greater number than had ever been estimated before.
In a new book, Robert Davis, professor of history at Ohio State University, developed a unique methodology to calculate the number of white Christians who were enslaved along Africa’s Barbary Coast, arriving at much higher slave population estimates than any previous studies had found.

Most other accounts of slavery along the Barbary coast didn’t try to estimate the number of slaves, or only looked at the number of slaves in particular cities, Davis said. Most previously estimated slave counts have thus tended to be in the thousands, or at most in the tens of thousands. Davis, by contrast, has calculated that between 1 million and 1.25 million European Christians were captured and forced to work in North Africa from the 16th to 18th centuries.

Davis’s new estimates appear in the book Christian Slaves, Muslim Masters: White Slavery in the Mediterranean, the Barbary Coast, and Italy, 1500-1800 (Palgrave Macmillan).

“Enslavement was a very real possibility for anyone who traveled in the Mediterranean, or who lived along the shores in places like Italy, France, Spain and Portugal, and even as far north as England and Iceland.”




“Much of what has been written gives the impression that there were not many slaves and minimizes the impact that slavery had on Europe,” Davis said. “Most accounts only look at slavery in one place, or only for a short period of time. But when you take a broader, longer view, the massive scope of this slavery and its powerful impact become clear.”

Davis said it is useful to compare this Mediterranean slavery to the Atlantic slave trade that brought black Africans to the Americas. Over the course of four centuries, the Atlantic slave trade was much larger – about 10 to 12 million black Africans were brought to the Americas. But from 1500 to 1650, when trans-Atlantic slaving was still in its infancy, more white Christian slaves were probably taken to Barbary than black African slaves to the Americas, according to Davis.

“One of the things that both the public and many scholars have tended to take as given is that slavery was always racial in nature – that only blacks have been slaves. But that is not true,” Davis said. “We cannot think of slavery as something that only white people did to black people.”

During the time period Davis studied, it was religion and ethnicity, as much as race, that determined who became slaves.

“Enslavement was a very real possibility for anyone who travelled in the Mediterranean, or who lived along the shores in places like Italy, France, Spain and Portugal, and even as far north as England and Iceland,” he said.

Pirates (called corsairs) from cities along the Barbary Coast in north Africa – cities such as Tunis and Algiers – would raid ships in the Mediterranean and Atlantic, as well as seaside villages to capture men, women and children. The impact of these attacks were devastating – France, England, and Spain each lost thousands of ships, and long stretches of the Spanish and Italian coasts were almost completely abandoned by their inhabitants. At its peak, the destruction and depopulation of some areas probably exceeded what European slavers would later inflict on the African interior.

Although hundreds of thousands of Christian slaves were taken from Mediterranean countries, Davis noted, the effects of Muslim slave raids was felt much further away: it appears, for example, that through most of the 17th century the English lost at least 400 sailors a year to the slavers.

Even Americans were not immune. For example, one American slave reported that 130 other American seamen had been enslaved by the Algerians in the Mediterranean and Atlantic just between 1785 and 1793.

Davis said the vast scope of slavery in North Africa has been ignored and minimized, in large part because it is on no one’s agenda to discuss what happened.

The enslavement of Europeans doesn’t fit the general theme of European world conquest and colonialism that is central to scholarship on the early modern era, he said. Many of the countries that were victims of slavery, such as France and Spain, would later conquer and colonize the areas of North Africa where their citizens were once held as slaves. Maybe because of this history, Western scholars have thought of the Europeans primarily as “evil colonialists” and not as the victims they sometimes were, Davis said.

Davis said another reason that Mediterranean slavery has been ignored or minimized has been that there have not been good estimates of the total number of people enslaved. People of the time – both Europeans and the Barbary Coast slave owners – did not keep detailed, trustworthy records of the number of slaves. In contrast, there are extensive records that document the number of Africans brought to the Americas as slaves.

So Davis developed a new methodology to come up with reasonable estimates of the number of slaves along the Barbary Coast. Davis found the best records available indicating how many slaves were at a particular location at a single time. He then estimated how many new slaves it would take to replace slaves as they died, escaped or were ransomed.

“The only way I could come up with hard numbers is to turn the whole problem upside down – figure out how many slaves they would have to capture to maintain a certain level,” he said. “It is not the best way to make population estimates, but it is the only way with the limited records available.”

Putting together such sources of attrition as deaths, escapes, ransomings, and conversions, Davis calculated that about one-fourth of slaves had to be replaced each year to keep the slave population stable, as it apparently was between 1580 and 1680. That meant about 8,500 new slaves had to be captured each year. Overall, this suggests nearly a million slaves would have been taken captive during this period. Using the same methodology, Davis has estimated as many as 475,000 additional slaves were taken in the previous and following centuries.

The result is that between 1530 and 1780 there were almost certainly 1 million and quite possibly as many as 1.25 million white, European Christians enslaved by the Muslims of the Barbary Coast.

Davis said his research into the treatment of these slaves suggests that, for most of them, their lives were every bit as difficult as that of slaves in America.

“As far as daily living conditions, the Mediterranean slaves certainly didn’t have it better,” he said.

While African slaves did grueling labor on sugar and cotton plantations in the Americas, European Christian slaves were often worked just as hard and as lethally – in quarries, in heavy construction, and above all rowing the corsair galleys themselves.

Davis said his findings suggest that this invisible slavery of European Christians deserves more attention from scholars.

“We have lost the sense of how large enslavement could loom for those who lived around the Mediterranean and the threat they were under,” he said. “Slaves were still slaves, whether they are black or white, and whether they suffered in America or North Africa.”

#Ohio State University, 2010

Tuesday, 12 October 2010

Kevin Myers On Double Standards



I can say Americans are lazy and boorish morons. That's fine. 
If I say the same about Nigerians, I'm jailed




By Kevin Myers
February 05 2010

The most fascinating aspect of the debate about the future of Haiti is its absence. All "discussion" consists of assertions that "the west" must rebuild the country. "The west" is a useful term. If things go very well, the Haitians will get the credit. If they go moderately well, the EU -- but probably the French -- will claim the kudos. If they go badly, the US will be universally blamed (because that's what Yanks are there for) and everyone will be happy.

To suggest that the best thing that outsiders can do once the immediate rescue work is finished, and the water is flowing, is to leave the Haitians to rebuild their own country is merely to invite shrill accusations of racism. However, you might have forgotten that the Chinese were hit by an earthquake two years ago. It killed 68,712 people, left 17,921 missing, with more than 374,000 injured and at least 15 million homeless.

Even if those figures are invented -- and I suspect they're not -- they bespeak the existence of a government that can count, which is more than Haiti has ever had. (Cue hisses of "racist!" at this irrefutable truth). Yet the two earthquakes rather conveniently bring together the two extremes of foreignness.

The Chinese -- who probably had the worst 20th century of anyone save the Jews -- do not naturally attract pity, yet without it, have largely rebuilt Sichuan. The Haitians have been cursed by pity throughout their existence, and now are probably about to be suffocated by it. In 10 years' time, I bet, outsiders will still be rebuilding Haiti, while the Haitians will continue to do whatever it was they were doing before the earthquake struck, back when George Hook went to build houses for them. It must be Stephen Hawking's turn soon.

Pity is the most human of emotions. It is also one of the most ruinous. It robs its subjects of responsibility, initiative, independence, courage, self-respect and will: hence the fate of so many African countries. Yet no pity rescued Poland or Italy or the Ukraine or Germany or Japan after the Second World War. Their peoples alone did.

Moreover, uncontrolled pity can damage those who feel it, sentimentalising judgment and elevating emotions. It makes an intellectual assessment of any problem almost impossible, for to use your brain equates with "heartlessness".

Yet pity is also a strangely useful tool, for it reveals a strange global hierarchy. At the bottom are black people, whom everyone pities. At the top are the Chinese, whom no one pities. Alongside them are the English, the one foreign group that Hollywood may officially reduce to unpleasant racist stereotypes. And the cultural censor that allows this actually has a strange Oedipal streak. For the only US ethnic identity which can be perpetually reduced to a stereotype of grasping, greedy, shallow bigots are WASPs. Not far behind them are the hillbillies of the Appalachians, namely, the Ulster-Scots.

Yet these are the very peoples who made the US (and who are both symbolically represented in that convenient pastiche, the Hatfields and McCoys). Between them, they founded and refined and fought for American freedoms, and then opened the doors of their country to the peoples of the world. The outsiders poured in, and ever since have shown their gratitude to the founding peoples of the USA by lampooning WASPs called Dexter and trailer-trash called Bub, in ways which would be unacceptable if the subjects were African-Americans or Jews or Irish Catholics.

The taboos of this cultural hierarchy cause even simple truths to remain unspoken. Jews have been disproportionately responsible for financial crime in the US, yet even to utter this simple truth is to court shrieks of anti-Semitism. In Europe, on the other hand, the only public criticisms of Jews that are not merely allowed, but are actually encouraged, are of Israel, about which "liberals" may utter the most ludicrously untrue and racist libels, and be applauded.

This strange cultural censor reluctantly allows us to acknowledge the role of blacks in street crime in Britain and the US, but preferably as a measure of their "victimhood". That blacks are grossly over-represented in sex offenders' wings in jails, however, or are responsible for the vast majority of trans-racial sex-crime, may not be publicly discussed at all.

Moreover, the total absence of Jews from sex offenders' wings is similarly unacknowledged, for it could lead to uncomfortable questions. If Jews don't rape, and they don't, then is it possible that our secular Christian culture -- never mind Afro-culture -- actually creates rapists? And if we can talk about Jews NEVER being sex offenders, can we then discuss Jews' disproportionate role as swindlers? Of course not: so we discuss neither.

You can say we have free speech -- but we haven't. Example: I can say Americans are loud, boorish, lazy and insensitive morons, and that's fine. If I say the same about Nigerians, I am in jail.

Look, you cry, he's at it again! He starts off quite innocently on Haiti, and look where's finished up!

Quite. I agree. You are looking nervously at the door. I am making you uncomfortable. You wish to leave. I quite understand. 

Sunday, 10 October 2010

GOVERNMENT WAR ON WHITE ENGLISH PEOPLE



THE GOVERNMENT HAS DECLARED WAR ON WHITE ENGLISH PEOPLE


VALID POINT: George Orwell 

By Leo McKinstry
Thursday August 9,2007

England is in the middle of a profoundly disturbing social experiment. For the first time in a mature democracy, a Government is waging a campaign of aggressive discrimination against its indigenous population.   

In the name of cultural diversity, Labour attacks anything that smacks of Englishness. The mainstream public are treated with contempt, their rights ignored, their history trashed. In their own land, the English are being turned into second-class citizens.