Why do so many people emphasize that Africans "sold other Africans" but they ALWAYS leave out the things that white slavers did?
Anyone who actually looks at the history will see that at no point did any African just take another African and force themselves onto white people who were just out on an ocean cruise.
What REALLY happened? It was WHITE PEOPLE who went up to every tribe they could find near the coast of west Africa, then played off of rivalries of enemy tribes/kingdoms through their importation of guns. You would HAVE to do what the whites wanted you to do out of protecting yourselves against your enemies who also are getting superior weaponry. The whites would even have the tribes at the coast that they were hiring out use some of their own members as collateral to be taken away as slaves just in case they couldn't come back in a certain period of time with freshly captured victims.
And GUESS WHAT? White slave traders even did this VERY SAME EXACT THING to AT LEAST one other race of people.
"The increased rise of the gun-slave trade forced the other tribes to participate or their refusal to engage in enslaving meant they would become targets of slavers."
And the whites may have even done this very same exact thing with yet ANOTHER race, since there was also a slave trade in what is now Indonesia.
Yet, for some reason, the whites and even other races including some blacks, who always bring up the "Africans sold other Africans" ALWAYS conveniently forget to mention that not-so-tiny part of what the whites did to make that happen....not ONLY with Africans, but even other races of people!.
Does anyone care to explain why this is? It couldn't possibly have anything to do with the fact that maybe they're trying to absolve what white society in America did with race centuries afterward, so telling half-truths about what happened in the beginning would make them think they can pass blame, now could it ? CRICKETS CHIRPING
I can't wait to see what excuses, false equivalencies, or deflections that some of you may come up with.
Yep, those Africans sure told those white peole to have permanent, racially based chattel slavery in America followed up by racial discrimination afterwards, right? Oh, and the Native Americans and Indonesian slave trades in which whites also used guns to get cooperation from enemy groups never happened, despite the wikipedia saying so. Right, whatever. Next.
what it comes down to is that you just proved my point.
- poornakumar bLv 72 years agoFavorite Answer
Selling other Africans for slavery wasn't a profession of Africans. They were enticed to sell off their brethren by the marauding Whites (Europeans) along the coast.
- EnguerarrardLv 72 years ago
The whole history is a sad tale of exploitation. The African chiefs and kings who sent out raiding parties can hardly be considered innocent. Desperate, maybe, but not innocent. The Europeans traded not only guns but also steel axes and knives, glass beads (not precious in European eyes, but precious to people who'd never seen glass before), mirrors, fabrics and, I guess, tinware. All these things were useful or luxurious.
Africans didn't sail out to capture Europeans because they didn't have any sailing ships. Northern Africans did, though, and the Barbary slave trade was active right up until about 1840.
There is plenty of blame to go around.
- 2 years ago
well, whatever,,,what it comes down to is that Africans enslaved themselves