I’d been told about this pattern before, but this map makes it VERY clear.
A discussion of the history of slavery broke out in the context of the Political Pandering Holiday “JuneTeenth” over in a W.O.O.D. This had some discussion of how it was largely Black Africans impressing their neighbors into slavery (often via tribal war dominance) and then them being sold in many (most?) cases by Muslim Slave Traders. Only once they were at the coast and in a boat were significant numbers of “White Men” involved (and by that time these slaves were already slaves for a while, and often for a long walk to the coast).
Why was this?
Well first off, the Koran lays out the manner and properness of Islamic Slavery. The Koran says it is just fine to be a Muslim slave owner or trader. Second, there had been many generations (perhaps to the depths of pre-history) of slavery by Blacks of Blacks in Africa. If nothing else, the Roman Empire was built on slavery and it had run North Africa as far back as 146 B.C with the conquest of Carthage.
So these folks had at least a 2000 year history of slavery. Then the northern White Europeans started to dominate trade globally as they made the great trade ships and trade routes. As they attempted to colonize the rest of the world, they got into the slave trade.
BUT, tropical areas were chock full of tropical diseases. The average life expectancy of a White Man in Equatorial Africa was about one year, or less. (Per the wiki). So they stayed with their boats or on the coast at the trading stations.
So what White Europeans did was move some of the folks, who were already slaves to other parts of the world, where they were eventually freed in places like North America.
But wait, there’s more…
Looking at Pop Culture you would think it was all English and Americans doing all of the Atlantic Slave Trade and it was all an American Thing, what with the War Between The States and all. But it wasn’t.
First off, the Atlantic Slave shipping was dominated by Portuguese from the very start. MOST of the slaves were landed in the Caribbean on islands or into South America. Only a very very small part were landed in North America.
Yet today, both Brazil and the USA have about the same proportion of Black African population. Ever wonder why? I’ve been told it was due to a difference of perception and costs. In North America, slaves were a dear price and a valuable asset. The Capitalist Ethic was to preserve that asset and, when possible, have it multiply and grow. Yes, slavery is “a horrible institution”, but there’s bad and a whole lot worse… In South America, not only were there a lot more diseases, but slaves were relatively cheap. As a consequence, many were simply worked to death and then more brought in.
Sidebar On Islamic Slavers: In Islamic nations, such as Arabia, they also imported Black African Slaves. BUT, they didn’t want their genes mixing so generally the men were castrated. That’s why there’s not a large ex-slave population in the Arab world…
With that said, let’s look at the map, and the tiny portion landed in North America:
Link to wiki source:
English: Map of both intercontinental and transatlantic slave trade in Africa
Date 15 February 2021
Source Own work based on Map 1, from Atlas of the Transatlantic Slave Trade (New Haven, 2010)
The original from which it was copied:
THE big takeaway here is just that the bulk of the Slave Trade went everywhere BUT North America. The big difference is that the North American slaves were largely preserved as a living intact population while those in Islamic hands were prevented from procreating and those sent to South America were largely worked to death. (Or so I have been told).
Some documentary bits:
The vast majority of those who were enslaved and transported in the transatlantic slave trade were people from Central and West Africa, who had been sold by other West Africans, or by half-European “merchant princes” to Western European slave traders (with a small number being captured directly by the slave traders in coastal raids), who brought them to the Americas. Except for the Portuguese, European slave traders generally did not participate in the raids because life expectancy for Europeans in sub-Saharan Africa was less than one year during the period of the slave trade (which was prior to the widespread availability of quinine as a treatment for malaria).
If find it a bit funny that even Uber Liberal Left Wing Biased Wiki has to admit the reality that the Slavery of Blacks originated with other Blacks. Europeans just traded in them after the fact.
The Portuguese, in the 16th century, were the first to engage in the Atlantic slave trade. In 1526, they completed the first transatlantic slave voyage to Brazil, and other Europeans soon followed.
Gee… no English nor Americans involved in starting this whole process. But what happened 300 years later, eh?
Then there’s this gem:
The first Africans kidnapped to the English colonies were classified as indentured servants, with a similar legal standing as contract-based workers coming from Britain and Ireland.
A WHOLE LOT of the Irish in America arrived as “Indentured Servants”. Now some idiots want ME to pay “reparations” to OTHER Indentured Servants progeny? How’s that fair to MY Indentured Servant ancestors? Eh?
The major Atlantic slave-trading nations, ordered by trade volume, were the Portuguese, the British, the Spanish, the French, the Dutch, and the Danish. Several had established outposts on the African coast where they purchased slaves from local African leaders.
Note that “American” is not on the list. Nor the Irish. Nor the Germans. WHY ought the German derived peoples of Ohio, for example, be charged with responsibility for that which they did not do? FWIW, over 1/2 the American population can trace some German ancestry. Another HUGE chunk has Irish ancestry.
Don’t try pushing that “White Guilt Trip” on me. My people were not involved in large part. On Mum’s side, it is possible that some Sailor ancestor (3+ generations) might have been worked on a ship on the Middle Passage, but not by choice. Note that they died as fast or faster than the slave cargo.
After being captured and held in the factories, slaves entered the infamous Middle Passage. Meltzer’s research puts this phase of the slave trade’s overall mortality at 12.5%
Despite the vast profits of slavery, the ordinary sailors on slave ships were badly paid and subject to harsh discipline. Mortality of around 20%, a number similar and sometimes greater than those of the slaves, was expected in a ship’s crew during the course of a voyage; this was due to disease, flogging, overwork, or slave uprisings. Disease (malaria or yellow fever) was the most common cause of death among sailors. A high crew mortality rate on the return voyage was in the captain’s interests as it reduced the number of sailors who had to be paid on reaching the home port.
The slave trade was hated by many sailors, and those who joined the crews of slave ships often did so through coercion or because they could find no other employment.
So basically the slaves on the ship were less at risk of death than the crew. Slaves had value and were an asset, crew were a cost center / liability.
So tell me again why my English Grunt Sailor ancestors (often pressed into service against their will ala Shanghaied, and frequently not paid either – essentially also slaves) ought to be charged with this evil?
Then just to note that this was NOT a new process and my Roman reference is valid:
European slavery in Portugal and Spain
By the 15th century, slavery had existed in the Iberian Peninsula (Portugal and Spain) of Western Europe throughout recorded history. The Roman Empire had established its system of slavery in ancient times. Since the Fall of the Western Roman Empire, various systems of slavery continued in the successor Islamic and Christian kingdoms of the peninsula through the early modern era of the Atlantic slave trade.
So you can blame Britain and America for ENDING a system of slavery with at least a 2000 year history.
End of the Atlantic slave trade
Main article: Abolitionism
See also: Blockade of Africa
William Wilberforce (1759–1833), politician and philanthropist who was a leader of the movement to abolish the slave trade.
In Britain, America, Portugal and in parts of Europe, opposition developed against the slave trade. David Brion Davis says that abolitionists assumed “that an end to slave imports would lead automatically to the amelioration and gradual abolition of slavery”.[ In Britain and America, opposition to the trade was led by members of the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers), Thomas Clarkson and establishment Evangelicals such as William Wilberforce in Parliament. Many people joined the movement and they began to protest against the trade, but they were opposed by the owners of the colonial holdings. Following Lord Mansfield’s decision in 1772, many abolitionists and slave-holders believed that slaves became free upon entering the British isles. However, in reality slavery continued in Britain right up to abolition in the 1830s. The Mansfield ruling on Somerset v Stewart only decreed that a slave could not be transported out of England against his will.
Under the leadership of Thomas Jefferson, the new state of Virginia in 1778 became the first state and one of the first jurisdictions anywhere to stop the importation of slaves for sale; it made it a crime for traders to bring in slaves from out of state or from overseas for sale; migrants from within the United States were allowed to bring their own slaves. The new law freed all slaves brought in illegally after its passage and imposed heavy fines on violators. All the other states in the United States followed suit, although South Carolina reopened its slave trade in 1803.
Denmark, which had been active in the slave trade, was the first country to ban the trade through legislation in 1792, which took effect in 1803. Britain banned the slave trade in 1807, imposing stiff fines for any slave found aboard a British ship (see Slave Trade Act 1807). The Royal Navy moved to stop other nations from continuing the slave trade and declared that slaving was equal to piracy and was punishable by death. The United States Congress passed the Slave Trade Act of 1794, which prohibited the building or outfitting of ships in the U.S. for use in the slave trade. The U.S. Constitution barred a federal prohibition on importing slaves for 20 years; at that time the Act Prohibiting Importation of Slaves prohibited imports on the first day the Constitution permitted: January 1, 1808.
Yes, those “horrible Christian White Men” set about the destruction of a 2000+ year old practice of Slavery and succeeded at it. Even at the expense of 1.5 Million Civil War Casualties and 600,000 dead White Men, mostly.
The Civil War was America’s bloodiest conflict. The unprecedented violence of battles such as Shiloh, Antietam, Stones River, and Gettysburg shocked citizens and international observers alike. Nearly as many men died in captivity during the Civil War as were killed in the whole of the Vietnam War. Hundreds of thousands died of disease. Roughly 2% of the population, an estimated 620,000 men, lost their lives in the line of duty.
Approximately one in four soldiers that went to war never returned home. At the outset of the war, neither army had mechanisms in place to handle the amount of death that the nation was about to experience. There were no national cemeteries, no burial details, and no messengers of loss. The largest human catastrophe in American history, the Civil War forced the young nation to confront death and destruction in a way that has not been equaled before or since.
There were an estimated 1.5 million casualties reported during the Civil War.
“Reparations” were completely paid, in blood, and by ending slavery. Get over it and move on with your life in freedom.