West Coast Connection Forum
Lifestyle => Train of Thought => Topic started by: TraceOneInfinite Flat Earther 96' on March 01, 2007, 10:17:56 PM
-
I was at Barnes and Noble bookstore the other day and I went to their history section. I was curious and I started browsing through all these books about the rise and fall of the British Empire. You know what they all had in common?
The first chapters all start with the white man's immigration to the America's (this includes the islands). For Britian this mainly started at the beggining of the 17th century. Then it goes in order like this...
1. White man comes to America
2. White man can't survive in America
3. Native American Indians try to help white man
4. White man still can't survive in America
5. White man starts importing slaves from Africa to do white man's work
...6. Suddenly white man's fortune changes, Britian becomes wealthy, starts dominating world polotics for next 400 years
-
As a footnote, you can go back even before that, and say that Europe only came out of the dark ages as a result of Islamic Spain's influence on the region. And this ofcourse immediately relates to the white man's discovery of America; because after the Christian Spanish inquisition took over Spain, Spain soon thereafter lead the way in the white man's discovery and immigration to America.
-
You're wrong.
-
You're wrong.
Explain
-
Definatly some truth to that. But I think the Industrial Revolution played a part too. ;)
-
Definatly some truth to that. But I think the Industrial Revolution played a part too. ;)
I'll agree with that... but then again... that's the big reason the West stopped using the system of slavery, because they modernized slavery and so the black people weren't working in the fields anymore, they were working in the cities, in the industry; and the old system of slavery doesn't work in the city. But still, their apartment was owned by the white man, and all their money was spent at the white man's businesses. So it was just an updated version of slavery, with some obvious advantages.
Think about it, how come the North didn't mind fighting the South over the issue of slavery? Is it because the Northern white man was that much more humane than the Southern white man? Ofcourse not. It's because the North had industry while the South was farming. Blacks could work for the industry in the North and slavery didn't need to be applied in the same manner there.
-
you have lost track of reality, seriously what drugs are you using? gotta make sure i never use that shit 8)
-
those six points are all fallacies and are just slanted pieces of shit to support your little white guilt essay
-
You're wrong.
Explain
The "RISE" of the West had nothing to do with the slave trade. Slaves were used for labor after the rise, but had nothing to do with the West actually beginning to surpass the rest of the world.
-
The "RISE" of the West had nothing to do with the slave trade. Slaves were used for labor after the rise, but had nothing to do with the West actually beginning to surpass the rest of the world.
Then please tell me about the "actual" beggining because it seems all the authors at Barnes and Noble must have missed what you know about. So again, I ask you to explain.
-
Why is everyone taking abdul serious, i mean its all his opinions, backed up by facts, but its still his opinion, im sure theres at least hundreds of people with other views on it...lol
he bases all this on 1 book he read, thats hella stupid 8)
-
so what should we do?
-
god this guy is a kook..
make your mind up.. is it off the back of black people,or muslims?
which nationality white people "stole the slaves"?
how did the first shipments of slaves get populated?.. i.e. who gave the whites the slaves? did the go round up people like cattle or what?
do you know how small a part of europe spain is when compared to the rest? fuck all influence on the rest.
nexy time you "travel" try travelling to spain, france, greece and england or something get a real handle on the shit you talk about..
in the most part spain is a backwards ass country of fisherman and farmers and its deeply catholic, just like its adjacent portugal it aint no "power base".. in other parts they have some beautiful stuff, barcelona in particular is stunning.. and work on the sagrada cathedral started in 1882 and is still going. check the pics http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sagrada_Fam%C3%ADlia
-
The "RISE" of the West had nothing to do with the slave trade. Slaves were used for labor after the rise, but had nothing to do with the West actually beginning to surpass the rest of the world.
Then please tell me about the "actual" beggining because it seems all the authors at Barnes and Noble must have missed what you know about. So again, I ask you to explain.
First of all, the authors whose books you skimmed through didn't reach the conclusion of the West's rise being tied to the slave trade... you admitted that's the conclusion you came to. For obvious reasons, free labor was definitely beneficial to them, and they gained a lot from slavery, but that doesn't mean the rise of the west began with slavery. Before I answer your question, think about this... slavery existed for many many years before the West used Africans in the New World, so why didn't all those other people practicing slavery rise to the status of the West?
The institutions of capitalism existed in the Middle East thousands of years ago, but the thing is that merchants/traders were looked down upon since they made so much money without producing anything tangible, while farmers were working their asses off in the fields making jackshit. Since a majority of the people saw them as some kind of evil, it was easy for governments to rape them for their money.. nobody was gonna oppose it. What changed everything to what we see today is the Papal revolution in 1075. This created the legal and administrative infrastucture for a market economy (ex: property rights, protecting Merchants, etc). The Church was above the State, so now profit-seeking was the norm, and it was protected. For over a thousand years, the economies (standards of living) in places like China and India were greater than that of the West (Roman Empire, etc)... but this is when the West BEGAN to RISE... and eventually with the Industrial Revolution, completely leave others in the dust (that's because it transformed agrarian economies constrained by the products derived from a limited resource aka land to one using an "unlimited" amount aka fossil fuels.. leading to promethean intensive growth yada yada if you want me to go into the specific economic aspects let me know.)
-
god this guy is a kook..
make your mind up.. is it off the back of black people,or muslims?
which nationality white people "stole the slaves"?
how did the first shipments of slaves get populated?.. i.e. who gave the whites the slaves? did the go round up people like cattle or what?
do you know how small a part of europe spain is when compared to the rest? fuck all influence on the rest.
nexy time you "travel" try travelling to spain, france, greece and england or something get a real handle on the shit you talk about..
in the most part spain is a backwards ass country of fisherman and farmers and its deeply catholic, just like its adjacent portugal it aint no "power base".. in other parts they have some beautiful stuff, barcelona in particular is stunning.. and work on the sagrada cathedral started in 1882 and is still going. check the pics http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sagrada_Fam%C3%ADlia
So, what exactly is your counter argument to what I said?
I guess you were trying to say that what I said somehow wasn't true because black Afrrican's were involved in selling their own people to white slave owners. Okay, fine. What's your point?
That still doesn't do anything to refute the fact that the British Empire was biult on the backs of black slaves.
-
First of all, the authors whose books you skimmed through didn't reach the conclusion of the West's rise being tied to the slave trade... you admitted that's the conclusion you came to. For obvious reasons, free labor was definitely beneficial to them, and they gained a lot from slavery, but that doesn't mean the rise of the west began with slavery. Before I answer your question, think about this... slavery existed for many many years before the West used Africans in the New World, so why didn't all those other people practicing slavery rise to the status of the West?
Well, the European Nations were getting rich off of America's resources and using the slaves there. The Middle East for example didn't have a whole new continent at their feet in which they could use to cultivate and earn great profits.
The institutions of capitalism existed in the Middle East thousands of years ago, but the thing is that merchants/traders were looked down upon since they made so much money without producing anything tangible, while farmers were working their asses off in the fields making jackshit. Since a majority of the people saw them as some kind of evil, it was easy for governments to rape them for their money.. nobody was gonna oppose it. What changed everything to what we see today is the Papal revolution in 1075. This created the legal and administrative infrastucture for a market economy (ex: property rights, protecting Merchants, etc). The Church was above the State, so now profit-seeking was the norm, and it was protected. For over a thousand years, the economies (standards of living) in places like China and India were greater than that of the West (Roman Empire, etc)... but this is when the West BEGAN to RISE... and eventually with the Industrial Revolution, completely leave others in the dust (that's because it transformed agrarian economies constrained by the products derived from a limited resource aka land to one using an "unlimited" amount aka fossil fuels.. leading to promethean intensive growth yada yada if you want me to go into the specific economic aspects let me know.)
Okay, the thing you metioned about the Papal revolution sounds interesting and it sounds like a possible explanation for the rise of the West. So my next question would be, how come they never mention that in school or in most books you would find about the rise of Europe, the British Empire, or America, etc.
btw, give me any more information you have about the Papl revolution because that is interesting.
peace.
-
I learned about it at school, and it is written in books... and just like with so many other things, it doesn't mean it's going to be written in every book and taught at every school.
-
god this guy is a kook..
make your mind up.. is it off the back of black people,or muslims?
which nationality white people "stole the slaves"?
how did the first shipments of slaves get populated?.. i.e. who gave the whites the slaves? did the go round up people like cattle or what?
do you know how small a part of europe spain is when compared to the rest? fuck all influence on the rest.
nexy time you "travel" try travelling to spain, france, greece and england or something get a real handle on the shit you talk about..
in the most part spain is a backwards ass country of fisherman and farmers and its deeply catholic, just like its adjacent portugal it aint no "power base".. in other parts they have some beautiful stuff, barcelona in particular is stunning.. and work on the sagrada cathedral started in 1882 and is still going. check the pics http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sagrada_Fam%C3%ADlia
So, what exactly is your counter argument to what I said?
I guess you were trying to say that what I said somehow wasn't true because black Afrrican's were involved in selling their own people to white slave owners. Okay, fine. What's your point?
That still doesn't do anything to refute the fact that the British Empire was biult on the backs of black slaves.
Its not about black people as slaves, they was sold out by their own people in africa to the european slavers (yes european, i know for a fact holland where im from had a part in it too, as well as england, france and w/e other country here) so there was people in africa who had benefits of seeling their own people, both sides is wrong if you ask me. nobody is owned by anyone, and im glad we in a age where slavery is gone.
with all respect but spain has almost no influence in europe, never had too, they used to have a big fleet but they was destroyed by the dutch centuries ago, and it always used to be england, holland and germany (and france from time to time) dominating europe's directions. so all your arguments with spain in it can be disregarded right away.
"Shakur Abdul-Latif's Definition Of Hip-Hop" youre an attention whore in its purest form, just looking to get arguments started to get some attention, and yes since you seem to know so much about europe, like seer said travel here next time, if you come to holland hit me up on this forum and we can hook up to see who is right, fool you dont want it with me you idiot ;D
-
xander already responded to the points i was making.. theres not much else for me to say..
the dutch were most prominent among the original slavers.. and yeah.. the original "batches" of slaves werent "sold out".. but they were actually prisoners to their own people..
what used to happen in africa was that if a man was imprisoned by his village due to crimes.. they'd barter HIS labour with neighboring villages in return for goods.. what happened is.. the whites (mostly dutch at first).. came along with a better offer to the villages with labour for sale.. and took the villages prisoners/slaves to america to work.. kind of like how austrailia was later populated with white slaves from the prison population
oh and dont forget that the moors (the black muslims who ran spain for a very small amount of time).. enslaved white people..
so there were black muslim slavers before the whites ever did it..
That still doesn't do anything to refute the fact that the British Empire was biult on the backs of black slaves.
oh man you're so far from the truth its really fucking scary..
i wont waste my energy argueing with someone so far from reality.
you're the master at over simplifying things and applying a "1 rule fits all" mentality to everything.
-
I agree, white people are worthless. They had to take slaves from Africa who are much better people in the first place to do work they couldn't do themselves and take all the profit from it.
-
Its not about black people as slaves, they was sold out by their own people in africa to the european slavers (yes european, i know for a fact holland where im from had a part in it too, as well as england, france and w/e other country here) so there was people in africa who had benefits of seeling their own people, both sides is wrong if you ask me. nobody is owned by anyone, and im glad we in a age where slavery is gone.
with all respect but spain has almost no influence in europe, never had too, they used to have a big fleet but they was destroyed by the dutch centuries ago, and it always used to be england, holland and germany (and france from time to time) dominating europe's directions. so all your arguments with spain in it can be disregarded right away.
"Shakur Abdul-Latif's Definition Of Hip-Hop" youre an attention whore in its purest form, just looking to get arguments started to get some attention, and yes since you seem to know so much about europe, like seer said travel here next time, if you come to holland hit me up on this forum and we can hook up to see who is right, fool you dont want it with me you idiot ;D
Okay, so you mentioned other nations were involved in the slave trade. That still doesn't refute the fact that the British Empire was biult on the backs of slaves! That's like me saying that Shaq is a good NBA player because he's tall; and you tell me no he's not because Kevin Garnett is tall.
The only person that came with something useful in this thread was Jamal.
I said that the British Empire was biult on the backs of slaves, and instead of coming with a legitimate counter-argument, you guys just made a few weak personal attacks on me; and tried to shift the blame by saying blacks sold other blacks, and other European nations (Dutch, you said) were involved.
My thread wasn't about... "Ohhh, the British are the worst people in the world because they have slaves." Then your arguments might have been useful cause you would have shown how others had done the same and tried to claim that that would make them equally as bad (although then I would have had to bring up that American slavery was racist and possibly the most brutal form of slavery ever; but that's a different arguement and subject alltogether).
-
so what should we do?
-
so what should we do?
before you answer that infinite, could you explain to me the qu'rans outlook on slavery?
-
so what should we do?
Don't all of Infinite's posts have the same underlying messeage? Convert to Islam.
-
1) The British empire was built on trade and commerce
2) The Abolition of the Slave Trade Act was passed by the British Parliament on 25 March 1807, in 1833 it was abolished in the colonies aswell
3) The industrial revolution didn't start until about 1830, although its beginnings were about a century prior to this
4) From 1839 Britain used its naval supremacy to pursue boats carrying slaves from Africa, a crime punishable by death
-
and america didnt ban slavery till 1865
so thats..
england 1807, british colonies 1833, america 1865
america stopped 58 years after england did..
that also means that this year marks 200 years since the uk banned slavery
-
abdul, i fucked your mom, now she has aids :)
-
bryan when will your book be released? I can't fucking wait to read that bitch.
-
Guys, you really should have more sympathy for Abdulla. His father ruined his lfe at a young age by being a drunk, and any kid who grows up without a father is going to be fucked up. His father's white, so Abdulla hates white people. His father's american, so Abdulla hates America. His father's christian, so Abdulla hates christians. His father named him Brian, so Abdulla changed his name. His father lives in wherever the fuck, so Abdulla moved away. It's a pretty fucking easy read.
BTW, now Brian doesn't have to write his book, I just wrote it for him.
-
^shut the fuck up man.
-
Who are you? I'm a man, i'll say what the fuck I want, to whom I want, whenever I want. You must have confused me with someone more bitchlike, someone similar to yourself.
-
lol, yeah you say what you want when you want on dubcc, but i wonder how you speak in real life... and if you'd speak to someone the way you did to infinite..
yeah he pisses me off too, but damn you went below the belt.
-
Who are you? I'm a man
keep tellin yourself that ;)