But what was the moral excuse for doing something like that? Yeah, they regarded them as not being homo sapiens but I don't see how (alleged) inferiority would excuse slavery.
But what was the moral excuse for doing something like that? Yeah, they regarded them as not being homo sapiens but I don't see how (alleged) inferiority would excuse slavery.
They thought Africans where subhumans and therefor not worthy of human rights.
In some cases they thought slavery was good for the Africans because they got a place to sleep and food to eat (even though the place to sleep was cold and the food was often bad leftovers of leftovers)
But what was the moral excuse for doing something like that? Yeah, they regarded them as not being homo sapiens but I don't see how (alleged) inferiority would excuse slavery.
People can rationalize anything. If you remove yourself far enough from the act, you can make anything admissible. There is a reason militaries actively encourage and foster de-humanizing of the enemy. It makes killing them more acceptable.
Didn't anyone think it was a tad bad to enslave other people? It wasn't that long ago either.JabbaDaHutt30
the british enslaved africans aswell, though not as much they still played a part, Chinese, Arabs, Egyptians etc All enslaved africans, slavery happened in EVERY culture there is not one culture that didnt do it at some point, but i suspect this topic is just a trolling topic, not to be taken serious
But what was the moral excuse for doing something like that? Yeah, they regarded them as not being homo sapiens but I don't see how (alleged) inferiority would excuse slavery.
There was no need to justify it; slavery was not considered a bad thing. This is just how society changes. You can ask these questions now, but they never even considered the idea that it was a moral wrong. Until they started to, of course.
But what was the moral excuse for doing something like that? Yeah, they regarded them as not being homo sapiens but I don't see how (alleged) inferiority would excuse slavery. nobody said it did. The sugar trade was one reason slavery was such a large practice. In a nutshell, Europeans liked sugar and tobacco. Sugar and tobbacco grew well in the New World. The natives were bad slaves because they were not as resistant to European disease as Africans. Europeans had contacts in Africa, and they drew slaves from there, to fuel sugar production in the Americas, to sell in Europe. All this simply happened because there was money to be made. The practice carried over after America won independence, because they had already been doing it- it was established, and it was working.
This has to be one of the dumbest questions I've seen on here, no offense TC. But its blatantly obvious, they were lazy and wanted the work done and we still not willing to pay. Thats the reason for ALL enslavement not just the US.
The natives were bad slaves because they were not as resistant to European disease as Africans. auron_16
Another reason why Native Americans made such poor slaves was because they knew the region extremely well and because of that they were able to escape with ease, which was another plus of African slave labor, considering the fact that Africans were complete strangers to the New World.
But what was the moral excuse for doing something like that? Yeah, they regarded them as not being homo sapiens but I don't see how (alleged) inferiority would excuse slavery.
There was no need to justify it; slavery was not considered a bad thing. This is just how society changes. You can ask these questions now, but they never even considered the idea that it was a moral wrong. Until they started to, of course.
I don't agree. Slavers tried to rationalize it by considering Africans somewhere between the "modern human" and... chimps, was it? They did it more later on when it began to be questioned, yes, but the reasoning was still the same as before.
People viewed africans as inferior beings. And if you were raised that way- if all your friends and faimily thought the same- what would make you think differently?
[QUOTE="alphamale1989"]People viewed africans as inferior beings. And if you were raised that way- if all your friends and faimily thought the same- what would make you think differently? First-hand experience of observing slavery? People changed eventually.
People viewed africans as inferior beings. And if you were raised that way- if all your friends and faimily thought the same- what would make you think differently?alphamale1989
Yeh, but i think they had more rights as slaves in Africa than they did as slaves in America. I'd have to see some pretty compelling evidence to buy that
Yeh, but i think they had more rights as slaves in Africa than they did as slaves in America.
And they only enslaved people from tribes that they were at war with, because it was considered better than killing them. Also after you're enslaved, if you had children they would be accepted as members of the tribe that enslaved you, so at least they would be born into slavery.
It was the African kings who sold their people to the Americans who used them as a cheap labour force to found the 13 colonies. Blame the imperial colonialism of the Spanish for opening up the African slave market in the first place.
And its no better today. There are still countless millions of people being sold as labour slaves, sex slaves and indentured debt slaves around the world.
I'd have to see some pretty compelling evidence to buy thatxaos
Slaves by definition have no rights. They serve their masters unquestioningly and if not, are punished.
People viewed africans as inferior beings. And if you were raised that way- if all your friends and faimily thought the same- what would make you think differently?alphamale1989
At the same time, they also viewed women as inferior beings. Hell, they weren't beings at all; they were objects owned by the father's and sold to husbands.
And just because you are raised a certain way does not mean you can come to a logical conclusion that defies how you were raised.
It was the African kings who sold their people to the Americans who used them as a cheap labour force to found the 13 colonies. Blame the imperial colonialism of the Spanish for opening up the African slave market in the first place.
And its no better today. There are still countless millions of people being sold as labour slaves, sex slaves and indentured debt slaves around the world.
[QUOTE="xaos"]I'd have to see some pretty compelling evidence to buy thatfoxhound_fox
Slaves by definition have no rights. They serve their masters unquestioningly and if not, are punished. I almost said that, characterizing slavery as by definition deprivation of rights, but I can see at least having required standards of treatment, which is sort of a "right"
It was the African kings who sold their people to the Americans who used them as a cheap labour force to found the 13 colonies. Blame the imperial colonialism of the Spanish for opening up the African slave market in the first place.
And its no better today. There are still countless millions of people being sold as labour slaves, sex slaves and indentured debt slaves around the world.
[QUOTE="xaos"]I'd have to see some pretty compelling evidence to buy thatfoxhound_fox
Slaves by definition have no rights. They serve their masters unquestioningly and if not, are punished.
People viewed africans as inferior beings. And if you were raised that way- if all your friends and faimily thought the same- what would make you think differently?alphamale1989
At the same time, they also viewed women as inferior beings. Hell, they weren't beings at all; they were objects owned by the father's and sold to husbands.
And just because you are raised a certain way does not mean you can come to a logical conclusion that defies how you were raised.
Exactly, some places in the middle east still use african slaves, child prostitute slaves you name it lol, slavery still happens all over the world mainly in poorer countries, whats sad is, more than often children are used now, more than adults
I almost said that, characterizing slavery as by definition deprivation of rights, but I can see at least having required standards of treatment, which is sort of a "right"xaos
There really has never been a standard for slave treatment. There are nice owners, there are bad owners and there are brutal owners. No one owner treats their slaves the same and none are forced to treat them nicely at all. You can always afford more slaves if the ones you have aren't working out.
Yeh, but i think they had more rights as slaves in Africa than they did as slaves in America.
And they only enslaved people from tribes that they were at war with, because it was considered better than killing them. Also after you're enslaved, if you had children they would be accepted as members of the tribe that enslaved you, so at least they would be born into slavery.
Like I said earlier, slaves were better off serving rival tribes that working the the U.S.
[QUOTE="xaos"]I almost said that, characterizing slavery as by definition deprivation of rights, but I can see at least having required standards of treatment, which is sort of a "right"foxhound_fox
There really has never been a standard for slave treatment. There are nice owners, there are bad owners and there are brutal owners. No one owner treats their slaves the same and none are forced to treat them nicely at all. You can always afford more slaves if the ones you have aren't working out. I know this isn't your view at all, but i don't think anyone who deals in slave labour can be 'nice' i mean the most they are doing is looking after there own selfish interests, that being that there slaves are there assets and they want to keep them well looked after.. they wouldnt give a damm otherwise.
[QUOTE="xaos"]I almost said that, characterizing slavery as by definition deprivation of rights, but I can see at least having required standards of treatment, which is sort of a "right"foxhound_fox
There really has never been a standard for slave treatment. There are nice owners, there are bad owners and there are brutal owners. No one owner treats their slaves the same and none are forced to treat them nicely at all. You can always afford more slaves if the ones you have aren't working out.
That's not exactly true... Many cultures had different laws dealing with slaves and what you were legally able to do with them, what responsibilities you had to your slave, and ways a slave could (if it all) earn their freedom. Also, like the other person pointed out, slaves from different cultures had different rights.
Yeh, but i think they had more rights as slaves in Africa than they did as slaves in America. I'd have to see some pretty compelling evidence to buy that They were entitled to education, marriage and parenthood.
[QUOTE="FalcoLX"]Europeans started enslaving them first. America just went along with it.MoonMarvel
Exactly, Europe started it and for a long time America had no choice but to follow. So blame Europe not America for starting it.Had no choice but to follow? Way to push away the dark history.
I know this isn't your view at all, but i don't think anyone who deals in slave labour can be 'nice' i mean the most they are doing is looking after there own selfish interests, that being that there slaves are there assets and they want to keep them well looked after.. they wouldnt give a damm otherwise.RiseAgainst12
You can treat your slaves with respect. Just because you own them and they are forced to obey you doesn't mean you cannot treat them as human beings and be fair. Many people throughout history have probably treated their slaves with respect and kindness... to assume that everyone beat them ruthlessly is to assume wrongly. Many ancient cultures slave trades were incredibly fair and a way for many people to have a job and earn food and shelter for their families when otherwise they would starve on the streets (ala Ancient Greece).
Being a slave was never really a "wholly bad" thing until more recent centuries. Plenty of people could only ever afford to survive as slaves for the upper cIass.
That's not exactly true... Many cultures had different laws dealing with slaves and what you were legally able to do with them, what responsibilities you had to your slave, and ways a slave could (if it all) earn their freedom.dnuggs40
Laws =/= rights
And there was absolutely no laws or rights for Spanish- or American-owned African slaves. They were merely a cheap and expendable work force exploited solely for their ability to be bought for practically nothing and work for nothing.
[QUOTE="xaos"][QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"] Yeh, but i think they had more rights as slaves in Africa than they did as slaves in America.AAllxxjjnn
I'd have to see some pretty compelling evidence to buy that They were entitled to education, marriage and parenthood. Except for education, wasn't it the same in American slavery; what is your source for this? Regardless, it's all still slavery and utterly reprehensible.
[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"] They were entitled to education, marriage and parenthood. so were american slaves, with the exception being education. that was at the owner's discretion.
Log in to comment