U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Africa
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-12-2016, 01:44 AM
 
1 posts, read 1,134 times
Reputation: 15

Advertisements

i am not expert in this. but it is nice discussion. good to be here.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-13-2016, 12:14 PM
 
Location: Historic West End
4,216 posts, read 3,585,565 times
Reputation: 4024
Once Europe resources starting dwindling they started raiding Africa.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-15-2016, 11:54 AM
 
1,829 posts, read 1,251,381 times
Reputation: 1822
Quote:
Originally Posted by NigerianNightmare View Post
Yes it has look at Japan. They would have gone like China but then they got attacked realized how far they were behind then made the sacrifices to develop and become a powerhouse.
Japan was not conquered. The intent of America's missions were not to conquer Japan but to open up Japan, which it was successful in.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-15-2016, 05:26 PM
 
3,743 posts, read 1,803,848 times
Reputation: 3757
Quote:
Originally Posted by Motion View Post
In what ways did European countries benefit from the Trans-Atlantic slave trade and colonialism?
They made a bunch of money until the colonies kicked their asses back to england. After that they benefitted in WWI and WWII when the US saved them.

In what ways have young AA's in modern day America benefitted from the T-A slave trade and colonialism?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-05-2016, 08:50 PM
 
4,433 posts, read 4,417,168 times
Reputation: 3500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seixal View Post
At one time in point locally a few coastline cities did benefit somehow from it to build some public buildings. However keeping the triangular trade was very costly too. Nevertheless it didn't develop Europe. The industrial revolution did.
This made me search this because the industrial Revolution benefited from the slave trade.


The industrial revolution itself was dominated by the textile industry. Which was by dominated American cotton, American cotton came from slavery. So it's ironic The North and Europe outlaw slavery but still depended on the American's South Cotton. So Slaves had a greater impact on the industrial Revolution. Slave holders and traders was not the only benefiting from Slavery.



https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...ng_in_1835.jpg








The Role Cotton Played in the 1800s Economy | African American History Blog | The African Americans: Many Rivers to Cross | PBS

"Cotton was the leading American export from 1803 to 1937"

"What did cotton production and slavery have to do with Great Britain? The figures are astonishing. As Dattel explains: “Britain, the most powerful nation in the world, relied on slave-produced American cotton for over 80 per cent of its essential industrial raw material. English textile mills accounted for 40 percent of Britain’s exports. One-fifth of Britain’s twenty-two million people were directly or indirectly involved with cotton textiles.”

"And, finally, New England? As Ronald Bailey shows, cotton fed the textile revolution in the United States. “In 1860, for example, New England had 52 percent of the manufacturing establishments and 75 percent of the 5.14 million spindles in operation,” he explains. The same goes for looms. In fact, Massachusetts “alone had 30 percent of all spindles, and Rhode Island another 18 percent.” Most impressively of all, “New England mills consumed 283.7 million pounds of cotton, or 67 percent of the 422.6 million pounds of cotton used by U.S. mills in 1860.” In other words, on the eve of the Civil War, New England’s economy, so fundamentally dependent upon the textile industry, was inextricably intertwined, as Bailey puts it, “to the labor of black people working as slaves in the U.S. South."




BBC - History - British History in depth: Enslavement and Industrialisation

"Slave-owning planters, and merchants who dealt in slaves and slave produce, were among the richest people in 18th-century Britain. Profits from these activities helped to endow All Souls College, Oxford, with a splendid library, to build a score of banks, including Barclays, and to finance the experiments of James Watt, inventor of the first really efficient steam engine."

"British capitalism was a cause rather than consequence of slave plantation development. But the fit between slave plantation growth and industrial advance in Britain was to be impressive and sustained. The plantation colonies supplied the mother country with a growing stream of popular luxuries - dyestuffs, sugar, tobacco, then later coffee and chocolate as well - and cotton, a crucial industrial input."

"Colonial purchases of British goods were a major stimulus to the economy. Around 1770, 96.3% of British exports of nails and 70.5% of the export of wrought iron went to colonial and African markets. Around the same time, British exports of iron manufactures took 15-19% of domestic iron production.

Textile exports accounted for between a third and a half of total production, with colonial and African markets again taking a huge share. In the periods 1784-1786 and 1805-1807, the growth of exports accounted for no less than 87% of the growth of British output."

The Cotton Industry and the Industrial Revolution - History Learning Site

America was supplying 3/4 the world cotton during slavery. That was being traded to North and Europe.

Watch @ 7 to 11 mins

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j3m3sEx-Vf4




------

I'm Still learning about Colonial Africa.........


https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com...82e9c01ef2.jpg


Diamonds are not all that rare, they were so common in South Africa they had little value so false scarcity was created by limiting supply. Later the Engagement Ring was popularize by the same company. To drive up demand.


How an Ad Campaign Invented the Diamond Engagement Ring - The Atlantic


Diamonds Are Bull****


"American males enter adulthood through a peculiar rite of passage — they spend most of their savings on a shiny piece of rock. They could invest the money in assets that will compound over time and someday provide a nest egg. Instead, they trade that money for a diamond ring, which isn’t much of an asset at all. As soon as you leave the jeweler with a diamond, it loses over 50 percent of its value.

Americans exchange diamond rings as part of the engagement process, because in 1938 De Beers decided that they would like us to. Prior to a stunningly successful marketing campaign 1938, Americans occasionally exchanged engagement rings, but wasn’t a pervasive occurrence. Not only is the demand for diamonds a marketing invention, but diamonds aren’t actually that rare. Only by carefully restricting the supply has De Beers kept the price of a diamond high."


Five myths about diamonds

Although you won't stumble across a diamond while digging in your tomato garden, they are far more common than their cost suggests. The big gem companies aggressively control the supply that arrives at market, creating artificial scarcity and high prices.
This practice was born in the diamond fields of South Africa in the 1880s, when Cecil Rhodes, the chairman of De Beers Consolidated Mines, discovered that he could inflate prices at will simply by locking up the rights to every diamond mine he could find.






Diamond History and Lore


The story of the modern diamond market really begins on the African continent, with the 1866 discovery of diamonds in Kimberley, South Africa. Entrepreneur Cecil Rhodes established De Beers Consolidated Mines Limited 22 years later, in 1888. By 1900, De Beers, through its mines in South Africa, controlled an estimated 90 percent of the world’s production of rough diamonds.

The South African sources affected many segments of the diamond industry. This was especially true as diamond mining moved from the surface to farther underground. Because of the huge costs and comparatively low yields involved, the new sources forced the development of more efficient mining techniques. They created the need for better marketing. They also led to advances in cutting and polishing—advances that increased efficiency, reduced costs, and enhanced the appearance of finished stones.

In the 1870s, annual production of rough diamond was well under a million carats. By the 1920s, the figure was around three million carats. Fifty years later, annual production approached 50 million carats, and in the 1990s it surpassed 100 million carats per year.






https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com...0b1e3a0073.jpg


Rubber & the Belgian Free State


"officially, between 1884 and 1906 the Congo was controlled by a company entirely owned by King Leopold. The area was referred to as the 'Belgian Free State.' Until the end of the 1800s this company primarily exported ivory and palm-oil, a lubricant, from the Congo. Only a small profit was made from these products. At the end of the century, however, the world discovered rubber. Soon everyone wanted it to make tires, hoses, tubes, valves and many other products. Rubber is produced from a latex ‘sap’ that came either from a tree or a vine, both of which grew exceptionally well in the Congo Jungle. Because of the new demand, the Belgian companies began demanding massive amounts of rubber from the jungle and forced the natives to find massive amounts of it and deliver it to them."

"King Leopold became incredibly wealthy from the sale of rubber and the Congo paid the price. The method that most harvesters used to get the sap destroyed the trees and vines they took it from. Soon the Belgians began to hire soldiers to make sure that the natives produced the raw material. They threatened them with starvation, mutilation or even death if they did not produce enough rubber. Many times they followed through with the threats. Between the 1880s and 1903 the population of the Congo was reduced from over 20 million people to about 8.5 million. Joseph Conrad, an author who was there during this time, in his book Heart of Darkness, best illustrated what was going on there when one character on his death bed comments on the situation by simply saying: “the horror, the horror.”

25 to 35 mins Rubber and Congo


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r81bmiJo3To


----------

Most of the Slave trade was agriculture, In the US Cotton, Tobacco and some places rice, And in Brazil, Jamaica, Haiti, Cuba, and etc Sugar was dominate. How ever slaves mined in Columbia and Slaves Built a lot of colonial towns especially in Latin America.

São Francisco Church .... this Church in Salvador Brazil was Built by slaves physically..... At the same time it shows the wealth being created because of slavery.



Michelle Obama: ‘Did you know that African-American slaves helped to build’ the White House?

The legend of slaves building Capitol is correct | PolitiFact

In 2005, Congress appointed a task force to research the subject, which issued a report in conjunction with the Office of the Architect of the Capitol, finally bringing a measure of scholarly rigor to bear on the topic.

The task force acknowledged it was not able to tell the full story. "No one will ever know how many slaves helped to build the United States Capitol Building — or the White House," says the 2005 task force report, entitled History of Slave Laborers in the Construction of the United States Capitol.

But the task force did find plenty of evidence of slave involvement in the Capitol's construction. Perhaps the most compelling evidence were records of payments from the commissioners for the District of Columbia — the three men appointed by George Washington to oversee the construction of the Capitol and the rest of the city of Washington — to slave owners for the rental of slaves to work on the Capitol. The records reflect 385 payments between 1795 and 1801 for "Negro hire," a euphemism for the yearly rental of slaves.

Slaves were likely involved in all aspects of construction, including carpentry, masonry, carting, rafting, plastering, glazing and painting, the task force reported. And slaves appear to have shouldered alone the grueling work of sawing logs and stones.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-05-2016, 09:58 PM
 
23 posts, read 13,024 times
Reputation: 28
Wow great info chiatldal.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-06-2016, 12:44 AM
 
749 posts, read 596,655 times
Reputation: 842
How much did Africa benefit from enslaving and selling their own people? How about the Arab world who had the monopoly on slave trade for centuries? How about White European who endured slavery for centuries, who feels bad for them? Are there any monuments remembering their sacrifice? Did they help develop Europe too?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-06-2016, 09:06 AM
 
Location: Katy,Texas
3,501 posts, read 1,699,618 times
Reputation: 2212
Quote:
Originally Posted by Parhe View Post
Japan was not conquered. The intent of America's missions were not to conquer Japan but to open up Japan, which it was successful in.
The U.S forced Japan to trade, that is basically conquering the country when you can do anything you want to the country and they can't stop you. Japan realized it was weak then went and modernized as quickly as possible.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-07-2016, 05:15 AM
 
177 posts, read 152,867 times
Reputation: 931
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seattle4321 View Post
How much did the slave trade benefit native Africans? You know the rulers or random Africans would capture people and sell them. What benefits did that give to Africa? Seriously. What benefits did the slave trade have to the Middle East? The Arab slavery was the largest amount of slavery ever to happen. What effects did that have on the Middle East? A lot of people don't know about the Arab slave trade. Here's a good website to get some info. 10 Facts About The Arab Enslavement Of Black People Not Taught In Schools - Atlanta Black Star
Nobody in their right mind cares about your narrative. Isn't there a hovel that is missing someone?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-08-2016, 01:29 AM
 
4,433 posts, read 4,417,168 times
Reputation: 3500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seattle4321 View Post
How much did the slave trade benefit native Africans? You know the rulers or random Africans would capture people and sell them. What benefits did that give to Africa? Seriously. What benefits did the slave trade have to the Middle East? The Arab slavery was the largest amount of slavery ever to happen. What effects did that have on the Middle East? A lot of people don't know about the Arab slave trade. Here's a good website to get some info. 10 Facts About The Arab Enslavement Of Black People Not Taught In Schools - Atlanta Black Star
Quote:
Originally Posted by seixal View Post
How much did Africa benefit from enslaving and selling their own people? How about the Arab world who had the monopoly on slave trade for centuries? How about White European who endured slavery for centuries, who feels bad for them? Are there any monuments remembering their sacrifice? Did they help develop Europe too?
What does this have to do with anything related with the topic? It's seem like yall trying Counter the topic or water down the topic because y'all want to discusses. maybe some day we will able to have a discussion about history and race with posters trying to turn it into a competition. Which I'm sensing maybe the motivate of yall post. Yall first error is not separating slavery with race, the trans Atlantic slave trade was partial related to racism. It was racially motivate and was a racial castes, The Situations yall mention were not.


which brings up the difference between chattel slavery vs indentured servitude. the trans Atlantic slave trade was chattel slavery because race defined it in the Americas. It was generational that people was born into slavery and their children inherently became slaves simply because their race And they could not have upward mobility to join the political system and etc.

Non of the other situations yall brought were race related. While slavery is negative regardless and chattel slavery could happen anywhere indentured servitude was more common. Slavery was a dishonored earn owing debt, being a criminal, or war captive. People was not slaves because on their race.

Europeans did not go to Africa and discover what slavery was. Europeans practiced a color blind white on white indentured servitude form of Slavery with Rome, Germanic tribes, Vikings, and etc. During late middle ages Churches ban slavery to Christians. Which Europeans were christians... So Europeans went to places of color and made it racially focus even if slaves was converted in the new world they were in double standard of still being slaves. And because it was raced related instead of a dishonored earn it was generational caste defined by skin color.

------------------------------

But to answer yall questions

Yes and no, Many of the West African Kingdoms become slavery base economies While they did economically benefited, the slaves were war captives. they was not born into slavery, Buying Slaves was basically sponsoring wars. While slavey existed in the Americas West Africa was in a stated of on going wars. So yall questions are like asking does a Drug cartel benefit the host country. The more Europeans bought slaves the more un diverse and dependent on the trade the kingdoms became which wasn't Healthy for their economy in the long run.. Besides slaves these kingdoms were trading Gold and spices. but Europeans intervention cause a market bubble if you will around the slave trade. so when slavery stop, there economy collapse, So while there was short term gain for some kings the trade overall weaken these Kingdoms progressing. Clearly the trans Atlantic Slave didn't built Africa.

Did white slaves help build Europe? very possibly but not modernly and less obvious. Slavery in the Americas supplied a surplus of wealth in European nations and during the industrial revolution. That's a very different context.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Africa
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top