If blacks built American, why aren't Liberia and Sierra Leone rich? (inventor, slavery)
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.
I think the contrast between North & South Korea backs up your reply. While not exactly slaves, the north Koreans are captive in that they aren't allowed to leave. 70 years ago they were both dirt poor nations. Today South Korea has a thriving economy. North Koreans can't even feed themselves.
Granted there are other factors going on such as national policies. But I don't know of any other example to back up or refute that slavery is a net drain.
I'm not buying it. The black market where people are being sold, is a billion dollar untapped resource that is propping up the global economy and keeps the supply chains lucrative. It's not costing governments a cent, it's fueling them.
They didn't.. They were used as manual labor in 7 states to farm 2-3 primary cash crops. That is really the extent to the contributions at the onset of the Nation.
Cotton, tobacco, and sugar cane were the raw materials that went into the mills, that produced clothing, molasses, rum, tobacco for smoking. Cotton was sent to mills in America and Britain. The wealth generated from the finished product would contribute to alot of wealth that Black slaves never benefitted from.
The wealth generated from the finished product would contribute to alot of wealth that Black slaves never benefitted from.
Living in America instead of Africa sounds like a benefit.
Maybe you can tell us another way America would’ve had 48 million modern African Americans: The largest black population of any developed country on earth.
America would be Canada, with only a 3% black population instead of a 13% black population, if it wasn’t for the importation of African labor.
Cotton, tobacco, and sugar cane were the raw materials that went into the mills, that produced clothing, molasses, rum, tobacco for smoking. Cotton was sent to mills in America and Britain. The wealth generated from the finished product would contribute to alot of wealth that Black slaves never benefitted from.
Britain got cotton from India and China before America got into the game after the War of 1812. In fact, cotton didn't hit its bull market stride until after the cotton gin made processing it more efficient, and after that, the most efficient producers who had large workforces of both paid and slave labor, plus assembly line segmentation of those workers assigned to specific steps/tasks, made the most money.
And while cotton did have input use in the North, it was essentially one of only two commodities produced in the South that paid all their bills and allowed them to import all the things thye didn't do well...namely, everything other than cotton, tobacco and subsistence agriculture. Most if not all of their machinery came from northern factories. Most of their distribution used shipping machinery made in northern factories. Most of the rail track their cotton traveled on was made in northern mills. Etc etc.
At its peak in the mid 1850s, all cotton related input to the economy maxed at 5% of the GDP. Peak...max...all time high. And slave labor was a percentage of the total labor force that contributed to it, which from extrapolation of recorded history estimates that the slave labor portion of cotton production peaked at around 1.5-1.7% of GDP, which gives slave labor credit for about 35% of cotton's contribution to the GDP.
The GDP is the measure of a nation's output productivity, and cotton never got past 5% of the total. That means 95% of the output productivity came from the rest of the economy. Basic, easily observable historical facts show the northern states outperformed the south across the board in almost every measurable way EXCEPT cotton and tobacco. Makes sense, given the north stopped using slave labor earlier, had way more rail, more distribution, better industrial machine output, better distribution and transportation of goods, more population, etc etc.
I am not discounting that slave labor was indeed an input to the GDP, but at the peak market value of the commodity most commonly associated with slave labor, that labor accounted for an estimated max 1.7% of the GDP at the time.
Can we accurately say that slavery was abominable? Absolutely.
Can we accurately say that slavery did produce a share of the GDP that slaves themselves were not compensated for? Absolutely.
Can we accurately say that slavery should have been outlawed? Absolutely.
but...
we can also accurately say that outlawing slavery does, in fact, represent the greatest confiscation/invalidation of property in the history of the nation. So while the slaves were never compensated for their labor, it is also JUST AS TRUE that slave owners were never compensated for the loss of their sunken costs. In order for the abominable practice to end, many law abiding citizens had to be made to suffer severe financial loss based on property that was legally owned, obtained and utilized one day being made illegal the next day.
In one of those articles I linked, they point out that a state's prosperity over the last 200 years is directly proportional with how early they internally outlawed slavery. As in, the states that gave it up the earliest are, to this day, more prosperous than those who gave it up latest. Thus, it can be shown via a number of historical indicators that slavery held back economic progress everywhere that depended on it.
This again does not discount the unpaid labor of the slave themselves. Far from it actually. What all this means is that slave labor is economically ignorant IN ADDITION to being inherently evil in every way. It's simply less efficient towards earning profit than using paid labor and technology, which our history proves beyond doubt.
You can lament what slaves endured and find the practice detestable, which I do, without having to say that 1.7% of the GDP at its peak is what "built America." Slaves do not need to be inaccurately and illogically deified for us to lament that such a horrific practice was ever legal. It takes a properly sympathetic view of that history and makes it an easily defeated bit of hyperbole.
Cotton, tobacco, and sugar cane were the raw materials that went into the mills, that produced clothing, molasses, rum, tobacco for smoking. Cotton was sent to mills in America and Britain. The wealth generated from the finished product would contribute to alot of wealth that Black slaves never benefitted from.
Blacks got paid later on and then some. It's not like they were going to get paid in Africa. Aren't you glad your ancestors got on that boat? Living in America in the best economy in world's history and lots of free stuff from the government.
Slavery may have ended 150 years ago, but was followed by 100 years of de facto slavery - lynching, segregation, discrimination in housing and hiring. It would be ludicrous to think that there is no vestige of racism left today.
The statues being removed are the likes of Robert E Lee, Jefferson Davis, Nathan Bedford Forrest, Stonewall Jackson. These guys fought to maintain slavery.
Take a look at what is going on in 2020-2021 South Africa. The genocide being committed against white people, by blacks, and sanctioned by government, knows no equal from at any point in time in history on American soil.
That does not in any way attempt to excuse the past human abuses of colonial American slavery, but only adds perspective to what you seem to want to ignore, which is the harsh reality that blacks can, have, and continue to this day, to inflict equal, if not greater levels of race based atrocities against white people, than ever occurred here, let alone what is going on now.
Entire families, men, women and children … thousands of simple white farmers and their entire families are being brutally massacred. Infants being murdered in front of their mothers … mothers being murdered in front of their children … wives being raped and murdered in front of their husbands … fathers murdered in front of their children and wives … the psychopathic levels of brutality is unequaled in any historical recount here in America. This is now leading to food shortages and famine, all under the guise of retribution for Apartheid policies of the past, which paled in comparison to the genocide being committed in response. While some inhumanely dismiss this as an understandable backlash from past crimes, the fake news actually takes it leaps further by claiming it’s not even happening, and just propaganda being promoted by white supremacists/white nationalists. That’s right, they ignore some of the most deplorable government sponsored genocides of the 20th century as fake news, and Google searches will present such “debunking’ stories, in spite of the evidence, which includes documentaries, foreign government involvements in granting asylum to hundreds of white South African farming families who are facing genocide in what can only be viewed as an historical rerun of the genocide that took place in Rhodesia/Zimbabwe.
And the world remains silent. As if this isn’t even happening. Do you hear about this in the mainstream news? Hardly a peep, unless it’s a story which claims it isn’t really happening.
The bottom line is, human beings have proven for thousands of years, that they are capable of committing great atrocities against one another, and it ain’t this one way street SOME people try to make it out to be.
Last edited by GuyNTexas; 01-27-2022 at 10:02 AM..
Take a look at what is going on in 2020-2021 South Africa. The genocide being committed against white people, by blacks, and sanctioned by government, knows no equal from at any point in time in history on American soil.
That does not in any way attempt to excuse the past human abuses of colonial American slavery, but only adds perspective to what you seem to want to ignore, which is the harsh reality that blacks can, have, and continue to this day, to inflict equal, if not greater levels of race based atrocities against white people, than ever occurred here, let alone what is going on now.
Entire families, men, women and children … thousands of simple white farmers and their entire families are being brutally massacred. Infants being murdered in front of their mothers … mothers being murdered in front of their children … wives being raped and murdered in front of their husbands … fathers murdered in front of their children and wives … the psychopathic levels of brutality is unequaled in any historical recount here in America. This is now leading to food shortages and famine, all under the guise of retribution for Apartheid policies of the past, which paled in comparison to the genocide being committed in response. While some inhumanely dismiss this as an understandable backlash from past crimes, the fake news actually takes it leaps further by claiming it’s not even happening, and just propaganda being promoted by white supremacists/white nationalists. That’s right, they ignore some of the most deplorable government sponsored genocides of the 20th century as fake news, and Google searches will present such “debunking’ stories, in spite of the evidence, which includes documentaries, foreign government involvements in granting asylum to hundreds of white South African farming families who are facing genocide in what can only be viewed as an historical rerun of the genocide that took place in Rhodesia/Zimbabwe.
And the world remains silent. As if this isn’t even happening. Do you hear about this in the mainstream news? Hardly a peep, unless it’s a story which claims it isn’t really happening.
The bottom line is, human beings have proven for thousands of years, that they are capable of committing great atrocities against one another, and it ain’t this one way street SOME people try to make it out to be.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyNTexas
foreign government involvements in granting asylum
Australia took their hand back --- and in those attacks, they are not attacking the young and able bodied that can handle themselves in a one on one --- nope, they attack the old people; people who can't defend themselves. Because that's what cowards do.
They also tear everything down around them thinking they've done something good and righteous when all they managed do in reality, is make life much harder for themselves. They kidnap folks and sell 'em on the open markets to fund their militias.
It's a violent continent, always was and the people living on that continent don't have enough about themselves to make their lives better, but revel in the violence instead.
However, several years back I came across a 'Wide Lens' segment on public broadcast t.v. that was an eye opener. It featured an American oil company and how they lived in huge mansions and just a few miles up the road, those people were waiting air dropped food to arrive.
It's a really crazy continent, glad I wasn't born there --- I probably would have been fed to the bush lions as an infant.
Cotton, tobacco, and sugar cane were the raw materials that went into the mills, that produced clothing, molasses, rum, tobacco for smoking. Cotton was sent to mills in America and Britain. The wealth generated from the finished product would contribute to alot of wealth that Black slaves never benefitted from.
Would not have even existed. When the manumission of slaves occurred in the West Indies, the large windward islands could not produce sugar because the slaves were now free. What they did was turn to subsistence farming. This is what occurred in Jamaica ,and Cuba for example. Only in places where land was tight could the surplus be enticed to actually work, That is to say wage slavery was born....
What resources in history are you using come to you conclusions? If it were not for the tenants being forced of the land there would have been no factory workers either. That was behind Britain's industrialization. See the Scottish clearances on how this works.
If anything ,the produce of the south cost the US because any strength in the economics of the south just made for a more difficult enemy. In fact that was one of the main issues in the war. The US wanted protectionism fro Britain that had lower industrial prices due to wage slave labor while the US industrialists had to deal with the same problems Cuba and Jamaica had, self sufficient homesteads.
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.
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.
