[ExI] The Catholic Impact (was Re: Origin of ethics and morals)

[Mirco Romanato]

Il 27/12/2011 09:53, Kelly Anderson ha scritto:
> On Sun, Dec 25, 2011 at 6:30 PM, Mirco Romanato <painlord2k at libero.it> wrote:
>> In the past slaver society obtained the bulk of their slaves from
>> external wars (if they won) and raids. If this source dried up, the
>> number of slaves in the society dropped.

> US slaves came primarily as a result of inter-tribal warfare in
> Africa. One tribe would capture slaves from another tribe in a raid,
> then sell them to the white slavers at the coast. This would of course
> perturb the tribe losing members, and a reciprocal raid would likely
> soon follow. The whites didn't have to get their hands dirty going
> inland and capturing slaves on their own, for the most part, as this
> internal squabbling provided ample manpower. Had the Africans fully
> realized what was going on, and how they were being manipulated, and
> managed some level of internal cooperation, I can't imagine the slave
> traders would have survived long.

This is disingenuous, because the slave trade was a feature of the
place. Muslims slavers were commercing blacks (and others) from the
beginning of Islam (and the slavery predate Islam). In fact, the British
stopped the commerce of slaves in the Atlantic and in the Indian Ocean
using military forces and destroying the slaver ports and bases. They
were not so multicultural and respecting different cultures like Islam
that institutionalized slavery and the raids needed to capture slaves.
In fact, Muslim slavers operated until the end of the XIX century and
the beginning of the XX.
It is remarkable there are only small traces of African genes in the
Middle East and Arabia (AKA they used their (mainly black) slaves like
the Nazis used the Jews - they were forced to work until they died and
often they were castrated). The treatment of the slaves in North
American was paternal compared to the treatment in South America and
loving compared to the treatment of Muslims.

>> In the Ancient Rome a common slave could cost 2 years of pay of an
>> unskilled worker. So they were use with care and well maintained when
>> possible.

> This was also true in the US where Irish workers were used to mine
> coal (deep mines) rather than employ slave labor. It was too dangerous
> to expose a valuable slave to the rigors of the mine, but the Irish
> were abundant and cheap and easily replaced. An Irish worker was
> cheaper than a slave when the life expectancy of a miner was less than
> the amortized value of the slave over that period. (If I'm saying that
> right, not an accountant). Aside from that, there was an expectation
> that slaves would be cared for to some extent in their old age (think
> black lung) and the Irish could simply be forgotten.

The expectation a slave would be cared by his owner in the old age is an
unique feature of North America. The mortality in South America (mainly
Brazil) and in Africa and the Middle East was much, much higher.

Mirco