Apologising for slavery


David Davis

This caught my eye quite accidentally: I was not intending to write anything about slavery today, with the possible exception of a suitable comment about true things that White People are not allowed to say.

It occurs to me that _if_ West African Tribal Bigmen had refused to trade their (own slaves) people for Spanish and Portuguese money and beads, then history might have been different. Absolutely all the helots would have got carted off by their ears either way (The HispanoPortuguesi had guns by then) and ther tribal Big-guys would have been slaughtered, but then at least “antislavery campaigners” would have been able to absolutely claim the moral high-ground from the very beginning. WE’d not have fallen, through being asleep on the ideological job, into the trap of being _blamed for slavery_ through being the dominant Atlantic-Maritime power in the times when we were trying actually to abolish this pre-capitalist, pre-liberal, Euro-Imperium-friendly barbarism.

It riles me, that _we_ have had to “apologise” for slavery, when _we_ were the first nation to unilaterally outlaw it everywhere and for all time, planetwide. Naturally, there is no mention whatever of the role played either by tribal chiefs, or by the Arabs, who as is well known, still “do” slavery bigtime, and who were not bit-players in the atlantic slavetrade either, with their trans-African communications.

Libertarians of course don’t agree with slavery. You own yourself and your justly-acquired goods, and can dispose of either as you will. But I think an exception could be made for major GramscoFabiocrats and their children (the Koran says that it says so) in the event of a libertarian revolution that’s far-reaching enough and rapid enough. There are after all things posing as “religions” which allow slavery and regulate it as a means of social intercourse. Either, these are religions and can therefore enforce behaviour-codes on willing submitters, or else they are not relgions and their strictures and codes can be disregarded. If the Libertarian “Minsiter of Human Skills Co-ordination” (a tautology) was to convert to Islam, then he could indent all ex-”Hospital Trust Managers” (for example) as (his) slaves, and they’d have to do his bidding at all times. if he can’t do that, then Islam is not a religion, but something else, and we have to start that deiscussion.

About these ads

10 responses to “Apologising for slavery

  1. Well, I suppose I can make myself unpopular by saying that the slave trade has always flourished in the Arab world and of course still does and Mr Westerner just copied this for a while. Mr Westerner has been very successful in developing his civilisation and technological infrastructure, social systems with even stuff like mercy and compassion thrown in. He has in the estimation of the world and the IMF become “rich”, and what better way to nick all his goodies than to shame him into weakness. His foray into slavery is a good thing to go for, it pulls all the right levers to develop and play on the weakness psychology.
    It just goes to show one should never play the enemy’s games or use any of his methods. They can come back to bite one!

  2. I guess also, that _slaves_ are the ultimate green energy resource. They are probably not “carbon-neutral”, but since the maximum possible population of slaves cannot presently by definition weigh more than 400 million tons, and if all of these were entirely converted into CO2 by burning or aerobic composting, without photosynthesis increasing, then atmospheric CO2 would only rise by a piffling 0.03% of the current level.

  3. Now I wonder what David Davis would say about the UK and Australian government apology to child migrants to Australia. I suppose for many their parents gave them up voluntarily. The issue is about the maltreatment of human beings and deception. Yes slavery was around but it was never like the transatlantic slave trade. Plus Europe and America has benefited from 400yrs of free labour from 400million people. Not to mention resources taken from Africa and other parts of the empire.

  4. “Yes slavery was around but was never like the transatlantic slave trade” – How do you know? Perhaps it was a lot worse than the transatlantic?
    Resources taken from Africa? Taken from the ground, yes. But what was there when westerners got there? Hunting and raiding with a bit of cultivation. And what was left behind when the westerners left? Roads, crops, electricity, beef farms, vast infrastructure, medicine, banking (!), mining and minerals, industry, textiles and clothing, building, learning, writing, reading. Cities.
    There was inequity and problems. Sure. One culture effectively coming out of the stone age and the other an “advanced” technologically complex civilisation.

  5. Now I wonder what David Davis would say about the UK and Australian government apology to child migrants to Australia.

    Fresh in my mind having just blogged on it myself and touched on the slavery apology. I think it’s slightly more up to date than all the Blairy crap about something ended in the British Empire (as was) in 1834 and which was on the way out even earlier, but even so it’s still just more gesture politics by a pair of tools who haven’t got the balls between them to call out the bastards who were actually responsible. Again.

    Also funny how here it’s Britain to apologise to Aussie kids and there it’s Australia to apologise to British kids.

    • It’s a pointless, handwringing gesture, designed to confirm to the armed wing in particular, of the real enemies of civilisation, that we are all ripe for demolition, about now.

      Kevin Rudd has no right to ponce about, “apologising” for something that happened when he was about three years old if that. The real culprits are probably dead or in care homes: it’s like asking young Germans alive today to apologise for the Holocaust. It’s just fashionable twaddle, capering lllike a whipped cur in front of the victors over our civilisation, who, before they finally draw their swords, make sport by pricking us slightly towards their bonfire, drinking and jollying with each other.

      Rudd ought to know better. But it’s really too late now in my opinion, to save what passed for an approximation to rational liberalism, for about a century.

  6. Rudd ought to know better, yes, but he has got form in this area of course. The apology to indigenous Australians over the Stolen Generation. Again, the people responsible are in no position to apologise. The people making the apology now do so only because it humanises them and gains political capital for little or no risk. Sure, the next thing mentioned will be compensation, and one woman interviewed on TV a couple of hours ago who was sent here as a child was asked about that. She was quite clear that the apology was a first step and compensation would be the next thing they talk about, especially since this varies from state to state. I suspect they want to further erode the principle of a federation of competing states by getting the bloody federal government to order them all to give compo. Sheesh.

  7. “Yes slavery was around but was never like the transatlantic slavery” How do you know? Perhaps it was a lot worse than the transatlantic slave trade.
    Well I guess I could ask David the same question how do we know there was slavery before the transatlantic slavery? There is not need debating that point the transatlantic slave trade was worse because it is well documented.
    Yes. Resources were in the ground and the people were not western educated in suit or using electricity. It still does not excuse it being taken away without payment. It does not excuse concentration camps in south africa. It sure does not excuse shipping children to Australia.
    I think the Autralia apology is a brilliant idea because it says we do not condone what happened and it must not happen again. Call it symbolic but if you were a victim I bet you will think differently. People have suffered in the past and continue to suffer as a result of state sponsored actions and it does not matter how long ago.
    I can understand people are wary of payment of reparations but it is true that some countries have benefitted and continue to benefit from human horrors commited in the past by our grandfathers and if reparation have to be paid so be it. How do we feel when we walk the streets knowing some of the wealth that built it was from the torture and blood of other humans?

  8. Methinks the only reason people pick so assiduously on the western civilisation/culture part of the world is because they know, because of westerners’ tendency to “want to do the right thing”, that it will produce results.
    Sorry that slavery in the middle East is not so well documented. We shall have to try and fix that.
    Mineral rights? Yes, an interesting one, that. Where does one start?
    Australia, well, if one insists on looking at things in group classifications, I guess one could say the westerners did that to themselves.
    Concentration camps in South Africa? Which ones?

    • WE didn’t really invent the idea of “concentration camps” as such: that was simply a way to describe where you put POWs, sort of after about 1860. I think the Union in the USA in fact did this first to the Confederates. So I guess Obama ought to aopologise to all the Southern States, for what HIS government (it is his, isn’t it?) did to all their Good ‘Ol Boys.

      But what the man is referring to is in fact what the British Expeditionary Force in South Africa did for displaced Boer non-combatants such as farmers’ wives and their children and staff. When clearing a region (thousands and thousands of square miles) we could not just leave these people there to give guns and stuff to Boers behind our lines. They hade to be cleared away, so we did. The Kaiser was stirring it all up all along, as he acknowledged often, so we could not allow it. The South African War, I mean. He wanted the money for his Imperium, and always admitted it cheerfully.

      The Kaiser was a sensitive, clever and autistic psychopath who should have been _Put To Sleep_ _At Birth_ .

      He should never have been allowed to live to be in absolute and autocratic charge of a brilliantly creative, educated and inventive nation of pure-logicians, such as Germany for example. Worst possible choice imaginable.

      The trouble is, it would have devastated his mother. We also could have got someone worse instead.

      Of course, what I have said is all wrong, for the Kaiser could have been brought up quite differently, and might have Discovered the Atom or something. Perhaps the problem was “Prussia”…oh my head hurts: I do not know.

      Lenin of course studied the history of British “Concentration Camps” in Southern Africa, and applied it to the Gulag.