If slavery never happened

[evanovitch]

Re: If slavery never happened

reading wid comprehension....reading wid comprehension....dis is not the mating song of the penguins...no match trying to be found here...fi real....gwane tru still....

[Dr.Dudd]

Re: If slavery never happened

[ QUOTE ]
by the time of slavery the "underdevelopment of africa" had already started as noted earlier in this thread [img]/forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

the shift from subsistence society to capitalism was already underway

[/ QUOTE ]
Are you suggesting that simply because the continent was under developed,even withou slavery, Africans were not capable of reversing it,as has been done on all other continents?

[Dr.Dudd]

Re: If slavery never happened

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
if slavery never happened do you think africans would have be able to stop the deprivation that is is occuring there now?

[/ QUOTE ]
Why do you assume that there would have been a deprivation to stop,in the first place?
Do you think that Africans would be in such a deprived state if it was not for slavery??

[/ QUOTE ]

That's why Evan posted the excerpt from Walter Rodney's book - so that readers could inform themselves on Africa's state of development when Europeans started this slavery business. But you know, Dr. D, you can lead a horse to water, etc., etc.

[/ QUOTE ]
You know how it go with me already. I never give up on anyone.

[Seveen]

Re: If slavery never happened

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
by the time of slavery the "underdevelopment of africa" had already started as noted earlier in this thread [img]/forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

the shift from subsistence society to capitalism was already underway

[/ QUOTE ]
Are you suggesting that simply because the continent was under developed,even withou slavery, Africans were not capable of reversing it,as has been done on all other continents?

[/ QUOTE ]

africans are still in africa - have they "reversed" it?

[Dr.Dudd]

Re: If slavery never happened

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
if slavery never happened do you think africans would have be able to stop the deprivation that is is occuring there now?

[/ QUOTE ]
Why do you assume that there would have been a deprivation to stop,in the first place?
Do you think that Africans would be in such a deprived state if it was not for slavery??

[/ QUOTE ]

That's why Evan posted the excerpt from Walter Rodney's book - so that readers could inform themselves on Africa's state of development when Europeans started this slavery business. But you know, Dr. D, you can lead a horse to water, etc., etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

and evan's excerpt includes this and more as the state before europeans - go back and read again [img]/forums/images/graemlins/notworthy.gif[/img]

In the period of transition, while African society retained many features that were undisputably communal, it also accepted the principle that some families or clans or lineages were destined to rule and others were not. This was true not only of cultivators but of pastoralists as well. In fact, livestock became unevenly distributed much more readily van [and; and those families with the largest herds became socially and politically dominant.

[/ QUOTE ]
How did you think the rule of monarchs developed everywherwe?
Isn't it due to the same clan startification,and favoured clan become more powerful while others surfs/
Why is deprivation not the result in al other cultures>
ever study the the cultures of india,pakistan,Afghanistan,russia and all the present successful economies?
Was't their societies similar to Agrican societies even so presently i many cases.
Do you know that the Binladen family was and still is a very wealthy clan??

[Blackstar*]

Re: If slavery never happened

[ QUOTE ]
In the period of transition, while African society retained many features that were undisputably communal, it also accepted the principle that some families or clans or lineages were destined to rule and others were not. This was true not only of cultivators but of pastoralists as well. In fact, livestock became unevenly distributed much more readily van [and; and those families with the largest herds became socially and politically dominant.

[/ QUOTE ]
According to Mr. Rodney, the unequal distribution of resources is a result of greater "development", not less.

[Dr.Dudd]

Re: If slavery never happened

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
by the time of slavery the "underdevelopment of africa" had already started as noted earlier in this thread [img]/forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

the shift from subsistence society to capitalism was already underway

[/ QUOTE ]
Are you suggesting that simply because the continent was under developed,even withou slavery, Africans were not capable of reversing it,as has been done on all other continents?

[/ QUOTE ]

africans are still in africa - have they "reversed" it?

[/ QUOTE ]

Africans have not been incharge of Africva since slavery.
it does not matter what they tell you.
As long as the colonialks owns the productive factors ,the media, the production of defensive arnaments,the markets to which they sells.As long as the politicians have to be funded a d elections are funded by the private sector.
as longs as those who pays the electorial bills are able to select those from who the population elect.
Te continent will be under the control of the clolnials.

[Seveen]

Re: If slavery never happened



[/ QUOTE ]Why is deprivation not the result in al other cultures?

[/ QUOTE ]

and therein lies the BIG question to me - why only africa?

and i highlighted the above quote to show that the transition from the very early communal days to the time described above - shows an evolution that eventually did not work for africa thus supporting an environment for european influence which lead to the appropriation and colonization and our history until this time

basically "our game plan didn't work"

[Seveen]

Re: If slavery never happened

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
by the time of slavery the "underdevelopment of africa" had already started as noted earlier in this thread [img]/forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

the shift from subsistence society to capitalism was already underway

[/ QUOTE ]
Are you suggesting that simply because the continent was under developed,even withou slavery, Africans were not capable of reversing it,as has been done on all other continents?

[/ QUOTE ]

africans are still in africa - have they "reversed" it?

[/ QUOTE ]

Africans have not been incharge of Africva since slavery.
it does not matter what they tell you.
As long as the colonialks owns the productive factors ,the media, the production of defensive arnaments,the markets to which they sells.As long as the politicians have to be funded a d elections are funded by the private sector.
as longs as those who pays the electorial bills are able to select those from who the population elect.
Te continent will be under the control of the clolnials.

[/ QUOTE ]

i totally agree and my very first post said that if slavery never existed we would still be there in the ish and there would be no one to help keep an eye on things - without the ones that were "taken away" helping to keep some focus on that country

Nelson Mandela would still be in jail without us - do you think they were going to release him without pressure [img]/forums/images/graemlins/70394-bawlout.gif[/img]

[Seveen]

Re: If slavery never happened

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In the period of transition, while African society retained many features that were undisputably communal, it also accepted the principle that some families or clans or lineages were destined to rule and others were not. This was true not only of cultivators but of pastoralists as well. In fact, livestock became unevenly distributed much more readily van [and; and those families with the largest herds became socially and politically dominant.

[/ QUOTE ]
According to Mr. Rodney, the unequal distribution of resources is a result of greater "development", not less.

[/ QUOTE ]

yes a greater development that led to capitalism - supply and demand

mr.rodney is not pointing that out as a good thing - he's a marxist

[Seveen]

Re: If slavery never happened

[ QUOTE ]
Africans have not been incharge of Africva since slavery

[/ QUOTE ]

actually since before slavery - when the big production "moguls" moved in - ie europeans

[Dr.Dudd]

Re: If slavery never happened

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Africans have not been incharge of Africva since slavery

[/ QUOTE ]

actually since before slavery - when the big production "moguls" moved in - ie europeans

[/ QUOTE ]
Africa was not the only place they did,and their simple present without the disarming,and overpowering of the africans would not mean deprivation.,does not

[rufian]

Re: If slavery never happened

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
by the time of slavery the "underdevelopment of africa" had already started as noted earlier in this thread [img]/forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

the shift from subsistence society to capitalism was already underway

[/ QUOTE ]
Are you suggesting that simply because the continent was under developed,even withou slavery, Africans were not capable of reversing it,as has been done on all other continents?

[/ QUOTE ]

africans are still in africa - have they "reversed" it?

[/ QUOTE ]

Africans have not been incharge of Africva since slavery.
it does not matter what they tell you.
As long as the colonialks owns the productive factors ,the media, the production of defensive arnaments,the markets to which they sells.As long as the politicians have to be funded a d elections are funded by the private sector.
as longs as those who pays the electorial bills are able to select those from who the population elect.
Te continent will be under the control of the clolnials.

[/ QUOTE ]

i totally agree and my very first post said that if slavery never existed we would still be there in the ish and there would be no one to help keep an eye on things - without the ones that were "taken away" helping to keep some focus on that country

Nelson Mandela would still be in jail without us - do you think they were going to release him without pressure [img]/forums/images/graemlins/70394-bawlout.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]
would Europe have advanced to that extent had it not been for slavery?

[Seveen]

Re: If slavery never happened

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Africans have not been incharge of Africva since slavery

[/ QUOTE ]

actually since before slavery - when the big production "moguls" moved in - ie europeans

[/ QUOTE ]
Africa was not the only place they did,and their simple present without the disarming,and overpowering of the africans would not mean deprivation.,does not

[/ QUOTE ]

so if they did it other places - the big production - why was africa the only one disarmed and overpowered - i don't think there were more europeans than africans on the continent - why'd it work differently in africa

[mountaingal]

Re: If slavery never happened

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Africans have not been incharge of Africva since slavery

[/ QUOTE ]

actually since before slavery - when the big production "moguls" moved in - ie europeans

[/ QUOTE ]
Africa was not the only place they did,and their simple present without the disarming,and overpowering of the africans would not mean deprivation.,does not

[/ QUOTE ]

so if they did it other places - the big production - why was africa the only one disarmed and overpowered - i don't think there were more europeans than africans on the continent - why'd it work differently in africa

[/ QUOTE ]
africa was not the only place this happened. the british did it in china and india. look up The Raj. India was considered the jewel in Queen Victoria's crown.