Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Arab Slave Trade - Should Arab Countries Pay Reparations To European and African.... watch

    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SexyNerd)
    people have been mining for gold and silver for thousands of years, it doesn't matter if you agree or not, its true.
    Yeh. If that is what you had written,then I would agree. However, you didn't write that.

    You were talking about Africa and you wrote:

    "thousands of years worth of mined gold and diamonds were stolen"

    (Original post by SexyNerd)
    no they weren't, they were in fact wealthy (wealth at the time being gold/diamonds, ect), which europe was lacking.

    No. They didn't lack Gold.

    Europe ( in particular Spain) was flooded with Gold during the 1600's because of the colonisation of America.


    (Original post by SexyNerd)
    Of Africa, but that still doesn't mean that they did not rob these countries, thus resulted in them becoming what is now the third world, thats the argument, so let us not resort to ad hominem.
    I know that is the argument. As I already stated before, the African nations were already third world before the Europeans began extensive colonisation in the 1800's.

    That is why they were so easily conquered and destroyed. Very few places had any wealth of significance.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DorianGrayism)
    Yeh. If that is what you had written,then I would agree. However, you didn't write that.

    You were talking about Africa and you wrote:

    "thousands of years worth of mined gold and diamonds were stolen"
    the gold they mined (that had been going on for thousands of years) was stolen.



    No. They didn't lack Gold.

    Europe ( in particular Spain) was flooded with Gold during the 1600's because of the colonisation of America.
    only after THEY ROBBED IT, as you've just mentioned!


    I know that is the argument. As I already stated before, the African nations were already third world before the Europeans began extensive colonisation in the 1800's.
    no, they were wealthy, robbing them resulted in them becoming poor (poor = lack of wealth)!

    "forget Bill Gates, the richest man in history lived in Mali... 700 years ago
    He was a despot who ruled swathes of West Africa and made a fortune from salt and gold. Now, Mansa Musa I has been named the wealthiest (inflation adjusted) man of all time
    "

    thats just one guy

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...o-8214080.html

    "The Portuguese began significant trading with West Africa in the 15th century. This trade was primarily for the same commodities the Arabs had bought—gold, ivory, and slaves. The Portuguese sold the Africans Indian cloth and European manufactured goods but refused to sell them guns. Soon, however, other European powers such as France, Denmark, the Netherlands and Britain were developing their own trade with Africa, and they had fewer restrictions. The major European imperial powers in Africa were Portugal, Great Britain, France, and to a lesser extent Germany, Belgium, Spain and Italy. Portugal's presence in Africa as an imperial power lasted until the 1970s, when the last of its former colonies declared independence after years of war"

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_history_of_Africa


    "The first Europeans to arrive at the coast were the Portuguese in 1471."

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold_Co...ritish_colony)

    That is why they were so easily conquered and destroyed. Very few places had any wealth of significance.
    no, its because the europeans had guns! well, you have no clue, the entire world was rich with gold/diamonds, all except europe!
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SexyNerd)
    the gold they mined (that had been going on for thousands of years) was stolen.
    No,not necessarily. The Africans didn't just sit on the Gold for thousands of years. So obviously not all of it was stolen.

    Even if you ignore that issue, then there is the amount that they mined as well, which is fairly insignificant.

    (Original post by SexyNerd)

    only after THEY ROBBED IT, as you've just mentioned!

    Don't change what you wrote. You said that they stole Gold from Africa because they didn't have enough.

    As I have just pointed out, the Gold they stole from South America was more than enough.

    Also South America debunks your argument anyway because South America is not 3rd and neither is East Asia.


    (Original post by SexyNerd)
    "forget Bill Gates, the richest man in history lived in Mali... 700 years ago
    He was a despot who ruled swathes of West Africa and made a fortune from salt and gold. Now, Mansa Musa I has been named the wealthiest (inflation adjusted) man of all time
    "

    thats just one guy
    Precisely. One guy.

    Not Africa. Just one Guy.

    The world's country would be Mexico using your logic.


    (Original post by SexyNerd)
    no, its because the europeans had guns! well, you have no clue, the entire world was rich with gold/diamonds, all except europe!
    Exactly, they had Guns. The Africans didn't have them because they had backward empires. If they were so rich then they could have easily bought guns like the Europeans did.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Should america and the uk be paying reparations for their role in the slave trade in africa?

    Idiot.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by notsure)
    i agree
    I don't think you are allowed to say "I agree" in threads like this. That's not how it works...
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DorianGrayism)
    No,not necessarily. The Africans didn't just sit on the Gold for thousands of years. So obviously not all of it was stolen.

    Even if you ignore that issue, then there is the amount that they mined as well, which is fairly insignificant.
    you trade gold back and forth, so the total would not be impacted significantly.

    No its not, as it stated in the article western africa was wealthy due to its gold & salt.


    Don't change what you wrote. You said that they stole Gold from Africa because they didn't have enough.
    no, i said they robbed the now "third world"!

    As I have just pointed out, the Gold they stole from South America was more than enough.
    maybe for the spanish, but not for the rest of the europeans, hence why the others began to pillage.


    Also South America debunks your argument anyway because South America is not 3rd and neither is East Asia.
    so clearly you're going to ignore that the spanish settled in south america? also, most of south america is "third world".


    Precisely. One guy.

    Not Africa. Just one Guy.
    one guy of many, yes, he just accounts for a small part of west africa's wealth.
    The world's country would be Mexico using your logic.
    how does that even make sense?

    Exactly, they had Guns. The Africans didn't have them because they had backward empires. If they were so rich then they could have easily bought guns like the Europeans did.
    not creating a weapon to kill is backwards? why are you ignoring what i posted, i clearly highlighted the europeans refused to sell them guns!
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SexyNerd)
    you trade gold back and forth, so the total would not be impacted significantly.

    No its not, as it stated in the article western africa was wealthy due to its gold & salt.
    Well, you don't know that they traded it back and forth. You just know they had it.

    Right, they were very wealthy. That does not mean they had a significant amount of it. It was very difficult to mine Gold back then.


    (Original post by SexyNerd)
    no, i said the robbed the entire world!


    maybe for the spanish, but not for the rest of the europeans, hence why the others began to pillage.

    so clearly you're going to ignore that the spanish settled in south america? also, most of south america is "third world".

    Actually, the Gold was leaving Spain fairly rapidly. If you study Spanish History then you would know that the Spanish Government tried to place export controls to stop this but obviously they failed.



    (Original post by SexyNerd)
    one guy of many, yes, he just accounts for a small part of west africa's wealth.
    Evidence.


    (Original post by SexyNerd)

    how does that even make sense?
    Because Carlos Slim is currently the world's richest man (or one of the richest according to some estimates).

    That would make Mexico very rich according to your logic.

    (Original post by SexyNerd)
    not creating a weapon to kill is backwards? why are you ignoring what i posted, i clearly highlighted the europeans refused to sell them guns!
    The Europeans didn't refuse. That is why Africans(like everyone else) eventually got hold of guns.

    IF you have enough money then they will sell you anything.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SexyNerd)
    you obviously don't know much about western colonialism. The third world is a direct result of western colonialism, it did not exist before the western countries colonialised the now "third world" countries and robbed them of their wealth.
    You mean that before the europeans came, they had plenty of food, a thriving culture, no problems like slavery / war, no bad weather etc? (things which now make a country 3rd world) :rolleyes:
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HumanSupremacist)
    Past powerful Arab states and Empires enslaved millions of the then weaker White Europeans and millions of Africans. Such occurred for several centuries.

    Therefore, should Arab states pay reparations to European and African states for the Arab Slave Trade?

    Discuss.
    Be careful there. You might make people realise that white people aren't soley responsible for all the world's ills throughout history.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    [QUOTE=DorianGrayism;42173465]Well, you don't know that they traded it back and forth. You just know they had it.

    Right, they were very wealthy. That does not mean they had a significant amount of it. It was very difficult to mine Gold back then.

    Africa traded a lot with asia, another gold wealthy land, thus we can deduce that gold was traded back and forth.


    "It is impossible to know the exact date that humans first began to mine gold, but some of the oldest known gold artifacts were found in the Varna Necropolis in Bulgaria. The graves of the necropolis were built between 4700 and 4200 BC, indicating that gold mining could be at least 7000 years old.
    "

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold_mining


    Actually, the Gold was leaving Spain fairly rapidly. If you study Spanish History then you would know that the Spanish Government tried to place export controls to stop this but obviously they failed.
    regardless, they stole their gold from south america, which is the basis of my argument.

    Evidence.
    i provide links, you not provided a single one!

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_history_of_Africa

    Because Carlos Slim is currently the world's richest man (or one of the richest according to some estimates).

    That would make Mexico very rich according to your logic.
    indeed it is...

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_economy

    The Europeans didn't refuse. That is why Africans(like everyone else) eventually got hold of guns.
    "The Portuguese began significant trading with West Africa in the 15th century. This trade was primarily for the same commodities the Arabs had bought—gold, ivory, and slaves. The Portuguese sold the Africans Indian cloth and European manufactured goods but refused to sell them guns. Soon, however, other European powers such as France, Denmark, the Netherlands and Britain were developing their own trade with Africa, and they had fewer restrictions. The major European imperial powers in Africa were Portugal, Great Britain, France, and to a lesser extent Germany, Belgium, Spain and Italy. Portugal's presence in Africa as an imperial power lasted until the 1970s, when the last of its former colonies declared independence after years of war"

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_history_of_Africa

    IF you have enough money then they will sell you anything.
    not if you will use those weapons to kill and rob them!
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Greenlaner)
    Be careful there. You might make people realise that white people aren't soley responsible for all the world's ills throughout history.
    or you will :rolleyes:
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Donald Duck)
    You mean that before the europeans came, they had plenty of food, a thriving culture
    yep..... how about you actually read the links posted, asia and africa are the cradles of civilization, and predate the greeks by thousands of years, and much attributed to the greeks existed in asia/africa for thousands of years before hand........ READ THE LINKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    no problems like slavery / war, no bad weather etc? (things which now make a country 3rd world) :rolleyes:
    slavery can exist, and war and bad weather, but these do not make a third world country.... America being the prime example...... THE THIRD WORLD IS A DIRECT RESULT OF COLONIALISM!
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SexyNerd)
    Well, yo...........i/Gold_mining[/url]
    I didn't say there was no such thing as Goldmining.

    I said it was difficult to Gold mine.

    As I said before, give me evidence that they were trading between the two in similar amounts of GOLD.


    (Original post by SexyNerd)
    regardless, they stole their gold from south america, which is the basis of my argument.
    Hahaha.....it is basis of your argument because I told you about it.




    (Original post by SexyNerd)
    i provide links, you not provided a single one!

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_history_of_Africa
    *
    No, this doesn't have the names of anyone that existed at the same time with lots of wealth.

    Another link please.


    * No, it isn't. It is not even considered to be a First World Economy.

    *
    (Original post by SexyNerd)
    "[I]The Portuguese began significant ...........i/Economic_history_of_Africa[/url]


    not if you will use those weapons to kill and rob them!
    Oh....so you have proven that one country refused to sell them guns. That isn't what I asked.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Greenlaner)
    Be careful there. You might make people realise that white people aren't soley responsible for all the world's ills throughout history.
    Of course the Atlantic Trade was atrocious and the dead perpetrators and partakers (both black and white) should be ashamed of themselves - although they can't "do" anything because they no longer exist.

    However, it would seem that the Arabs need to pay reparations to the White European as well as the Black African?

    And you are err in your use of "white people" in that, many of the things that we list as harming many people involved groups of White Europeans, not the Caucasian in general. Indeed, small elite groups of the past could be blamed for encouraging and allowing partaking in slavery and whatnot. It is not as if the working poor of England advocated slavery of millions of some some black people from the African continent...
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Donald Duck)
    You mean that before the europeans came, they had plenty of food, a thriving culture, no problems like slavery / war, no bad weather etc? (things which now make a country 3rd world) :rolleyes:
    It is inaccurate to believe that "Africa" (that blanket term again) was *backward* always. This is incorrect and a simple delving into history will show this.

    However, it is accurate to say that had the European Empires not pervaded the continent, it would have been far better off. Prior to the White European of the European Empires developing a inferiority complex and violating the sovereignty of foreign lands which they had no business setting foot on, trade thrived between African states, empires and kingdoms and European states. It was only later than greed set in and the massive manpower was needed for the fresh colonies in the West (the Americas).

    The African managed quite well without being disturbed by the Empires of Europe - then, the African did not call up the European pleading for "aid". And yet, what do we have now? Aid, aid and...more aid! It is naive to believe that the arrival of the European Empires did good for the continent - now all we get are lots of request for aid and lots of sad little pictures of little black children starving (when they managed quite well before and did not need aid for strange pale men who felt the need to violate the sovereignty of autonomous states).
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by yorkshire.lad)
    Should america and the uk be paying reparations for their role in the slave trade in africa?

    Idiot.
    Precisely. The question in your post is as legitimate as the question asked in this thread.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DorianGrayism)
    I didn't say there was no such thing as Goldmining.

    I said it was difficult to Gold mine.

    As I said before, give me evidence that they were trading between the two in similar amounts of GOLD.
    "Gold, sought from the western and central Sudan, was the main commodity of the trans-Saharan trade. The traffic in gold was spurred by the demand for and supply of coinage. The rise of the Soninke empire of Ghana appears to be related to the beginnings of the trans-Saharan gold trade in the fifth century."

    http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/gold/hd_gold.htm

    "The Gold Coast: As more and more traders braved the Trans-Sahara Trade Routes, bringing spices and silks to Ghana, and taking gold in trade, the Kingdom of Ghana flourished. Ghana and other West African kingdoms soon became known as The Gold Coast. "



    http://africa.mrdonn.org/goldandsalt.html

    "Unlike Ghana, Mali was a Muslim kingdom, and under it, the gold - salt trade continued. Other, less important trade goods were slaves, kola nuts from the south and slave beads and cowry shells from the north (for use as currency). It was under Mali that the great cities of the Niger bend —including Gao and Djenné— prospered, with Timbuktu in particular becoming known across Europe for its great wealth"

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Saharan_trade

    Hahaha.....it is basis of your argument because I told you about it.
    yes, before you told me, i never knew the spanish colonised south america, murdered its inhabitants in order to steal its gold/wealth :rolleyes:





    No, this doesn't have the names of anyone that existed at the same time with lots of wealth.
    but speaks of the reigns wealths, that europe pillaged, thus resulting in them becoming poor (poor = lack of wealth) thus becoming what is now known as a third world nation, as a result of being pillaged!

    Another link please.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Saharan_trade

    No, it isn't. It is not even considered to be a First World Economy.
    link provided, proves that it has one of the strongest economies in the world!

    I'll post the link for you one more time

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_economy

    Oh....so you have proven that one country refused to sell them guns. That isn't what I asked.
    no, you claimed that they would have sold them guns if the africans requested, but the link clearly states they did ask and the europeans refused.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Stop splitting everything up. Every time I write a point,you split it into 2 unnecessarily.

    (Original post by SexyNerd)
    "[I]Gold, sought fr..........g/wiki/Trans-Saharan_trade[/url]
    No, I asked for a link that shows that they were trading and receiving similar amounts of Gold in Africa which would show that Africa was rich.

    I don't want a link telling me that one part of Africa received lots of Gold while the rest did nothing.

    (Original post by SexyNerd)
    yes, before you told me, i never knew the spanish colonised south america, murdered its inhabitants in order to steal its gold/wealth :rolleyes:

    but speaks of the reigns wealths, that europe pillaged, thus resulting in them becoming poor (poor = lack of wealth) thus becoming what is now known as a third world nation, as a result of being pillaged!
    Well....you didn't otherwise you wouldn't have written that Europe lacked Gold and needed to pillage Africa

    I said I want names of other wealthy individuals that existed at the same time. Don't provide me with a Wikipedia link. Give me 10 names. Should be easy with all that weallllllllth.

    (Original post by SexyNerd)
    link provided, proves that it has one of the strongest economies in the world!

    I'll post the link for you one more time

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_economy
    I already looked at the link. Mexico is not even in the Top 10 even though Carlos Slim is considered to be the Richest man in the world.


    (Original post by SexyNerd)
    you claimed that they would have sold them guns if the africans requested, but the link clearly states they did ask and the europeans refused.
    No,the Portuguese refused.....Portugal does not represent the entire of Europe.

    Your own link debunks what you wrote. Just below:

    "the arrival of guns lead to significant centralization and a number of states formed in the region such as the Ashanti Confederacy and Kingdom of Benin. "
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_history_of_Africa
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DorianGrayism)
    Stop splitting everything up. Every time I write a point,you split it into 2 unnecessarily.



    No, I asked for a link that shows that they were trading and receiving similar amounts of Gold in Africa which would show that Africa was rich.

    I don't want a link telling me that one part of Africa received lots of Gold while the rest did nothing.
    these links prove that africa was wealthy, and that they traded in gold.

    "The trading kingdoms of West Africa: 5th - 15th c. AD

    A succession of powerful kingdoms in West Africa, spanning a millennium, are unusual in that their great wealth is based on trade rather than conquest. Admittedly much warfare goes on between them, enabling the ruler of the most powerful state to demand the submission of the others. But this is only the background to the main business of controlling the caravans of merchants and camels.

    These routes run north and south through the Sahara. And the most precious of the commodities moving north is African gold.
    "

    Read more: http://www.historyworld.net/wrldhis/...#ixzz2Q6wPJ59q

    UNLIKE EUROPE!

    They brought in mainly luxury goods such as textiles, silks, beads, ceramics, ornamental weapons, and utensils. These were traded for gold, ivory, woods such as ebony, and agricultural products such as kola nuts (which act as a stimulant as they contain caffeine). They also brought their religion, Islam, which spread along the trade routes.

    Nomads living in the Sahara traded salt, meat, and their knowledge as guides for cloth, gold, cereal, and slaves.

    Until the discovery of the the Americas, Mali was the principal producer of gold.

    http://africanhistory.about.com/od/k...radeRoutes.htm

    Well....you didn't otherwise you wouldn't have written that Europe lacked Gold and needed to pillage Africa
    I said europe lacked wealth, so pillaged the world!

    http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/show...5#post42152165

    POST NO:18, i said "you obviously don't know much about western colonialism. The third world is a direct result of western colonialism, it did not exist before the western countries colonialised the now "third world" countries and robbed them of their wealth."

    I said I want names of other wealthy individuals that existed at the same time. Don't provide me with a Wikipedia link. Give me 10 names. Should be easy with all that weallllllllth.
    that would be a matter of documents still existing, but this does not detract from my argument that the rest of the world was wealthy and europe robbed it and as a result these countries became the third world!





    I already looked at the link. Mexico is not even in the Top 10 even though Carlos Slim is considered to be the Richest man in the world.
    its still 13th in the world, out of 200 countries, making it in the top 7%!


    No,the Portuguese refused.....Portugal does not represent the entire of Europe.
    they were the only ones they had contact with that had guns.

    "The early Kingdom of Ghana (sometimes known as "Ghanata" or "Wagadugu") were one of the most powerful African empires for several hundred years. At the time it was far more developed than any European country. The Ghana empire was in the Sahel: It included most of present-day Senegal and some regions of Mali and Mauritania, but did not reach as far south as what we know as Ghana today. Use of metals were known, and the Kingdom was well organized, with its laws and economy.

    The 13th century: The Kingdom of Ghana is conquered by the Kingdom of Melle. While small and big Kingdoms are dissolved or succeeded by new ones, the populations slowly migrates towards south. Tribes and clans are mixed during the passing centuries. Prisoners of war were often kept or sold in North Africa or some times even to Europe. These early signs of slave trade happened before the arrival of Europeans to West Africa, but can in no way be compared to what happened later.

    ARRIVAL OF THE EUROPEANS
    1471: The Portuguese arrives on the coast of Guinea as the first Europeans.

    1482: The Portuguese build their first fortress on the coast. They name it "Elmina" (the mine).

    The Ga people had been the last group of people arriving from East (Nigeria). They have settled in their capital of "Great Accra" about 15 km inland, but now builds "Small Accra" directly on the coast as a base for trade with the Portuguese.

    Other Europeans arrive. They are all attracted by gold, ivory and timber."

    http://crawfurd.dk/africa/ghana_timeline.htm

    Your own link debunks what you wrote. Just below:

    "the arrival of guns lead to significant centralization and a number of states formed in the region such as the Ashanti Confederacy and Kingdom of Benin. "
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_history_of_Africa
    No, my link clearly states... The Portuguese began significant trading with West Africa in the 15th century. This trade was primarily for the same commodities the Arabs had bought—gold, ivory, and slaves. The Portuguese sold the Africans Indian cloth and European manufactured goods but refused to sell them guns. Soon, however, other European powers such as France, Denmark, the Netherlands and Britain were developing their own trade with Africa, and they had fewer restrictions. The major European imperial powers in Africa were Portugal, Great Britain, France, and to a lesser extent Germany, Belgium, Spain and Italy. Portugal's presence in Africa as an imperial power lasted until the 1970s, when the last of its former colonies declared independence after years of war. NOW THAT THE OTHER EUROPEANS HAVE ARRIVED...
    The Atlantic Ocean had long been all but impenetrable to the galleys that plied the Mediterranean. That any ship needed to pass thousands of kilometers of waterless desert before reaching any populated regions also made trade impossible. These barriers were overcome by the development of the caravel in Europe. Previously, trade with Sub-Saharan Africa could only be conducted through North African middlemen. Now Europeans could trade directly with the Africans themselves.
    This valuable trade lead to rapid change in West Africa. The region had long been agriculturally productive and, especially in western Nigeria, densely populated. The massive profits from trade and the arrival of guns lead to significant centralization and a number of states formed in the region such as the Ashanti Confederacy and Kingdom of Benin.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_history_of_Africa
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SexyNerd)
    these links pro...........onomic_history_of_ Africa[/url]
    Please stop being silly and rewrite it correctly without the obnoxious red lettering
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.