Slavery played NO role in Britain's success as a nation Watch

capitalismstinks
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#1
This is a thread debunking the absurd thread titled: Britain was built on slavery

Its important to debunk racist lies like this because these lies, invented by Marxists, are designed to divide and conquer people for revolutionary purposes.

First of all, during the hight of slavery it contributed les than 5% of GDP to Britain's economy. More recent historians have concluded its actually less than 1%. See figure 4.1

In other words not only did slavery not build Britain, it played virtually no role at all.

Next, let me present a graph of global per capita GDP, or individual wealth, for the past two thousand years:



I made a red dot which denotes the moment Britain became the first Empire in human history to abolish slavery.

So what changed after the red dot? Why didn't we see this massive wealth spike three thousand years ago when the Egyptian empire was 'built' on slavery? Why not two thousand years ago years when the Roman empire was 'built' on slavery? Why not a thousand years ago when the Islamic empires were 'built' on slavery?

The reason why is because none of these empires started the world changing events we call the industrial/technological revolution.

The industrial/technological revolution, which began in Britain, was the invention of machines that could do the productive work of literally thousands of men and women in a tiny fraction of the time.

It was this monumental giant leap in productivity which created the unprecedented wealth for Britain and the wider western world in general.

In conclusion: Not only did slavery not create the wealth of Britain, slavery never created any significant wealth at any time in human history for anybody except for a tiny elite class. The wealth ordinary people enjoy today is entirely down to technological advancements which started with the industrial revolution.
2
reply
Bealzibub
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#2
Report 3 years ago
#2
I wish ethnics would stop being so butthurt, let it go
0
reply
BefuddledPenguin
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#3
Report 3 years ago
#3
So what you've said is that the industrial revolution was more effective than slavery in building the economy. I don't think anyone will argue with that, I don't see what your point is. Britain did have a lot of money invested in the slave trade. In terms of the amount of money it isn't comparable in quantity to what we have today but that doesn't render that aspect of the economy at the time meaningless. Nor does it undo all the pain and suffering caused by slavery. Britain was partially built on slavery prior to the industrial revolution, at which point it was built on the back of abused manual labourers who had to live and work in abhorrent conditions. What's your point?
0
reply
capitalismstinks
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#4
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#4
(Original post by BefuddledPenguin)
Britain did have a lot of money invested in the slave trade.
No, it didn't. Slavery contributed less than 5% ( see: 4.1 ) of GDP to Britain's economy even at the height of the trade.
0
reply
BefuddledPenguin
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#5
Report 3 years ago
#5
(Original post by capitalismstinks)
No, it didn't. Slavery contributed less than 5% ( see: 4.1 ) of GDP to Britain's economy even at the height of the trade.
The source you have given me states that '...the total profits from the slave trade and of West Indian plantations amounted to less than 5% of the British economy during any year of the Industrial Revolution.' I've already agreed with you that the industrial revolution grew the economy more than slavery did, so of course during the industrial revolution the slave trade was of comparatively little value. But what about before the industrial revolution? Britain became involved in slavery around the start of the 17th century, if we ignore the small amount of slavery which took place in the middle ages.

I don't really see why any of this matters though, just because selling slaves may not have been that integral to the economy it certainly played a large part in our success in agriculture and our relationships with other slave owning countries, most notably the colonies in America.
0
reply
PinkDreamcatcher
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#6
Report 3 years ago
#6
Historically if you map technological progress and slavery, when a nation demolishes slavery it's technological progress increases dramatically. Reason is that say for example you want your stuff to be carried, if you own a slave you get the slave to carry it for you, whereas if you don't have a slave you have to put up with carrying your own stuff and be more inclined to buy a car. Which seems a bit too simple but its true. This helped fuel the industrial revolution which explains the dramatic spike in gdp.

However to say Britain didn't benefit from slave trade is untrue, like in all industries, people profit from any sort of trade. I wouldn't say Britain was built on slavery but rather it benefited a lot.
1
reply
capitalismstinks
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#7
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#7
(Original post by BefuddledPenguin)
The source you have given me states that '...the total profits from the slave trade and of West Indian plantations amounted to less than 5% of the British economy during any year of the Industrial Revolution.' I've already agreed with you that the industrial revolution grew the economy more than slavery did, so of course during the industrial revolution the slave trade was of comparatively little value. But what about before the industrial revolution? Britain became involved in slavery around the start of the 17th century, if we ignore the small amount of slavery which took place in the middle ages.

I don't really see why any of this matters though, just because selling slaves may not have been that integral to the economy it certainly played a large part in our success in agriculture and our relationships with other slave owning countries, most notably the colonies in America.
But before the industrial revolution, slave trade was hardly happening. The height of slavery 1725-1800, which is when the period of the industrial revolution was happening.

The point is people are saying slavery was the driving force behind the industrial revolution, and therefore built the wealth of Britain. This is just a lie because it contributed less than 1% ( not 5% ) of GDP when the industrial revolution was happening.

And no, Britain's success in agriculture was because of technology. The agricultural revolution also started in Britain.
0
reply
Iwouldliketoknow
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#8
Report 3 years ago
#8
(Original post by capitalismstinks)
This is a thread debunking the absurd thread titled: Britain was built on slavery

Its important to debunk racist lies like this because these lies, invented by Marxists, are designed to divide and conquer people for revolutionary purposes.

First of all, during the hight of slavery it contributed les than 5% of GDP to Britain's economy. More recent historians have concluded its actually less than 1%. See figure 4.1

In other words not only did slavery not build Britain, it played virtually no role at all.

Next, let me present a graph of global per capita GDP, or individual wealth, for the past two thousand years:



I made a red dot which denotes the moment Britain became the first Empire in human history to abolish slavery.

So what changed after the red dot? Why didn't we see this massive wealth spike three thousand years ago when the Egyptian empire was 'built' on slavery? Why not two thousand years ago years when the Roman empire was 'built' on slavery? Why not a thousand years ago when the Islamic empires were 'built' on slavery?

The reason why is because none of these empires started the world changing events we call the industrial/technological revolution.

The industrial/technological revolution, which began in Britain, was the invention of machines that could do the productive work of literally thousands of men and women in a tiny fraction of the time.

It was this monumental giant leap in productivity which created the unprecedented wealth for Britain and the wider western world in general.

In conclusion: Not only did slavery not create the wealth of Britain, slavery never created any significant wealth at any time in human history for anybody except for a tiny elite class. The wealth ordinary people enjoy today is entirely down to technological advancements which started with the industrial revolution.
false false false
0
reply
EmperorPowerMan
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#9
Report 3 years ago
#9
I'd argue it is false to say Britain was entirely built on slavery but at the same its also false that the profits from having slaves produce sugar and such in the Carribean did not contribute to the wealth of the nation.
0
reply
capitalismstinks
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#10
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#10
(Original post by EmperorPowerMan)
I'd argue it is false to say Britain was entirely built on slavery but at the same its also false that the profits from having slaves produce sugar and such in the Carribean did not contribute to the wealth of the nation.
How could they contribute significantly when slavery played such a small role in economic activity?

The other thing to consider is that even though the industrial revolution produced massive rise in economic growth, British people were still extremely poor until the mid 20th century.

Wealth is just not possible for the vast majority of people without technology. For example a poor person today has running water, central heating, TV, car, washing machine, dish washer, mobile phone, free health care, fee schools etc etc etc.

These technological and political advancements which create wealth have absolutely nothing at all to do with slavery. It's almost comical how people want to use a minor part of the economy 200 years ago to explain the situation today.

It's also extremely offensive to the people who contributed the vast majority of GDP for the past thousands of years, the British working classes themselves.
0
reply
NHM713
Badges: 4
Rep:
?
#11
Report 3 years ago
#11
(Original post by capitalismstinks)
This is a thread debunking the absurd thread titled: Britain was built on slavery

Its important to debunk racist lies like this because these lies, invented by Marxists, are designed to divide and conquer people for revolutionary purposes.

First of all, during the hight of slavery it contributed les than 5% of GDP to Britain's economy. More recent historians have concluded its actually less than 1%. See figure 4.1

In other words not only did slavery not build Britain, it played virtually no role at all.

Next, let me present a graph of global per capita GDP, or individual wealth, for the past two thousand years:



I made a red dot which denotes the moment Britain became the first Empire in human history to abolish slavery.

So what changed after the red dot? Why didn't we see this massive wealth spike three thousand years ago when the Egyptian empire was 'built' on slavery? Why not two thousand years ago years when the Roman empire was 'built' on slavery? Why not a thousand years ago when the Islamic empires were 'built' on slavery?

The reason why is because none of these empires started the world changing events we call the industrial/technological revolution.

The industrial/technological revolution, which began in Britain, was the invention of machines that could do the productive work of literally thousands of men and women in a tiny fraction of the time.

It was this monumental giant leap in productivity which created the unprecedented wealth for Britain and the wider western world in general.

In conclusion: Not only did slavery not create the wealth of Britain, slavery never created any significant wealth at any time in human history for anybody except for a tiny elite class. The wealth ordinary people enjoy today is entirely down to technological advancements which started with the industrial revolution.
Come again??
0
reply
william walker
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#12
Report 3 years ago
#12
I know.
0
reply
1420787
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#13
Report 3 years ago
#13
(Original post by capitalismstinks)
But before the industrial revolution, slave trade was hardly happening. The height of slavery 1725-1800, which is when the period of the industrial revolution was happening.
Most sources classify the industrial revolution as having begun in the late 18th century.

Britain's involvement in slave trading in West Africa dates from at least 1573, supported by Elizabeth I.
0
reply
niqbal1
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#14
Report 3 years ago
#14
Putting the barbaric nature of the slave trade aside for a moment. Slavery equals free labour. Does free or cheap labour give you an edge over your competitors? Just like Chinese goods are flooding the market today and putting British firms out of business there is a definite advantage. As a result has China benefited?

Britain should never be allowed to forget the death, destruction, misery and oppression out had caused just as Germany cannot forget it's past.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Where do you need more help?

Which Uni should I go to? (16)
15.24%
How successful will I become if I take my planned subjects? (7)
6.67%
How happy will I be if I take this career? (21)
20%
How do I achieve my dream Uni placement? (16)
15.24%
What should I study to achieve my dream career? (13)
12.38%
How can I be the best version of myself? (32)
30.48%

Watched Threads

View All