The White Slave Trade of Africa

Nov 15, 2020 22:20:42 GMT joustos said:

SLAVERY, CIVIL WAR, EMANCIPATION

[1] The myth of slavery: The Spaniards on the American continent did enslave Amerindians but also intermarried with them, whereas th New England colonists fought against them in order to get rid of them from  the surrounding territories and.... Both purchased Africans and, were they enslaved??? I shall speak only of the N. Eng. colonists.

In England, they were subjects of the king and lived and worked on land that belonged to the king; they were vassals of feuds, not slaves, as they were provided with lodgings, food, and clothing, but they were not free to leave (and die somewhere else). To this extent, they we slaves. Now, in America the colonists did not live on the king's property, and there was un-owned land all around. So, they -- some of them -- decided to establish feudalism there in which they would be the baronial landowners. This was private (not State) feudalism. Hence they bought Africans to do the farm work, as they were not conqueros of peoples and had no prisoners of war. They bought Africans (singles and married people) from the so-called slave-traders, who rescued them from starvation in Africa. Colonists also imported indentured servants, i.e, Europeans who obliged themselves to work for the colonists for a limited number of years in exchange for their travel expenses and the present necessities of life. // As in the case of ancient Roman prisoner owners, some American "slave" owners, granted freedom to their subjects, for good or extraordinary behavior (such as the teaching of children), after some years.

[2] 

[2] Why was there a civil war? We know the superficial facts: The southern States wanted to expand "slavery" to new states which were being formed in the southern United States, but presidential candidate Lincoln said that, as president, he would not allow that. So, when he was elected, the southern states decided to secede from the Union {which they had the right to do}, that is, to be independent from the federal government.Secession was the peaceful way of getting independence, whereas, earlier, the American independence from the British government necessitated the fight against the king's armies (militias) stationed in he Colonies. The Civil War was started by Lincoln, not by the seceded States. But WHY? Lincoln declared that he wanted to save the union. However it is NOT the president's duty to preserve the Union; according to the Constitution and the oath of office, a president has the duty to defend the Constitution -- which he violated. Anyway, he started the war in order to resolve an old problem, which the framers of the Constitution faced. Premises [provisions in the Constitution]: The number of the Representatives in the federal government depends on the number of the residents in each State; taxes are paid to the Federal government by the landowners in each State. {Eventually, the U.S. made the law that taxes were to be paid by the citizens according to their income, while cities levied taxes on property owners... as well as "sale taxes", which are really "purchase taxes".} Well, since the southern colonies had very large populations (on account of the slaves), they would supply more Representatives (legislators) than the northern States, but since the slaves were not property owners, the Slavery States would contribute, proportionately, fewer taxes than the northern States. So, they reached a compromise: In effect, each slave was to be counted as less than a unit. Now, Lincoln had no idea as to how he could resolve the problem of the great disparity between Representatives and Taxes that would ensue, if slavery were expanded to new States, so, Lincoln and Senator Thaddeus Stevens decided to abolish slavery/feudalism altogether by vandalizing the southern plantations. (This left the Blacks jobless and homeless.)

[3] While the war was still raging, Lincoln  wrote his famous Proclamation of Emancipation, to justify his war and vandalism:There was a rebellion against the federal government, wherefore he quelled the rebellion by sending troops. In truth, there was never such a rebellion and, if there were one, then, according to the Constitution, the state militias have to quell it. The Proclamation and the War actually indict Lincoln of a great crime. He was duly assassinated as a tyrant.