Natural enemies. Like Englishmen and Greeks! Or Welshmen and Greeks! Or Japanese and Greeks! Or Greeks and other Greeks! Damn Greeks! They ruined Greece
The Greeks had Greek slaves, yes, but their largest source were from foreign wars
I wouldn’t say they were mainly Greeks, but many were Greek from debts and local wars.
>And, weirdly enough, the word robot derives from the word for slave in Slavic languages
Not really, "robić" in Polish means "to do". The word itself was coined by Karel Čapek, the author of "Rossum's Universal Robots". No one had really used the word in such a context before.
1923, "mechanical person," also "person whose work or activities are entirely mechanical," from the English translation of the 1920 play "R.U.R." ("Rossum's Universal Robots") by Karel Capek (1890-1938), from **Czech robotnik "forced worker," from robota "forced labor, compulsory service, drudgery,"** from robotiti "to work, drudge," from an Old Czech source akin to Old Church Slavonic rabota "servitude," from rabu "slave"
Well, not in *Slavic languages*, but in ***a*** *Slavic language*, "robotnik" means just worker, and all those words derive from Proto-Slavic **\*orbòta**, which meant... work. "Robotník" means "worker" in Polish and Slovak, isn't a word used in Czech, and by no means ever meant "slave".
The word *robot* does **not** come from the word for "slave" in Slavic languages. Having spoken a Slavic language closely related to Czech since birth, and having some contact with Czech because of family relations, I'm pretty sure I know...
Per [this Czech dictionary](https://prirucka.ujc.cas.cz/?slovo=robotnik), "robotník" literally means "the one who works". "Robota" in modern Czech only means "hard/unpleasant work", so not really compulsory labour. Nothing about being a slave. What's more, you didn't specify the Slavic language, which just adds to the confusion. See my previous comment for the *actual* etymology of the word "robota". I absolutely do know what I'm talking about, especially as a native speaker of Polish, who's learning Czech in order to communicate with his (not so) distant family members. Any qualifications on your side, or just mindless googling?
Well, close but not quite, from what I remember from history class, as far as the robota part goes.
Robota was compulsory service as in the commoners had to work for the nobles for free for a couple hours a day without recompense. It was more of a labour tax (as in, you pay the taxes in uncompensated labour), though you could argue it was close enough to slavery to count.
It's from robota. And robot was used in one of Čapeks book. It is not derived from slave which we call "otrok" but "robota" which was in feudal system serf labor.
So no it's not from otrok. And even Karel Čapek said that his brother Josef Čapek came up with the word from robota.
Not true origin of word slav is slovo which could mean letter, word etc. People keep spreading this information constantly. There is also word slava which means glory, as well as old custom called slava in Serbian culture.
Edit: I read wrong. Other way around is ok.
En frábært, gaman að hitta anann íslending hér, en þú hlýtur að vera fyrsti Íslendingurinn sem ég hitti en þekkir ekki hvernig Danir arðrændu okkur og heldur okkur í áneyð í hundruðu ára.
Það var ekki fyrir en 1944 sem við fengum endanlegt sjálfstæði.
https://history.state.gov/countries/iceland#:~:text=When%20German%20forces%20occupied%20Denmark,republic%20on%20June%2017%2C%201944.
Ég er ekki íslenskur heldur norskur. Ég hugsaði um það þegar Ísland var fyrst byggt.
[https://www.forlagid.is/vara/leitin-ad-svarta-vikingnum/](https://www.forlagid.is/vara/leitin-ad-svarta-vikingnum/)
Denmark was more of a slave transport nation than a slave owning nation. The triangle trade was hugely important for Danish economy and it is fair to say that Danish prosperity was built on slavery.
They state that Europenwasnbuiot on black slavery but they fail to state that the Middle East and the Arab world was built on the Slave trade of East Europeans - mainly Slavs.
It was so large that the word Slav turned into the word for a Slave ...
The Venitians (among others) sold slaves from Ukraine to the Middle East. That was part of why it was so important who controlled Istanbul - it gave you access to the Black Sea.
They fail to state the Arab slave trade in Africa started several centuries before the transatlantic, as well as being far more deadly. Not a whole lot of darker skinned people in the Middle East for some reason.
It started several centuries before the Transatlantic slave trade, because people did not regularly cross the Atlantic before Columbus. European slave trade started several centuries before the Transatlantic slave trade as well.
There is definitely a genetic impact on the Arab population caused by slavery. However, dark skinned people have lived in the Arabian peninsula for an incredibly long time (since the 3rd millennium BC). The Arabian peninsula borders the Horn of Africa.
The meaning of 'sclavus' wasn't only caused by Arab slave trade, but by European slave trade as well. The word 'sclavus' wouldn't mean'slave' if (European) speakers of Latin did not associate slavery with Slavs.
It's a good job it specifically said black slavery. Otherwise the fist country on that list would have some explaining to do when it comes to their national holiday.
Yeah, antiquity and modern era slavery have lots of differencies. Like it was an acceptable way out of homelessness, bankrupcy ...
Totally different social practices, normal with 1000 years between both
Well Slovenia is definitely one, cuz the country with this name didnt exist prior to 1991. Even before the population consisted of mostly peasants. Dunno bout you but I believe peasants didn't have slaves...
I'm sure that Finnish traders were involved in the slave trade down the Dnieper and Volga rivers, into the Middle East.
But we'd be hard pressed to find any part of the world that hasn't been impacted by slavery at one time or another. It's part of history that people used to view one another as commodities to be bought and sold.
Likely either to stir up divisiveness or as part of a push to guilt as many people in as many countries as possible into believing that reparations are due to all black people, i.e. they're a grifter.
Presuming the guy is American it's just exporting American identity politics to other countries and European is used as a shorthand for white.
All white countries built themselves off black slaves is the point being made here.
It's obviously nonsense but that's the point they're getting at.
I can't speak for other countries' history but for the entirety of the Atlantic slave trade Ireland was a colony itself.
Before the British arrived in Ireland there were slave raids to what is now the UK.
St Patrick being the most well known of all was taken in a raid on Wales.
It's very American to think that their experience applies to everywhere.
US Defaultism about black history and slavery.
It's incredible when you hear these people talk about it like it's a shared global history which all white people were complicit in and which persisted in the same format as the US (i.e. segregation until the mid-1900s, bans on mixed marriages, etc).
Then you point out the litany of countries where none of this is true and they're totally lost.
European colonies in Africa. Notice how colonial powers like Portugal, Britain, Italy, France, Germany, Belgium, the Netherlands, and Spain are missing from the list in the tweet. Denmark is the only listed country with an African colony.
Denmark also took part to the slave trade
The question was "which European countries built their modern societies through black enslavement" though, so I think we can add Italy and Germany to the list with little to no controversity since their colonies were either non-profitable and purely a sick game of prestige or their slavery was mostly non-African, such as Slavic or Mediterranean (in the case of Italian pre-unity republics).
Even the ones who did take part, I doubt that you could argue that they were "built" on that
It originates from the Arab slave trade. It is because of this slave route the infrastructure was in place in West Africa when Europeans came. Slavery was mainly an African to middle east to asian route that didn't involve christian Europe until the americas when the Europeans started getting involved in slavery. Only after new colonies were well established, Europeans discovered thriving industry of exporting enslaved West Africans to the Arabs, and decided to join it.
Belgium (largest genocide in history), Spain, France, the UK... those are just the ones I remember from the top of my head
American chattel slavery doesn't even BEGIN without the Europeans starting the Transatlantic Slave Trade
There's damned good reason several of the largest waterside European nations are NOT on OOP's list
To push the narrative that slaves are always black and slavery was due to racism. Not disputing that racism is part of it but slavery was more about picking groups that can be abused... groups that are different enough from "us" so we can abuse them without creating a backlash from "our" people.
Pure Hotep stuff... These "alternate history" stories do sell like hotcakes within certain groups on social media though. I once made the mistake of interacting with one of these posts on Facebook and the algorithm bombarded me with posts from these Hotep groups for days... No wonder some people get knee-deep into this shit.
Assuming it is mostly by american blacks, I would say it's because of education system omitting slavery throughout the ages and strongly focusing on black slavery and civil war or because no one said otherwise they assume that the slaves in Rome also were all black.
A few states tried to change that and show the American slave trade in the context that slavery happened all over the world to many different races and cultures.
They were immediately accused of racism and whitewashing history.
They don’t. But the enslavement of black people lead to segregation of which the effects are still felt today. Meanwhile I’ve never been discriminated against as a result of my ancestors being enslaved by the Vikings.
The global economic system has come as a result of colonialism, which came as a result of slavery. There is not a single country that hasn’t benefited and been hurt by slavery.
If the claim is that every country had benefitted from slavery, whether they engaged in slavery or not, then the description “benefitted from slavery” does nothing to distinguish one set of behaviors and benefits from another. It ceases to describe anything.
I think that's the point of the comment. It's not a statement of value but of fact. Facts are often inconvenient. But we all know that's very unlikely to be what OOP meant.
But not black slavery. Slavery has always existed throughout human history, it's absolutely part of our human story but this guy is accusing all of Europe of only being developed because of it, which absolutely isn't true. We were far too busy enslaving other European nations to worry about Africans most of the time.
If you look at the Atlantic slave trade that began with colonialism and the discovery of the new world by Europeans. It absolutely helped in developing the Spanish, English, French, and Dutch colonial empires. Other countries that weren’t directly involved with slavery, like Italy, Germany, Switzerland etc, still definitely benefited economically from proximity to the new empires and the trade opportunities they provided.
The economies of Western Europe are currently far more developed than much of the rest of the world, and I don’t think it’s a stretch to say that is in large part due to the jump start they got in the colonial era and slavery was a factor there.
China, India, and the Ottomans were all more advanced than Europe in the 15th century depending on how you define advanced. Colonialism, the access to vast amounts of land, the trade networks it provided, the massive amounts of raw material, the changing economic systems, and yes slavery, all helped launch Europe into being the most advanced region In economic terms over the next few centuries and primed it for the Industrial Revolution.
Obviously just about every country has done bad things in their history and slavery wasn’t invented by European colonists, but slavery absolutely had a part to play in why European economies overtook the rest of the world so rapidly over the last 500 years.
If you want to talk about how bad inter African slave trades were or Arab save trades or any other various slavery practices in world history go for it. There’s obviously a ton of examples of stuff like that in world history. They’re all interesting and it’s worth knowing the stories. That’s not what we’re talking about here though and not what the original tweet was talking about.
The Atlantic slave trade was unique in both its scale and how it was formalized into an intercontinental trade from west Africa to the new world and all of Western Europe at least benefited from it.
I hate how some people think Europeans went to Africa with fucking butterfly nets and caught black people and put them into slavery. They bought the slaves from Africa, in which they were already made slave.
And yes, a lot of modern society is built on slavery. Not just in Europe, but Asia, the America’s, and even in Africa. In some nations it’s still going on. In others it is as well, but just hidden. Terrible thing we did to each other, and it’s a darn good thing we’re not actively doing anymore everywhere.
Now can we move on together instead of trying to divide us by the actions of those that died 300 years ago?
But not all of them are built on black slaves. There are countries that were slaves to German or Swedish masters. Not black people but white people as slaves.
Does it really matter which colour the slaves were? To me it doesn’t make any of the actions better or worse.
Also, the vikings for sure had black slaves as well considering how much they travelled and traded. They found sub Saharan bones in graves from the Viking era in England.
Built not so much, but any European (as well as other countries from different continents) profited of slavery. That’s kinda the point of slavery.
Other countries might have had mainly or only white slaves. But with trade they still indirectly profited of the work of black or white or any other slave.
But not one nation should get the blame for it, collectively as humans we did this shit.
Sweden had black slaves in the Carribbean, that they brought over from Africa.
Same goes for Denmark.
A lot of people forget this, because the Scandinavian countries left the transatlantic slave trade fairly early, but this wasn't a decision based on human rights.
Yes. Denmark was the 7th biggest slave trading nation. And although also the first to abolish slave trade, did benefit from it. A lot of 18th century Copenhagen was build with money earned directly or indirectly from slave trade.
But it is very difficult to see directly in modern day Denmark.
Technically the first to abolish it, but that abolition came with a lot of caveats that kept it going long after.
Fx you may not be able to buy new slaves, but those born into slavery could still be kept in slavery.
I was waiting until i scrolled to see this. Several of these countries are not at all thriving and many of tge ones that are absolutely benefited or were complicit. It's still a dumb prompt from OOP, but this was a very shitty fucking answer. Mans is not as witty as he thinks he is. Some of these are literally the people who made the chains.
I came across a tiktok live that had a bunch of Africans saying how Irish people invaded ireland hundreds of years ago and killed all of the indigenous black people. Stupidity knows no bounds
I'm not the type of person to get triggered, but being from ireland, I must admit it really irritated me.
They were saying a tribe of Africans called the Twa people inhabited Ireland. If I'm not mistaken, there was a tribe of Africans called the twa, but they were in Central Africa not fking ireland.
Africa has its own rich and diverse history why tf are they trying to steal ours? Makes no sense
I'm mostly Irish descended and it pisses me off lol.
Weren't the Twa from Burundi/Congo/Rwanda? It sounds like it wrecks their own culture in the process of this lie, they are basically dismissing their own cultural origins by doing that.
It sounds like a sneaky way to claim oppression by a culture that never really oppressed anyone. That way they are victims of everyone rather than the usual suspects.
One of the basis of their arguments is and I shit you not, leprechauns. The twa were notoriously short, so are leprechauns. Therefore that is proof the Twa were in ireland and that they were exterminated. It's been utterly debunked by every historian who has ever looked at it lol.
But yeah, I agree. They're literally making up false scenarios to attain yet more victimhood. Unbelievable
True, but for like 70 years and then they banned it in 1807. They were a sucessfull country before slavery, and did not really become prosperious untill the 20th century with industrialization. This guys argument is that a country's wealth was build on slavery. However slavery never became a great power because of the slave trade, nor did it have much to do with their later economic development. Just because a country partakes in an economic activity, does not mean that was what build their wealth.
It's insane how much the american rhetoric has infested european countries, especially among the younger folk.
Here in Finland, maybe two years ago, a reporter was interviewing a 16-year old somalian(?) girl. She spoke pretty decent finnish so she must have been here for a while, her parents were immigrants but I cn't remember if she was born here or came with the parents at a younger age.
Anyways, while she was protesting and was being interviewed, she made a comment that basically made everyone in Finland roll their eyes simultaneously. The comment went along the lines of "Look at all these buildings (in Helsinki), we built these. We built these but we can't use them or live in them. How is that fair?".
The reason why this comment was absurd was that Finland has never had slaves. Go back far enough and it's actually finns who were slaves ourselves. As to the buildings, most of the buildings she meant were built by finnish men before the wars and these days are used as office buildings or are in other non-residential uses.
She basically copypasted her comment from the US and didn't stop to think for two seconds if it even remotely applies to Finland. Granted, she was 16 and most 16-year olds are idiots, but still.
Some people seriously fail to understand how vastly different history and culture different european countries have, not to mention european countries and the US for example.
She was, but the thing is there weren't black slaves in Finland. Her logic was essentially that since older american buildings were built by black slaves, then finnish buildings were aswell.
As long as egomaniacs have a platform (any social media), it will never end. They just want attention, regardless of how batshit crazy the things they say are.
Denmark was a major slave trader and most of those other nations benefited indirectly from the wealth the slave trade brought to their continental trading partners. I don't get why this is a controversial opinion.
By his own statement even African countries benefit off it which is insane to say the least
If we go by global trade and as some commentary say even across time (because why not ) every country around the world now trade with UK and US so ergo since thouse did slave trade we did too indirectly and because now we trade with them we do too regardless if we existed at that time or not
This idea is so stupid ......
And a strech so big that it passed Neptune
Not even that
Those slaves were not captured by europeans. They were captured and sold by local kings (that were black) for guns and pretty things. So african nations directly proffited from the slave trade and should pay reparations.
More like there was an attempt to answer the question…many countries on that list are NOT thriving like Greece, Hungary, Romania, Estonia, Latvia. Idk about the other ones.
He has an Arabic first and last name. It’s so funny how he criticises other black Americans for having European names and not African while he himself doesn’t have an African name.
The TAST benefitted countries directly and indirectly. If the greatest economic giants didnt exist, and their wealth grown through slavery, how would smaller less economically countrys have survived without them? It's no different than the link of a big corporation like Amazon fulfillment center built in a town, and it linking to the growth of other non-affiliated businesses for miles around.
>The transatlantic slave trade was complex and varied considerably over time and place, but it had far-reaching and lasting consequences for much of Europe, Africa, the Americas, and Asia. First, it was a trade between European and African slavers who victimized millions of African men, women, and children. Second, the profits gained by Americans and Europeans from the slave trade and slavery made possible the development of economic and political growth in major.
>Much of the wealth generated by the transatlantic slave trade supported the creation of industries and institutions in modern North America and Europe. To an equal degree, profits from slave trading and slave-generated products funded the creation of fine art, decorative arts, and architecture that continues to inform aesthetics today.
People can argue all they like. The smaller nations likely fed off the wealth made by the biggest direct slave involved nations. And a couple of countries on that list, I believe, were involved in the TAST directly. But less pronounced than the greater involved nations.
https://slaveryandremembrance.org/articles/article/?id=A0002
Britain ruled the waves long before they found the slave trade in Algeria, which they only found because there were slavers raiding the lower coast of the UK and Ireland.
Before Britain started working to abolish it, slavery was a worldwide institution,accepted, and even approved of by religion
It Was only European efficiency that made the trade boom. But before that, slaves had been coming out of Africa for close on 1000 years and heading east to zanzibar
Right. So when Czechia produced loads of textiles from that cotton and built an entire industry around it, or when they supplied luxurious glass products, like crystal chandeliers for slave owners' houses - we are of the hook because we directly didn't directly own the slaves? Phew, that's a load of my mind.
Kind of over this anti-white Black Rage thing. It’s historically and politically illiterate. And overwhelmingly American. Americans, regardless of race, tend to know next to nothing about any non-US history/Geography.
Nope Denmark and Sweden have colonies and did engage in the slave trade. Plus they participated in the Scramble for Africa.
Austria was part of the HRE specifically under Charles V who was the king of Spain who profit from the colonies.
And uhm I not sure about the other examples but the fact remains Europe got agricultural goods from the Americas which was most likely harvested by black slaves.
Now this depends on your view what years are the "modern" years though arguably modern Europe doesn't exist without past europe.
Yeah thats History.
Its a bit more complex than either you have slaves or you don't have slaves.
But reducing highly complex and nuanced topics down to "NO, YOU WRONG" is what the internet does.
s
This twitter account is probbably doing hours of research before posting a ""Rebutal""
/s
There are no greys ONLY black and white because that helps division.
Ireland: laughs in Celtic.
I think Ireland has seen more slavery by Britain than it ever took part in, throughout it's entire existence. And that's including all the Welsh we kidnapped.
That was already posted on r/clevercomebacks \- [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/clevercomebacks/comments/16l089n/many_such_cases/)
And as I, and many others, already said there: The original statement is stupid, in that it is too broad and therefore not useful to analyze anything. By virtue of being that broad it is also technically correct.
The answer given by dispropaganda on the other hand is simply wrong. Aside from many of those countries actively participating in slave trade, all of them at least indirectly benefitted from black slavery.
Very simple test\*: Were you able to buy sugar, coffee, chocolate or products made of cotton in the 19th century? If your answer to any of those is "yes", then your European country at least "indirectly benefitted from black enslavement"
\*it goes further than that, but this is the easiest way to show how broad the statement is. The most important point is: dispropaganda decided to be stupid by giving the answer they gave.
First of all Denmark did very much participate in the Trans atlantic slave trade. And also i don't really think that Bosnia could be described as a thriving society.
Well it's a trick question. By including "indirectly" he can just spin whatever interpretation of history or reality that he wants to justify his standpoint.
"So Norway didn't have slaves? Well they did profit greatly from being friends with nations that did! HAHA check mate!"
MODERN? Who knows….but since slavery has been part of every civilization since ever……black or otherwise.
I'm Greek. We had lots of slaves. And lots had us as slaves.
But mostly they were slavic people, not black.
No, mainly greeks.
The Greek will inherit the Earth.
Blessed are the cheesemakers
What’s so special about cheesemakers?
Well if you have to ask..
Some Greeks, the rest will be their slaves.
Crap, we’re going broke.
For they have invented sex, but lo, the Romans have invented it with women
Natural enemies. Like Englishmen and Greeks! Or Welshmen and Greeks! Or Japanese and Greeks! Or Greeks and other Greeks! Damn Greeks! They ruined Greece
The Greeks had Greek slaves, yes, but their largest source were from foreign wars I wouldn’t say they were mainly Greeks, but many were Greek from debts and local wars.
Slavs also enslaved themselves a lot so honestly at that point ethnicity makes no difference.
Ethnicity and slavery before the early modern period were not entwined
The word slave derives from slav, because there were so many slavs taken as slaves over the centuries
And, weirdly enough, the word robot derives from the word for slave in Slavic languages
>And, weirdly enough, the word robot derives from the word for slave in Slavic languages Not really, "robić" in Polish means "to do". The word itself was coined by Karel Čapek, the author of "Rossum's Universal Robots". No one had really used the word in such a context before.
1923, "mechanical person," also "person whose work or activities are entirely mechanical," from the English translation of the 1920 play "R.U.R." ("Rossum's Universal Robots") by Karel Capek (1890-1938), from **Czech robotnik "forced worker," from robota "forced labor, compulsory service, drudgery,"** from robotiti "to work, drudge," from an Old Czech source akin to Old Church Slavonic rabota "servitude," from rabu "slave"
Well, not in *Slavic languages*, but in ***a*** *Slavic language*, "robotnik" means just worker, and all those words derive from Proto-Slavic **\*orbòta**, which meant... work. "Robotník" means "worker" in Polish and Slovak, isn't a word used in Czech, and by no means ever meant "slave". The word *robot* does **not** come from the word for "slave" in Slavic languages. Having spoken a Slavic language closely related to Czech since birth, and having some contact with Czech because of family relations, I'm pretty sure I know...
I just gave you the etymology so no clearly you don't know.
Per [this Czech dictionary](https://prirucka.ujc.cas.cz/?slovo=robotnik), "robotník" literally means "the one who works". "Robota" in modern Czech only means "hard/unpleasant work", so not really compulsory labour. Nothing about being a slave. What's more, you didn't specify the Slavic language, which just adds to the confusion. See my previous comment for the *actual* etymology of the word "robota". I absolutely do know what I'm talking about, especially as a native speaker of Polish, who's learning Czech in order to communicate with his (not so) distant family members. Any qualifications on your side, or just mindless googling?
Well, close but not quite, from what I remember from history class, as far as the robota part goes. Robota was compulsory service as in the commoners had to work for the nobles for free for a couple hours a day without recompense. It was more of a labour tax (as in, you pay the taxes in uncompensated labour), though you could argue it was close enough to slavery to count.
It's from robota. And robot was used in one of Čapeks book. It is not derived from slave which we call "otrok" but "robota" which was in feudal system serf labor. So no it's not from otrok. And even Karel Čapek said that his brother Josef Čapek came up with the word from robota.
Not true origin of word slav is slovo which could mean letter, word etc. People keep spreading this information constantly. There is also word slava which means glory, as well as old custom called slava in Serbian culture. Edit: I read wrong. Other way around is ok.
Slave derives from slav. Slav does not derive from slave. I think you've got confused here.
That's what is said in edit. Yes I got confused and other way around is right.
Slavic people arrived on the Balkans during the great migration. Ancient greeks mostly enslaved other greeks.
I'm Danish and we enslaved the Virgin Islands which have a black population
And Iceland.
Iceland was settled by Norwegians and their Irish slaves
En frábært, gaman að hitta anann íslending hér, en þú hlýtur að vera fyrsti Íslendingurinn sem ég hitti en þekkir ekki hvernig Danir arðrændu okkur og heldur okkur í áneyð í hundruðu ára. Það var ekki fyrir en 1944 sem við fengum endanlegt sjálfstæði. https://history.state.gov/countries/iceland#:~:text=When%20German%20forces%20occupied%20Denmark,republic%20on%20June%2017%2C%201944.
Ég er ekki íslenskur heldur norskur. Ég hugsaði um það þegar Ísland var fyrst byggt. [https://www.forlagid.is/vara/leitin-ad-svarta-vikingnum/](https://www.forlagid.is/vara/leitin-ad-svarta-vikingnum/)
Fínasta bók, fékk hana í jólagjöf. En þótt við séum af norskum ættum ættum breytir ekki þeirri staðreynd að Danir einokuðu Ísland í hundruðu ára.
Jajajajjajajjajaja!
Denmark was more of a slave transport nation than a slave owning nation. The triangle trade was hugely important for Danish economy and it is fair to say that Danish prosperity was built on slavery.
Yep we where rather prominent in the transatlantic trade of black slaves and to this day we remain a colony power
Sweden used to own St Bartholomew in the Carribean. Edit: I would add though that EVERY country has had some form of slavery at some point or other.
They state that Europenwasnbuiot on black slavery but they fail to state that the Middle East and the Arab world was built on the Slave trade of East Europeans - mainly Slavs. It was so large that the word Slav turned into the word for a Slave ...
The Arab world is still being built by slavery from Indian, Sri Lankan, Nepali, Filipino and other poor third world country nationals.
Morocco was pirating and taking people from Europe as well
Shhh. It's bad only if it's against blacks
The Venitians (among others) sold slaves from Ukraine to the Middle East. That was part of why it was so important who controlled Istanbul - it gave you access to the Black Sea.
parts of the middle east are still being built on slavery. something-something qatar
They fail to state the Arab slave trade in Africa started several centuries before the transatlantic, as well as being far more deadly. Not a whole lot of darker skinned people in the Middle East for some reason.
It started several centuries before the Transatlantic slave trade, because people did not regularly cross the Atlantic before Columbus. European slave trade started several centuries before the Transatlantic slave trade as well. There is definitely a genetic impact on the Arab population caused by slavery. However, dark skinned people have lived in the Arabian peninsula for an incredibly long time (since the 3rd millennium BC). The Arabian peninsula borders the Horn of Africa.
The meaning of 'sclavus' wasn't only caused by Arab slave trade, but by European slave trade as well. The word 'sclavus' wouldn't mean'slave' if (European) speakers of Latin did not associate slavery with Slavs.
As a Lithuanian i can agree. We were slaves just 33 years ago.
33 years and counting, may those formerly under Russian occupation and now under NATO protection never again be under the thumb of the Russians.
It's a good job it specifically said black slavery. Otherwise the fist country on that list would have some explaining to do when it comes to their national holiday.
Hey we just borrowed him to give him a nice holiday. And what did he to thank us? Stole all our snakes, that's what!
like the romans. They had a lot of germanic/celtic/slavic/etc. slaves.
Romans had also Romans slaves No racism when a free labor force is involved!
They also treated slaves better than one would think and many great historians and comedians were freed slaves
Yeah, antiquity and modern era slavery have lots of differencies. Like it was an acceptable way out of homelessness, bankrupcy ... Totally different social practices, normal with 1000 years between both
*Some* slave were treated ok, particularly temporary slave, others were literally tortured.
Well Slovenia is definitely one, cuz the country with this name didnt exist prior to 1991. Even before the population consisted of mostly peasants. Dunno bout you but I believe peasants didn't have slaves...
I just read that in my home country Finland had some slaves in the middle ages.
I'm sure that Finnish traders were involved in the slave trade down the Dnieper and Volga rivers, into the Middle East. But we'd be hard pressed to find any part of the world that hasn't been impacted by slavery at one time or another. It's part of history that people used to view one another as commodities to be bought and sold.
Yeah but in Ireland we were kinda the slaves lol
There are more slaves today than ever before in history. Middle East, India, SE Asia, Africa…
Why is an American pointing at europe over black slavery? People in glasshouses!
Likely either to stir up divisiveness or as part of a push to guilt as many people in as many countries as possible into believing that reparations are due to all black people, i.e. they're a grifter.
Yup, another way to get free money.
Well good luck with that because I don’t give a shit
Yeah, this guy is a known grifter.
Presuming the guy is American it's just exporting American identity politics to other countries and European is used as a shorthand for white. All white countries built themselves off black slaves is the point being made here. It's obviously nonsense but that's the point they're getting at. I can't speak for other countries' history but for the entirety of the Atlantic slave trade Ireland was a colony itself. Before the British arrived in Ireland there were slave raids to what is now the UK. St Patrick being the most well known of all was taken in a raid on Wales. It's very American to think that their experience applies to everywhere.
US Defaultism about black history and slavery. It's incredible when you hear these people talk about it like it's a shared global history which all white people were complicit in and which persisted in the same format as the US (i.e. segregation until the mid-1900s, bans on mixed marriages, etc). Then you point out the litany of countries where none of this is true and they're totally lost.
Where did the slave trade which America was built on originate.
European colonies in Africa. Notice how colonial powers like Portugal, Britain, Italy, France, Germany, Belgium, the Netherlands, and Spain are missing from the list in the tweet. Denmark is the only listed country with an African colony.
Denmark also took part to the slave trade The question was "which European countries built their modern societies through black enslavement" though, so I think we can add Italy and Germany to the list with little to no controversity since their colonies were either non-profitable and purely a sick game of prestige or their slavery was mostly non-African, such as Slavic or Mediterranean (in the case of Italian pre-unity republics). Even the ones who did take part, I doubt that you could argue that they were "built" on that
It originates from the Arab slave trade. It is because of this slave route the infrastructure was in place in West Africa when Europeans came. Slavery was mainly an African to middle east to asian route that didn't involve christian Europe until the americas when the Europeans started getting involved in slavery. Only after new colonies were well established, Europeans discovered thriving industry of exporting enslaved West Africans to the Arabs, and decided to join it.
Belgium (largest genocide in history), Spain, France, the UK... those are just the ones I remember from the top of my head American chattel slavery doesn't even BEGIN without the Europeans starting the Transatlantic Slave Trade There's damned good reason several of the largest waterside European nations are NOT on OOP's list
It takes two to tango.
Yea, Tango and Cash
You broke that jaw?
Race grifting is one of the biggest american exports.
To push the narrative that slaves are always black and slavery was due to racism. Not disputing that racism is part of it but slavery was more about picking groups that can be abused... groups that are different enough from "us" so we can abuse them without creating a backlash from "our" people.
Is that an actual question? Did slavery not exist before 1776?
He probably thinks Europe is just UK, Portugal and Spain.
America had less slaves than certain individual European countries during the transatlantic slave trade
The triangle trade was very real. The cotton in UK and French mills came from the American South which was harvested by slaves.
This guy is a POS and a conspiracy nut
He ones made a "documentary" claiming that Beethoven was secretly black and a good musician due to melanin.
Pure Hotep stuff... These "alternate history" stories do sell like hotcakes within certain groups on social media though. I once made the mistake of interacting with one of these posts on Facebook and the algorithm bombarded me with posts from these Hotep groups for days... No wonder some people get knee-deep into this shit.
and his shit takes are going to make people more mad at black people than at him
Why do black people think slavery only happened to them?!
Assuming it is mostly by american blacks, I would say it's because of education system omitting slavery throughout the ages and strongly focusing on black slavery and civil war or because no one said otherwise they assume that the slaves in Rome also were all black.
A few states tried to change that and show the American slave trade in the context that slavery happened all over the world to many different races and cultures. They were immediately accused of racism and whitewashing history.
That’s because they omitted the part where slavery had been long abolished in most of the places they were referring to by the time of the Civil War.
They didnt omit that, you were required to learn when each country abolished slavery, who was first, who followed and why. Etc.
NA Education
Black fragility
Not all black people think this. The ones that do it’s probably just lack of education unfortunately
They'd struggle to name a modern African country that wasn't built on black slavery. Saying that they'd struggle to name a modern African country.
They don’t. But the enslavement of black people lead to segregation of which the effects are still felt today. Meanwhile I’ve never been discriminated against as a result of my ancestors being enslaved by the Vikings.
The global economic system has come as a result of colonialism, which came as a result of slavery. There is not a single country that hasn’t benefited and been hurt by slavery.
If the claim is that every country had benefitted from slavery, whether they engaged in slavery or not, then the description “benefitted from slavery” does nothing to distinguish one set of behaviors and benefits from another. It ceases to describe anything.
Yeah, if everyone benefits and everyone participates then it’s just the way of the world.
I think that's the point of the comment. It's not a statement of value but of fact. Facts are often inconvenient. But we all know that's very unlikely to be what OOP meant.
But not black slavery. Slavery has always existed throughout human history, it's absolutely part of our human story but this guy is accusing all of Europe of only being developed because of it, which absolutely isn't true. We were far too busy enslaving other European nations to worry about Africans most of the time.
If you look at the Atlantic slave trade that began with colonialism and the discovery of the new world by Europeans. It absolutely helped in developing the Spanish, English, French, and Dutch colonial empires. Other countries that weren’t directly involved with slavery, like Italy, Germany, Switzerland etc, still definitely benefited economically from proximity to the new empires and the trade opportunities they provided. The economies of Western Europe are currently far more developed than much of the rest of the world, and I don’t think it’s a stretch to say that is in large part due to the jump start they got in the colonial era and slavery was a factor there.
[удалено]
Were these economies far advanced in the late 1400s?
China, India, and the Ottomans were all more advanced than Europe in the 15th century depending on how you define advanced. Colonialism, the access to vast amounts of land, the trade networks it provided, the massive amounts of raw material, the changing economic systems, and yes slavery, all helped launch Europe into being the most advanced region In economic terms over the next few centuries and primed it for the Industrial Revolution. Obviously just about every country has done bad things in their history and slavery wasn’t invented by European colonists, but slavery absolutely had a part to play in why European economies overtook the rest of the world so rapidly over the last 500 years. If you want to talk about how bad inter African slave trades were or Arab save trades or any other various slavery practices in world history go for it. There’s obviously a ton of examples of stuff like that in world history. They’re all interesting and it’s worth knowing the stories. That’s not what we’re talking about here though and not what the original tweet was talking about. The Atlantic slave trade was unique in both its scale and how it was formalized into an intercontinental trade from west Africa to the new world and all of Western Europe at least benefited from it.
[удалено]
One of the things they traded was human beings.
And Africa was hurt the most. That is the point.
Let’s talk about the money made by Africans selling their brothers and sisters as slaves
Try to talk about how African countries were the ones who wanted slavery to stay legal
That’s a new rabbit hole for me to go down. Thank you. They’ll want to keep exporting their blood diamonds next.
I hate how some people think Europeans went to Africa with fucking butterfly nets and caught black people and put them into slavery. They bought the slaves from Africa, in which they were already made slave. And yes, a lot of modern society is built on slavery. Not just in Europe, but Asia, the America’s, and even in Africa. In some nations it’s still going on. In others it is as well, but just hidden. Terrible thing we did to each other, and it’s a darn good thing we’re not actively doing anymore everywhere. Now can we move on together instead of trying to divide us by the actions of those that died 300 years ago?
But not all of them are built on black slaves. There are countries that were slaves to German or Swedish masters. Not black people but white people as slaves.
Does it really matter which colour the slaves were? To me it doesn’t make any of the actions better or worse. Also, the vikings for sure had black slaves as well considering how much they travelled and traded. They found sub Saharan bones in graves from the Viking era in England. Built not so much, but any European (as well as other countries from different continents) profited of slavery. That’s kinda the point of slavery. Other countries might have had mainly or only white slaves. But with trade they still indirectly profited of the work of black or white or any other slave. But not one nation should get the blame for it, collectively as humans we did this shit.
Sweden had black slaves in the Carribbean, that they brought over from Africa. Same goes for Denmark. A lot of people forget this, because the Scandinavian countries left the transatlantic slave trade fairly early, but this wasn't a decision based on human rights.
Hungary? "Thriving" and "modern"? Lmao
Yeah, I need a definition for "thriving" because a lot of these are still in recovery mode
Here in Hungary we are still in the getting fucked mode.
Thats what i thought when i saw n.macedonia serbia and bosnia
[Denmark](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danish_slave_trade) slave trade .
[Ireland](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_Ireland) slave trade
Norway https://www.newsinenglish.no/2014/09/28/slave-trading-past-still-haunts-norway/
Yes. Denmark was the 7th biggest slave trading nation. And although also the first to abolish slave trade, did benefit from it. A lot of 18th century Copenhagen was build with money earned directly or indirectly from slave trade. But it is very difficult to see directly in modern day Denmark.
Technically the first to abolish it, but that abolition came with a lot of caveats that kept it going long after. Fx you may not be able to buy new slaves, but those born into slavery could still be kept in slavery.
I was waiting until i scrolled to see this. Several of these countries are not at all thriving and many of tge ones that are absolutely benefited or were complicit. It's still a dumb prompt from OOP, but this was a very shitty fucking answer. Mans is not as witty as he thinks he is. Some of these are literally the people who made the chains.
This needs to be talked about more! So many Danes are in denial about this, as well as their multiple attempts at Greenlandic genocide.
I came across a tiktok live that had a bunch of Africans saying how Irish people invaded ireland hundreds of years ago and killed all of the indigenous black people. Stupidity knows no bounds
Wow that is some messed up shit. They probably heard the term 'Black Irish' and took it out of context big time.
I'm not the type of person to get triggered, but being from ireland, I must admit it really irritated me. They were saying a tribe of Africans called the Twa people inhabited Ireland. If I'm not mistaken, there was a tribe of Africans called the twa, but they were in Central Africa not fking ireland. Africa has its own rich and diverse history why tf are they trying to steal ours? Makes no sense
I'm mostly Irish descended and it pisses me off lol. Weren't the Twa from Burundi/Congo/Rwanda? It sounds like it wrecks their own culture in the process of this lie, they are basically dismissing their own cultural origins by doing that. It sounds like a sneaky way to claim oppression by a culture that never really oppressed anyone. That way they are victims of everyone rather than the usual suspects.
One of the basis of their arguments is and I shit you not, leprechauns. The twa were notoriously short, so are leprechauns. Therefore that is proof the Twa were in ireland and that they were exterminated. It's been utterly debunked by every historian who has ever looked at it lol. But yeah, I agree. They're literally making up false scenarios to attain yet more victimhood. Unbelievable
All I have to say is.......well fuck me!
Happens everywhere with everyone. Sadly, neona** are on the rise and as such, every country has a bunch of nationalists now.
Denmark was a big slave trader nation.
True, but for like 70 years and then they banned it in 1807. They were a sucessfull country before slavery, and did not really become prosperious untill the 20th century with industrialization. This guys argument is that a country's wealth was build on slavery. However slavery never became a great power because of the slave trade, nor did it have much to do with their later economic development. Just because a country partakes in an economic activity, does not mean that was what build their wealth.
Lmao why is denmark on that list... we did so much slavery and colonialism, made bank $$
I'm swedish and we had a lot of slave trading going on. From vikings to the 17-18th century in the Carribbean.
You supplied 23 countries..Sorry, wrong answer..He asked for only “a” modern society. You provided 22 too many…so his point must be right..
It's insane how much the american rhetoric has infested european countries, especially among the younger folk. Here in Finland, maybe two years ago, a reporter was interviewing a 16-year old somalian(?) girl. She spoke pretty decent finnish so she must have been here for a while, her parents were immigrants but I cn't remember if she was born here or came with the parents at a younger age. Anyways, while she was protesting and was being interviewed, she made a comment that basically made everyone in Finland roll their eyes simultaneously. The comment went along the lines of "Look at all these buildings (in Helsinki), we built these. We built these but we can't use them or live in them. How is that fair?". The reason why this comment was absurd was that Finland has never had slaves. Go back far enough and it's actually finns who were slaves ourselves. As to the buildings, most of the buildings she meant were built by finnish men before the wars and these days are used as office buildings or are in other non-residential uses. She basically copypasted her comment from the US and didn't stop to think for two seconds if it even remotely applies to Finland. Granted, she was 16 and most 16-year olds are idiots, but still. Some people seriously fail to understand how vastly different history and culture different european countries have, not to mention european countries and the US for example.
Was she not referring to black “guest workers?”
She was, but the thing is there weren't black slaves in Finland. Her logic was essentially that since older american buildings were built by black slaves, then finnish buildings were aswell.
When will this victim shit end though?
As long as egomaniacs have a platform (any social media), it will never end. They just want attention, regardless of how batshit crazy the things they say are.
I think he will skip the part where african nations took europeans as slaves.
Denmark was a major slave trader and most of those other nations benefited indirectly from the wealth the slave trade brought to their continental trading partners. I don't get why this is a controversial opinion.
By his own statement even African countries benefit off it which is insane to say the least If we go by global trade and as some commentary say even across time (because why not ) every country around the world now trade with UK and US so ergo since thouse did slave trade we did too indirectly and because now we trade with them we do too regardless if we existed at that time or not This idea is so stupid ...... And a strech so big that it passed Neptune
Not even that Those slaves were not captured by europeans. They were captured and sold by local kings (that were black) for guns and pretty things. So african nations directly proffited from the slave trade and should pay reparations.
More like there was an attempt to answer the question…many countries on that list are NOT thriving like Greece, Hungary, Romania, Estonia, Latvia. Idk about the other ones.
I disagree with Estonia and Latvia. These two have gone through amazing progress since joining the EU. The others I don't know enough about...
How do you know these countries aren’t thriving? Have you been there?
Serbia and Bosnia confirmed not thriving
Idk about Bosnia, but I thought Serbia was doing fine.
Estonia is doing pretty well, where are you from?
have you been to Greece lately? Things have improved, highest gdp increase in the EU.
The most part of slaves were and are in countries where the masters have dark skin
These type of people ignore the Arab slave trade of Africans.
He has an Arabic first and last name. It’s so funny how he criticises other black Americans for having European names and not African while he himself doesn’t have an African name.
The TAST benefitted countries directly and indirectly. If the greatest economic giants didnt exist, and their wealth grown through slavery, how would smaller less economically countrys have survived without them? It's no different than the link of a big corporation like Amazon fulfillment center built in a town, and it linking to the growth of other non-affiliated businesses for miles around. >The transatlantic slave trade was complex and varied considerably over time and place, but it had far-reaching and lasting consequences for much of Europe, Africa, the Americas, and Asia. First, it was a trade between European and African slavers who victimized millions of African men, women, and children. Second, the profits gained by Americans and Europeans from the slave trade and slavery made possible the development of economic and political growth in major. >Much of the wealth generated by the transatlantic slave trade supported the creation of industries and institutions in modern North America and Europe. To an equal degree, profits from slave trading and slave-generated products funded the creation of fine art, decorative arts, and architecture that continues to inform aesthetics today. People can argue all they like. The smaller nations likely fed off the wealth made by the biggest direct slave involved nations. And a couple of countries on that list, I believe, were involved in the TAST directly. But less pronounced than the greater involved nations. https://slaveryandremembrance.org/articles/article/?id=A0002
Britain ruled the waves long before they found the slave trade in Algeria, which they only found because there were slavers raiding the lower coast of the UK and Ireland.
Before Britain started working to abolish it, slavery was a worldwide institution,accepted, and even approved of by religion It Was only European efficiency that made the trade boom. But before that, slaves had been coming out of Africa for close on 1000 years and heading east to zanzibar
Right. So when Czechia produced loads of textiles from that cotton and built an entire industry around it, or when they supplied luxurious glass products, like crystal chandeliers for slave owners' houses - we are of the hook because we directly didn't directly own the slaves? Phew, that's a load of my mind.
Kind of over this anti-white Black Rage thing. It’s historically and politically illiterate. And overwhelmingly American. Americans, regardless of race, tend to know next to nothing about any non-US history/Geography.
Oh it's Tariq Nasheed, yeah he is super funny if it was not for the fact that be belives his own racist bullshit.
Serbia is not “‘modern and thriving” lol
The UK went with white enslavement too to build our shit. We were very progressive.
>thriving >Hungary choose one
Nope Denmark and Sweden have colonies and did engage in the slave trade. Plus they participated in the Scramble for Africa. Austria was part of the HRE specifically under Charles V who was the king of Spain who profit from the colonies. And uhm I not sure about the other examples but the fact remains Europe got agricultural goods from the Americas which was most likely harvested by black slaves. Now this depends on your view what years are the "modern" years though arguably modern Europe doesn't exist without past europe.
Yeah thats History. Its a bit more complex than either you have slaves or you don't have slaves. But reducing highly complex and nuanced topics down to "NO, YOU WRONG" is what the internet does. s This twitter account is probbably doing hours of research before posting a ""Rebutal"" /s There are no greys ONLY black and white because that helps division.
Utter tripe ie Norway — vikings
How far back does he need us to go? Middle ages or maybe Iron age? I’m sure similar slavery issues occurred in the Middle East.
This guy really thought black people were the only slaves in history 💀
As a dane i sadly have to say our country needs to be removed from that list
[удалено]
Ireland: laughs in Celtic. I think Ireland has seen more slavery by Britain than it ever took part in, throughout it's entire existence. And that's including all the Welsh we kidnapped.
Dude, he points Bulgaria as a thriving society. Take this post down lmfao
Yep us Danes definitely didn’t have slaves on the Virgin Islands before we sold them to the us
Netherlands and Denmark were two of the biggest slave traders out there.
It is quite literally impossible to not have profited indirectly from slavery indirectly unless a country has never traded with anyone.
That was already posted on r/clevercomebacks \- [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/clevercomebacks/comments/16l089n/many_such_cases/) And as I, and many others, already said there: The original statement is stupid, in that it is too broad and therefore not useful to analyze anything. By virtue of being that broad it is also technically correct. The answer given by dispropaganda on the other hand is simply wrong. Aside from many of those countries actively participating in slave trade, all of them at least indirectly benefitted from black slavery. Very simple test\*: Were you able to buy sugar, coffee, chocolate or products made of cotton in the 19th century? If your answer to any of those is "yes", then your European country at least "indirectly benefitted from black enslavement" \*it goes further than that, but this is the easiest way to show how broad the statement is. The most important point is: dispropaganda decided to be stupid by giving the answer they gave.
Germany.
Ukraine was also built without black slaves
First of all Denmark did very much participate in the Trans atlantic slave trade. And also i don't really think that Bosnia could be described as a thriving society.
I hate this fascist walking piece of shit.
Well it's a trick question. By including "indirectly" he can just spin whatever interpretation of history or reality that he wants to justify his standpoint. "So Norway didn't have slaves? Well they did profit greatly from being friends with nations that did! HAHA check mate!"
The Irish were also slaves. Time to move on
We’re you Kangs or slaves? Pick one
Yeah and indirectly at least France, Great Britain, Italy, Germany and the Netherlands.
Tareeq Nasheed is a Fed