Slavery: A Positive Good (2012)


“But I take higher ground. I hold that in the present state of civilization, where two races of different origin, and distinguished by color, and other physical differences, as well as intellectual, are brought together, the relation now existing in the slaveholding States between the two, is, instead of an evil, a good – a positive good.”
– John C. Calhoun, 1837

Is there a positive case for the domestic institution of negro slavery?

(1) In slave societies, negroes were a wealth generating economic asset: America’s slaves were worth more than its railroads, banks, and manufacturing industries combined.

In 1861, the average slave was worth $800. In 2009 dollars, a single slave purchased in 1861 would be an asset worth $135,000.

(2) In 1860, 49.8 percent of the population of Barbour County (AL) were slaves.

(3) In 1860, there were 2,717 free families in Barbour County (AL). There were 1,143 slaveholders. 42.1 percent of free families were slaveholders.

(4) In the Lower Chattahoochee Valley as a whole, there were 47 slaveholders who owned over 100 slaves. If the average slave was an asset worth $135,000, then each one of these super planters in 1860 had a fortune in slaves alone worth a minimum of $13.5 million dollars.

(5) In the Lower Chattahoochee Valley, there were 270 slaveowners who owned 50 to 100 slaves. If the average slave was worth $135,000, then each one of these middling planters had a fortune in slaves alone worth a minimum of $6.7 million dollars.

(6) In the Lower Chattahoochee Valley, there were 1,193 slaveowners who owned 20 to 50 slaves. If the average slave was worth $135,000, then these lower tier planters had a fortune in slaves alone worth a minimum of $2.7 million dollars.

Obviously, the planter class in the Lower Chattahoochee Valley was stupendously wealthy by modern standards – those numbers don’t include their non-slave property or investments and are based on the minimum number of slaves required to belong to each tier.

In 1860, there were 1,150 planters in the Lower Chattahoochee Valley. The planters were only 17.3 percent of slaveholders though. How’s that compared to the stock market?

(7) In the Lower Chattahoochee Valley, there were 1,637 slaveowners who owned 10 to 19 slaves. If the average slave was worth $135,000, then these upper middle class slaveowners had a fortune in slaves alone worth $1.35 million dollars.

(8) In the Lower Chattahoochee Valley, there were 1,485 slaveowners who owned 6 to 9 slaves. If the average slave was worth $135,000, then the typical middle class slaveowner had a fortune worth $810,000.

(9) In the Lower Chattahoochee Valley, there were 4,100 slaveowners who owned 1 to 5 slaves. 47 percent of slaveowners in the Lower Chattahoochee Valley belonged to this group. Every one of these slaveowners had at least one slave worth $135,000.

(10) In Barbour County (AL), 42.1 percent of free families were slaveowners – surely, the great majority of them were middle class slaveowners, while only a small minority were planters.

How much is the average negro household worth after 147 years of free society? The average negro household is worth $4,995.

As we have learned from Paul Kersey, the average single black woman in America has a net worth of $5, which is over a 99 percent depreciation in value from 1861. A third of blacks have a negative net worth. They are effectively bankrupt after 40 years and countless billions of dollars of wasted Great Society redistributive spending.

Freedom failed doesn’t quite capture the magnitude of the social and economic disaster that was abolition: it is more like freedom was a world shattering catastrophe that nearly crippled American civilization.

In free society, the average White household might have a net worth of $110,000 in 2012, most of which is locked up in the value of their depreciating suburban home – with both parents working in order to pay income taxes to a federal government that redistributes their wealth to millions of idle tax consuming negro voters.

In slave society, if you owned one slave, you had an asset worth $135,000 in 2009 dollars not counting your property or home, those slaves worked in direct proportion to the leisure time of a single male slaveowning patriarch, and there was no income tax because the government was funded with a revenue tariff.

(11) That’s the rub: under slavery, the negro was a fabulous wealth generating economic dynamo, the ownership of which emancipated White families from the drudgery of wage labor and significantly contributed to our national prosperity.

Under free society, the negro is the single biggest economic albatross in the United States and a civilization wrecking menace to public safety who through the genius of liberal democracy can vote himself a living from taxes and fees on the income and property of White families.

(13) Libertarians: What planter ever emancipated his slaves based on the assumption that liberating them would increase his wealth and make his plantation more productive?

(14) As a commodity, slaves were used as a store of value like gold and silver or stocks and bonds: a single slave in 1850 was worth $80,000 whereas a single slave in 1860 was worth $135,000.

(15) Paul Kersey writes:

“Black unemployment rates are directly correlated to the fact that a great many Black people are unemployable in America’s service economy, save for government/public jobs. Not institutional racism.”

The only known solution to this problem is slavery.

There are any number of industries where the millions upon millions of negroes who have an IQ less than 85 could be profitably employed today as slaves.

They could be put to work immediately as stoop laborers in the construction industry or in the fields harvesting fruits and vegetables. Alternatively, they could at least be hooked up to bicycles and used to manually generate cheap electricity to promote America’s goal of energy independence.

Even today, a slave society could find some use for them. Black women could be employed as domestics as they were in the Jim Crow South. They don’t have to become welfare queens shacking up with Mr. EBT to breed little Ja’Quares Walkers or Trayon Omar Washingtons in the Booker T. Washington housing projects.

If negroes were enslaved in such a way, we could empty our prisons, raise property values, raise per pupil spending on White students, slash law enforcement and court costs, fund an expedition to Mars, and slash the soaring cost of healthcare by curtailing epidemic black obesity.

(16) As far back as the 1830s, free negroes in the Northern states were notorious for elevating crime, destroying property values, and burdening prisons and other social services.

In free societies, the cost of negroes is socialized whereas it was privatized in slave societies: abolition eliminated natural masters (who provided employment for White working class overseers) who had a vested economic interest and legal responsibility for curtailing destructive behavior and promoting productive labor.

(17) Any student of the discipline of negro management in the Old South could have told you that emancipating slaves, blaming White people for all their various failings, and giving them access to drugs and firearms was a recipe for disaster. See the 21,000 black people who have been murdered by other black people in Detroit since 1969.

(18) In 1850, a slaveowner could have told you that the return on investment on negro education was quite low because of biological racial differences in intelligence.

(19) In 1850, a slaveowner could have told you that abolition and the politicization of the negro was a recipe for disaster based on previous experiments in abolition in Haiti and the British West Indies.

(20) Slave society promoted conservatism and racial solidarity in the Old South. It also created an indigenous elite that had the wealth and political power to resist the encroachment of the degenerating effects of liberal capitalist democracy.

Note: Virtually all the social ills that are commonly blamed on slavery are actually a consequence of freedom.

Slave societies didn’t tolerate or meekly subsidize negro criminals or flagellate themselves with racial guilt. The negro had no status as a citizen or a voter. He wasn’t a huge drag on our national prosperity as he is today in the 21st century.

Slavery was a positive good. It was a successful social system that broadly distributed wealth among Whites, created an elite invested in white supremacy, cultivated a moral sense based on the cult of honor, and most importantly, acted as a brake on the consolidation of power in Washington.

The success of slavery proved to be its downfall. It was a rival economic system that inspired enormous jealously, fear, and envy of the Slave Power in the North. As we all know, that’s what brought about the War Between the States, destroyed the White Republic created by the Founders, and set America down its path to the present racial disaster.

That’s not the fault of slavery though. It is the fault of slavery’s professed enemies.

About Hunter Wallace 12371 Articles
Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Occidental Dissent


  1. We’re not bringing back Negro slavery.

    Hunter Wallace needs to stop dreaming about the long, gone Confederate slave society past and start to live in the present – and the present isn’t going to include Negro slavery.

    Time to enter the political ring and run for Alabama state representative. And how about asking some of the pretty White Southern, Alabama gals to dance – propose marriage?

    Otherwise, some Midwestern White guy like me or worse a full fledged YANKEE will come down to Alabama – Dixie and bother your beautiful Southern Gals and we can’t have that – Southern gals courtin Yankees.


  2. Slavery, a positive good, for whom?

    It is irrelevant to me what the effect of black slavery is on black people. What bothers me about slavery is the effect on the enslavers. It weakens and denatures them, it separates them from honest basic labor, it corrupts them. I oppose slavery on that basis. Menial labor is good for building character – it may sound trite but it’s the truth. It’s also good for building a technologically sophisticated civilization – people get sick of it and find or invent labor-saving devices. A slave state is a stagnant state. I do not worship change for its own sake, but retaining traditional ways of life should be a matter of at least partly choice and wisdom, not inability to do otherwise. A Chinese or Indian style society is not one I want to live in.

  3. Combine harvesters have made field hands obsolete. Automation is now making most factory workers redundant. Machines will be making machines. Soon the entire world will only require a few thousand engineers. Great social unrest will follow.

  4. “(20) Slave society promoted conservatism and racial solidarity in the Old South. It also created an indigenous elite that had the wealth and political power to resist the encroachment of the degenerating effects of liberal capitalist democracy.”

    You make good points. I think the above for me is the strongest of them all. Being exposed to large numbers of blacks on a daily basis is undoubtedly what led to such a crisp explicit racial consciousness in the South.

    Slave labor is also probably the greatest factor in preventing the turning of the South into “A nation of immigrants” like the North preserving a real continuity of blood and history between today’s Southern people and their British colonial ancestors.

    I do still think there were downsides to it as well such as the demeaning of menial labor. The drawback I find most troubling though is the mulatto issue. I’m not saying most slave holders or overseers engaged in such activity but more did than should have and such behavior should have been more severely condemned than it was sometimes.

    Hopefully we can take the positive benefits we received from lessons learned in the past with slavery and build a society without black labor in the future.

  5. there is no way she-boons are worth $5. That is way to high a value.

    I’d never let a she-boon watch over my young.

    So all those planter class men who fought the north like devils with roid rage were soften by owning slaves….. don’t see how you reckon that

  6. True.

    Most of the above is purely historical second guessing. We hardly need millions of negro slaves today though when 2 percent of the population works in agriculture and 98 percent of them are White.

    The future is a different story. It will turn on the energy question.

  7. There is no energy crisis. We have hundreds of years worth of coal and a thousand years of nuclear fuel if we use breeder reactors. The earth is bombarded with 16 terawatts of solar energy every 88 minutes and solar cells keeps getting cheaper and more efficient all the time.

    We have successfully initiated fusion in 150 million degree Tokamak magnetic plasma containment fields. We can build fusion reactors if need be.

  8. Bringing black slaves to the USA was the worst and dumbest decision for European-Americans. Black slavery has been catastrophic for European-Americans.

  9. If the slaves had risen up and violently overthrown their masters and created the racial dystopia that exists today, then I would be the first to agree.

    That’s not what happened though. Instead, slavery was destroyed by a fanatic mass movement of Whites based in an area where slavery was non-existent, which was stirred up by the spread of utopian religious delusions through that area during the Second Great Awakening.

    The destruction of slavery is just one episode in a larger story. The same people who gave us anti-slavery were the ones who gave us civil rights and women’s suffrage and later anti-racism and feminism and who are now diligently working to advance “gay marriage” which is their latest cause.

    Liberals have brought negroes to Canada, to the UK, to Ireland, to France, to the Netherlands and Germany. Sweden is being overrun by Muslims. America is being overrun by Hispanics.

    Insofar as there is any resistance to the decline in America, it is based in the former slave states, especially those which haven’t been overrun by immigrants like Maryland and Delaware.

    Ground Zero? Vermont, the first state to abolish slavery, which refused to ratify the Constitution because of slavery.

  10. the entire nation was driven by negro slave labor. even the yankee economic success depend on negro slavery in the South

    course you’d know that if you did any reading/ studying etc on the topic, but its much easier to use that perfect hindsight when you don’t know the subject

  11. There would be plenty of jobs for slaves today even without the need for farmhands. Domestic help alone would employ most blacks.

    If w had a totally libertarian society which had no ebt card, and allowed people to sell themselves into slavery, we’d see most tax consumers end up in slavery. Not all blacks would, and not all slaves would be black, but it would still be somewhat reminiscent of the old South.

  12. “What bothers me about slavery is the effect on the enslavers. It weakens and denatures them, it separates them from honest basic labor, it corrupts them. I oppose slavery on that basis.”

    I would ask, ‘According to whom?’

    The Bible not only condones slavery (I’ve linked my articles before, but I’ll do it again for the neophytes in this room), but encourages it, as a means for generational chattel for inheritance.–-the-word-of-god/

    Moreover, those who are the recipients of God’s Favor (the White Man) are exemplars of what Pirsig noted was needful in our modern world- Quality.…/

    When Whites were slave owners ( in a society with biblically-based laws on slavery), such a ‘peculiar institution’ would actually be BETTERING OUR people, rather than making them worse. This writer (Rollory) is seeing Blacks as our ontological Equals- which they are not!

    Phil’s comment, also [“Bringing black slaves to the USA was the worst and dumbest decision for European-Americans. Black slavery has been catastrophic for European-Americans.”] is not quite true, if one realizes that, had the Darkies been kept a) illiterate, and b) not been ‘christianized’ i.e., given the fallacy (coming as it does, from filioquist Western apostate Roman models, via the Protestant Church’s incomplete rupture with Rome) that they were ‘vessels fit for the grace of YHWH God’ IN LIKE MANNER AS THEIR WHITE MASTERS, you would not have had the problems you did.

    When the Ancient Israelites conquered a people, it was NEVER a subsequent decision to call their perennial enemies, ‘brethren.’ The very fact of the racial ‘set apartness’ of the 12 Tribes, as well as the obvious visual of circumcision, made it quite clear that the Almighty was God and Lord over all, but Saviour ONLY to ‘His own.’ That did not change in the N.T. [Matt. 1:21, Matt. 15:24, James 1:1, I Pet. 1:1, Rev. 2:9] but was ratified by the Holy Spirit upon the writers of the N.T., as well!

    It is only the heretical error of Rome’s post-Schism plans for ‘world conquest’ via her theology of ‘universal jurisdiction’ that led both Rome and the Papist-dominated Scholastic West, to believe that ‘Christendom’ extended both a) beyond the boundaries of the Ecumene (it could and did- wherever white men went) as well as b) beyond the RACE of the Ecumene (which it could never do- Only the White Adamic is the recipient of God’s favor and covenant. All others are like the non-circumcised slaves of the Davidic O.T. kingdom- they have blessings living among ‘God’s Adam’, to be sure- but they will NEVER be our ontological/covenantal equals.

    Phenomenal column, Hunter. You push the boundaries of our People’s consciousness, to help us see ourselves as the Summum Bonum of YHWH God’s creative final act of Gen. 1:26-7. ” “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, etc.” If that likeness and Image is the White Flesh of Adamic Man (and it is) the Negro can never, at any time, now- or in the future- BE of that ‘image or likeness.’ Bravo!

  13. Anglo Saxon society pre 1066 was essentially powered by slavery. One of the innovations that abolishing it created was the prison or dungeon.

    Before that law breakers were simply put to work on farms ploughing with oxen or placed in tannery, weaving, mill jobs.

    Here we had a golden opportunity with a dumb as rocks black population and the Yankees messed it up.

  14. “I suppose you would offer the modern White working class under BRA as a sparkling example of moral virtue compared to antebellum slaveholders?”

    Of course not. The modern white working class is very dysfunctional and getting worse. To a certain extent, it is because they are adopting black social norms.

    I don’t see how this is evidence against what I wrote.

    As for abolishing slavery leading to prison, that’s an entirely different discussion, that of the specific purpose and nature of criminal punishment. I always liked the medieval Icelandic system: fines or death, enforced or not by whoever thought it was important enough to do something about.

  15. “….Bringing black slaves to the USA was the worst and dumbest decision for European-Americans. Black slavery has been catastrophic for European-Americans….”

    It was true in all the colonies, though— but the focus is ALWAYS and everywhere u.s. or, maybe, south africa—-

    The Northern Europeans versus the Spanish seem to try to have maneuvered in a different way, which has made it an ongoing contention, and “elites” have used those ex-slave populations in a different way in those countries.

    No one goes on and on about the Spanish, Portuguese and French, (many more slaves by comparison).

    This should be explored more than it is.

    And what plantations were really like. It’s not like slave holders sat on their fat asses like “aristocrats in England,” (i.e. the images of them from movies). All the people had to be fed, clothed, housed, various forms of accounting done. There was all sorts of labor, not just “picking cotton,” or sugar cane, lol.

  16. Most of the planters in Jamaica were heavily in debt. Lots went to prisons as debtors. They tended to work very hard as they were often close to the edge financially if a crop failed or was otherwise destroyed.

  17. Most aristocrats were busy managing vast estates. Or leading armies of conquest of they wished to maintain their status…

  18. I’m going to say alot of negative things about slavery. All the negatives I mention here in my post refers to the effects of slavery on the White race in America. Not going to mention blacks here. Here it is:
    Slavery ain’t comin back. Thank God. What a disgusting, inhuman, inhumane, unfair, unbalanced, overbearing, stupefying ,and divisive economic system.
    It was a complete disaster for the United States.
    The word “catastrophic” : The word Phil used to describe the effects of slavery hits the nail on the head.
    To those who read “OD” , whether you post or not : Especially to those who don’t care for the talmud ( I detest the talmud) :
    Slavery is the most jew/talmudic economic system ever devised. Slavery is jew/talmudic to-the-core. A slave-based economic system concentrates wealth into the hands of a few at the great expense of the many. The slave system left many whites in the South dirt poor, without much chance of advancement or opportunity. All economic policies were decided by the owners of the largest plantations ( 1,000 + slaves). The ruling-class large plantation owners screwed over the Southern whites big time. Slavery brought a type of lethargy and a type of stupor over the South, hindering the position of the South vis-a-vis the rest of the West : The other regions of the US, as well as Europe, Canada, Australia, etc.
    Unfortunately, the South was left in the dust while the rest of the West advanced (from an economic viewpoint ).
    As far as the war of of 1861 is concerned, Southern large plantation owners were through with slavery as it was becoming increasingly unprofitable for them. The Southern big-shots played a substantial role in fomenting the war. The war was a giant cover-up to hide the fact the big-shot Southerners ( in cahoots with Northern and British banking/business interests) wanted to get rid of the slave system and ipso facto get rid of their slaves who were becoming a burden on them as the economic system was changing and transitioning because of technological advances, to a large degree.
    Southern big-shots are just as culpable for the war as any Northern abolitionist and/or politician. Southerners who disagree with that are uninformed and need to study their history at greater length , dig deeper into the history of the South than what you read in our abridged history books. Our history books are chock full of lies : Mostly lies of omission. Now with the internet, more and more truth is coming to light. I would suggest a thorough study of this matter via the internet, not just through our extremely abridged history books. Of course, one must be discerning reading anything period. This has always been the case throughout history.
    After the slave-system was abolished – because Southern big-shots wanted it abolished and fomented the war to get it abolished : After the war , the Southern big-shots instituted share-cropping. They still didn’t have to pay for labor [as far as their erstwhile slaves, they weren’t responsible for the upkeep of the blacks anymore as well]. Still have free labor and no upkeep, too boot.
    The Southern big-shots invested their profits in the new Robber-Baron-corporate-monopoly economy : The great bulk of Southern money being invested in other areas of the country while the Southern big-shots let the South languish without industry. The whites under the share-cropping system were totally fucked by their “own kind” Southern big-shots. The Southern ruling class was disgusting to-the-core, in spite of the airs of refinement and aristocracy they put on ; that they feigned. A true and real aristocracy looks out for their own racial, religious, and cultural kind. If a so-called aristocracy screws over their own kind, it’s not aristocracy —-> It’s an oligarchy : ” A form of goverrnment in which the power is vested in a few persons” ; “Oligo” is from the Greek, and means “few” :
    It’s the same premise upon which the communist system is based :Rule by the few; Rule by a few very wealthy men at the great expense of the great bulk of the population : That’s communism, it’s slavery. Communism is just another name for slavery. Both the slave-system and the communist system is based on slavery; Violence to make sure everyone stays in line ; Ignorance, disinformation and propaganda : All truth is abridged hoping the bulk of the population remains in the dark so the ruling class doesn’t haven’t to deal with a disgruntled population; Constant divide -and- conquer strategies to get the average people distracted and at each-others-throats so they won’t band together to put an end to the system of misery.
    Communism and the slave system are based on the same premise: A few own and control everything at the great expense of the great bulk of the population. Both are slave systems. Both are jew/talmudic to-the-core. Both stink unto The Throne of The Holy Creator.
    I like “Occidental Dissent”. I learn alot by reading the website. However, the wistful and longing tone I many times read here at “OD” for slavery greatly undermines the overall message/goal of the website. Hardly anyone in the real world — and that includes real-life White Southerners, Do Not want to see a return to slavery. Slavery is Barbaric and Atavistic : as are all things that emanate from the talmud. Slavery and communism come from the talmud : Both stink Unto The Throne of The Holy Creator.
    It would behoove us to discuss the future, not atavistic yearnings for a stupefying and grossly unfair economic system that reaps misery for a very large proportion of our fellow Whites. The above article, “Slavery a Positive Good” is Disgusting :”2012″ or any year, period.
    Slavery is dead. I will fight on the side of those who oppose slavery if – by chance -there was any serious movement in this country to reinstate slavery. I would fight slavery for the sake of my fellow Whites : The slave system left many White Southerners languishing in poverty and misery and disease. What a putrid vision for White Americans.

  19. more jew spew from jew-joe about how the upper class Southrons destroyed the South on purpose to end slavery and make more money. Because hell, it’s not like the slave wouldn’t have been worth a fortune in South America or anything like that and every business owner burns his factory down before retooling for a new product and looks forward to a hundred and fifty year recovery period.

    perhaps it learns something while here; to bad we learn nothing from jew-joe, expect for how out of touch with reality it is

  20. I’m not going to even bother responding to Stonelifter. My words speak for themselves on their own merit.
    Vince Malum Bono
    [ Overcome Evil With Good]
    Not saying Stonelifter is evil (just ignorant, he seems to like ignorance) . I’m saying the slave-system and communism [same thing] are evil : Both are from the talmud.
    Both stink Unto The Throne of The Holy Creator.
    I’m outta here : Said what I had to say. I’ll talk to you all under the next article.

  21. “Hunter Wallace says:
    July 13, 2012 at 8:02 am
    I’m still editing this.

    In a few minutes, I am going to tweet this at Ta-Nehisi Coates.”


  22. Whites did okay antebellum. Seems like there was an enviable lifestyle for most 80-90% of them. It also kept blacks on the reservation so to speak.

  23. Joe,

    have you visited a Mega factory in China? slavery by another name.

    Here’s the thing about blacks. They don’t want to work at all. They consider all responsibilities to be bondage.

    The industrial scale of importation was a mistake in the long run.

  24. well then clearly I am not evil since I do not want to reintroduce slavery. Or perhaps I am evil because I don’t find slavery morally wrong, but simply unnecessary for us at this point in time. Evil or not, slavery has been part of the human condition. If part of the definition of slavery is being forced to work for anther’s benefit, everyone in the usa who works is a slave to those who get welfare and the like. But your ok with hat because you love negros and think they are just dandy, expect for when your freaking out about the black panthers….

    Slavery is alive and well in many forms. How about my freind who’s wife was unfaithful and conceived a child by another man. Since he didn’t challenge paternity in time, ( he didn’t know she was a whore until the child was 8) he is stuck with child support for a child proven not to be his and owes her alimony as well. He is a slave to her, mandated by law. I find what you rail about to be very one-sided

    I do not want to reintroduce slavery in the CSA, but I understand negros only bring value to a nation when they are enslaved. Which is why I advocate for the removal of negros, peacefully or other wise. Doesn’t matter to me. Good try at putting words into my mouth jew-joe, but once again, you lie

    Being called evil by jew-joe pretty much ensures I’m on the correct side of the issues

  25. @John
    My post wasn’t about blacks really. I was very clear about that. You’re deflecting again. I can’t be bothered responding to your nonsense. I know very well the importation of blacks into the US was a giant mistake. Phil hit-the-nail-on-the-head: “catastrophic”.
    And that’s not hindsight. All those involved with slavery– both in the South, the big-shots in the North and in England, knew fully well at the time what they were doing: They knew fully well what the future consequences would be : They didn’t give a shit ; They also knew fully well the negative effects slavery had on white Americans — especially white Southerners —–> They didn’t give a shit about Whites either. True bastards.
    You overlook my points. I can’t be bothered discussing this matter with you any longer.

  26. and you never see jew-joe beat himself up about the italians role in slavery, or what great slavers his distant Roman forefathers were. every inch the hypocrite

  27. Italians didn’t get involved in slavery. Slavery remained illegal in Italy before and after the Reformation ; Unlike the catholic countries of Spain and Portugal who made slavery legal after they saw the protestant countries make slavery legal. An embargo was placed on Italy by England because the Italians wouldn’t allow slavery + the Italians refused slave ships to enter Italian seaport cities period. An embargo was placed on Italy for a very long time period. Italy was ostracized from the rest of Europe economically. It’s a big reason Italy fell into poverty. It was very difficult for Italians to sell their goods to the rest of Europe and to America because of the economic embargo of Italy that was placed on Her by England. England at the time had the power to place economic embargoes on countries and get away with it.
    The Italians didn’t get involved in the slavery. In fact, many jews living in Italy at the time moved to England so they could get involved with the slave trade. The Italians wouldn’t allow the jews to indulge in their favorite economic system : Slavery.

  28. The Romans were a long time ago. Italians, even 500 years ago, were only very distantly related ( in blood) to the ancient Romans. The Romans have nothing to do with this subject.

  29. or this

    Although slavery in Muslim people declined in subsequent centuries a trade in … old world trade, supplying slaves to Lisbon and hence onwards to Spain and Italy. … Major Portugeuse involvement in Brazil began in the second half of the 16th …

  30. Contemporary Roman aristocrats can often trace back to patricians.

    The Roman Empire, which on the whole did good things was based on slaving.
    Athens was a slave state too.

  31. The value of slavery(and of the slaves) was situational, based on a monopoly on cotton, and limited intake of new slaves into the system. If slavery had been opened up the value of the average slave would have crashed.

    “Alternatively, they could at least be hooked up to bicycles and used to manually generate cheap electricity to promote America’s goal of energy independence.” – you should post a troll physics picture next to that.

    “We have successfully initiated fusion in 150 million degree Tokamak magnetic plasma containment fields. We can build fusion reactors if need be.” – We’ve yet to see a positive energy return from any fusion reactor, though the NIF is supposedly going to do this shortly, and once fusion reaches that milestone it has the long road ahead of it to get to cost competitive with current energy sources. It is good that we can generate fusion reactions, but it might not be the all encompassing savior we think it will be.

    “Liberals have brought negroes to Canada, to the UK, to Ireland, to France, to the Netherlands and Germany. Sweden is being overrun by Muslims. America is being overrun by Hispanics.” – As you’ve noted before, more africans have immigrated here since 1965 than were brought here as slaves.

  32. “Unlike the catholic countries of Spain and Portugal who made slavery legal after they saw the protestant countries make slavery legal.”

    Try again Joe.

    Also of course “Italy” didn’t get involved in the slave trade because there was no Italian nation state until the mid 19th Century.

  33. Only 400,000 slaves were brought over. Ship manifests prove it. So that more blacks have simply migrated since isn’t hard to imagine. That’s essentially the extent of America’s “sin” with slavery. That’s the equivalent of a large college city or a smallish factory city.

    The nigs have yet to stop whinging about the guarantee of food and work.

  34. That’s horseshit.

    Slavery is a racial Ponzi scheme: it always collapses and when it does, the races mix.

    Or worse (see Haiti).

    Was it a “positive good” for America to enjoy the peerless standard of living that our debt based economy affords? Or the seed of our own destruction?

    I understand the fun of bucking up against taboos, and all that, butI think we need to conclude that “If I would have known all this, I would have picked my own cotton” and move on.

  35. The Spanish monarchs controlled a good portion of Italy in the renaissance period.
    They certainly controlled the pope.

    Italy was hit by Portuguese trade direct with India but it was part of the Hapsburg empire in significant ways so it benefitted from that trade.

Comments are closed.