Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

SCIENCE, NATURE, HISTORY & CULTURE


Recommended Posts

PaulCraigRoberts.org - https://www.paulcraigroberts.org -

The Untold Story of White Slavery

Posted By pcr3 On October 21, 2020 @ 7:30 am In Guest Contributions | Comments Disabled

The Untold Story of White Slavery

When do White People Get Reparations?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ednt48rcwo [1]

 
Share this page
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 5 weeks later...
Chronicles Magazine of American Culture
 
Sins of Omission
 
November 2020

Slavery's Ironic Twist of Fate

 
 
1120-SLAVERY-1_copy
 

The historical ignorance of The New York Times’ 1619 Project is difficult to accept. Is the newspaper truly that ignorant or is it disinformation in a propaganda campaign to destroy our country? What I know for certain is most colleges no longer require the U.S. History and Western Civilization courses once considered essential, and that leftist professors teach cultural Marxism and not history.

That white supremacy motivated the Colonists to conceive slavery as a founding principle is the claim making news most recently. A look at the historical record, however, would suggest slavery actually developed as a consequence of malaria, a disease that came to the Americas from Africa. The vector of the disease, the Anopheles mosquito, also came from Africa. The heat and standing water of the tidewater regions of the southern Colonies made for an ideal habitat for the invasive insect.

Blacks from equatorial West Africa had, over thousands of years, developed an immunity to this disease in the form of the sickle blood cell. Today we only hear about the cell in connection with sickle cell anemia, which results from too many sickle cells in the blood stream. However, for most blacks coming from Africa there were enough sickle cells in their blood to prevent malaria, but not enough to cause anemia. This meant blacks would normally not become debilitated or die from malaria in the Tidewater South while whites, lacking the sickle cell, would.

The first permanent English settlement in the Colonies was Jamestown, founded on a marshy island in Tidewater Virginia in 1607. Disease took a fantastic toll on the early settlers. In May 1607, 105 settlers arrived and by the end of summer half were dead. By 1624, some 7,500 settlers had arrived and only 1,300 remained alive. How big a role malaria played in these deaths is hard to determine because dysentery, typhoid, and scurvy were also prevalent. 

Some of the Jamestown settlers carried with them from England the relatively mild vivax strain of malaria. It was usually not deadly. However, the malnourished Jamestown colonists intermittently experienced “starving times,” which compromised their immune systems, leaving them vulnerable to even mild forms of disease.

In 1619, the first African slaves arrived in Jamestown—which is one of the few facts the 1619 Project got right. However, the slaves arrived by accident. They were brought to Virginia by an English privateer sailing under Dutch authority, which had captured a Portuguese slave ship in the Caribbean en route from Africa to Mexico. The privateer captain knew better than to attempt to sell the stolen slaves at an island port in the Caribbean and instead sailed north to try his luck at the new English colony of Jamestown. The Africans were sold as indentured servants, an established form of bondage legally recognized in England and in Jamestown. The Africans were unique only by their race—white indentured servants were common in the colony.

The 1619 sale of the Africans had none of the significance the 1619 Project imputes to it. The sale didn’t start a trend, because there were thousands of potential white colonists, including those willing to indenture themselves, in the British Isles ready to be shipped to the New World. In the following years Africans only trickled into Virginia. 

What is most significant about the arrival of those first blacks is the virulent falciparum strain of malaria they carried. Mosquitoes bit them and then bit whites. Before long, malaria was taking a frightful toll, mostly among whites. As the years went by it became clear that blacks had a significant degree of immunity to malaria.

It took many years for slavery to be established in America, and that varied colony by colony. In the meantime, the cost of shipping Africans to the colonies only to serve an indenture of 4-7 years didn’t make economic sense, when the much shorter voyage from the British Isles brought cheaper, white indentured servants to the shores of America.

Instrumental in establishing slavery in Virginia was an African slave, later known as Anthony Johnson, who was sold in Jamestown as an indentured servant in 1621 to a tobacco farmer with the surname of Bennet. By that time, tobacco had become the highly profitable cash crop of the colony and tobacco farms had begun filling up the hinterland of Jamestown.  Johnson was one of the few on the Bennet farm who survived the Massacre of 1622, a surprise Indian attack on the farms surrounding Jamestown that left 347 colonists dead and mutilated. Johnson’s luck held, because the next year the Bennet farm had its first female indentured servant, an African called Mary, whom he married.

By the 1630s, Johnson was free of his indenture and, as was customary, received 50 acres of farmland from the colonial government. Soon he was selling crops of tobacco and importing indentured servants himself. For every servant he brought to Virginia he received 50 acres of land. By 1651, Johnson farmed 250 acres of land and had five indentured servants, four of them white and one black, a man named John Casor.

Claiming Johnson had kept him in servitude long beyond any term of indenture, Casor went to work for a neighboring farmer, Robert Parker. With Parker championing Casor’s cause the dispute went into the courts in 1654. Johnson argued that Casor had been sold in Africa as a slave and Johnson had bought him without Casor having signed a contract of indenture. Therefore, said Johnson, Casor was simply his property.

At first, the court rejected Johnson’s precedent-setting argument but, after an appeal in 1655 declared in Johnson’s favor, Casor was Johnson’s property and would remain so until Johnson sold him or freed him. There had been an indentured servant in Virginia sentenced to lifetime servitude as a punishment for a crime in 1641, but it was the Casor case that formally established the legal precedent for slavery. It is one of the ironies of history that a black African, Anthony Johnson, could be called the Father of American Slavery.  

In 1661, the Virginia House of Burgesses, recognizing the Casor decision, enacted a statute that said any free person—white, black, or Indian—could own servants for life. This didn’t mean much to Indians who had practiced slavery for centuries anyway, but it did mean that the Indian tribes of the southeast would eventually own thousands of black slaves.

By the 1680s, slavery was generally established in the colonies and the importation of slaves to the malarial areas of the Southern colonies began in earnest. The high cost of importing labor from faraway Africa was worth it because, unlike an indentured servant, a planter had a slave’s labor for a good portion of his lifetime and the African slave would not fall victim to malaria. What had ensured blacks would survive malaria in equatorial West Africa, now ensured they would become slaves in the American colonies.

Numbers tell the story. In 1680 there were only 3,000 black slaves in a Virginia population of 45,000, which included 15,000 white indentured servants. In 1700 there 6,000 black slaves in a population of 60,000; and in 1750 100,000 black slaves in a population of 230,000. In the malarial areas of Tidewater Virginia, blacks were in the majority. Their numbers and percentage of the population were far lower in Piedmont Virginia, and negligible in the mountains.

The same was true for the other southern Colonies. Especially striking was South Carolina, where in the swampy and malarial rice-growing coastal region blacks outnumbered whites 10-to-1. After some time on the malarial coast, a French traveler remarked, “Rice can only be cultivated by negroes.” In the mountains of western South Carolina black slaves were rarely found. Because of South Carolina’s coastal region though, 40,000 of the colony’s population of 65,000 were black by 1750.

Throughout the colonial era, malaria ravaged the coastal South and ensured that black slavery became an entrenched institution. There were regular reminders of what malaria could do to white populations. During the American Revolution, a British army invaded South Carolina and easily captured Charleston in June 1780. However, as the British marched inland to engage an American army, hundreds of their troops began to drop from malaria. Johann David Schoepf, the chief surgeon for a Hessian regiment in the British army, wrote, “Carolina was in the spring a paradise, in the summer a hell, and in the autumn a hospital.”

By contrast, Pennsylvania, also blessed with rich agricultural lands that included a tobacco-growing region, suffered little from malaria and saw only very limited black slavery. There were only very small numbers of blacks in Pennsylvania by the 1650s. By the time William Penn established his colony in 1680 they only numbered in the hundreds. Most of them were indentured servants. Penn himself owned several. Their status was generally the same as white indentured servants, who outnumbered them manyfold.

Slavery was not codified in law in Pennsylvania until 1700. At that time there were some 1,000 black slaves in a total population of 20,000. By 1750, their number had increased to some 6,000 and the total population to 120,000. Although the percentage of black slaves varied decade by decade depending on the flow of white indentured servants from the British Isles and Germany, it remained at about 5 percent of the total population. During the same period, slaves in nearby Virginia increased from 10 percent of the population to more than 40 percent.

Far from being a white supremacist conspiracy to create a slavocracy in the American colonies, the establishment of slavery in the colonies clearly had more to do with an ironic twist of epidemiological fate: Equatorial West Africans were genetically immune to the worst effects of malaria, while whites dropped like flies. 

 
 

Roger D. McGrath

 

Corresponding editor Roger D. McGrath is the author of Gunfighters, Highwaymen, and Vigilantes.  A U.S. Marine and former history professor at UCLA, Dr. McGrath has appeared on numerous documentaries, including Big History, Cowboys & Outlaws, Jesse James: Legend, Outlaw, Terrorist, and Wild West Tech.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Capitalists back then were, like now, always looking for the most efficient way to produce their product, in this case, with reliable and efficient labor ... a factor of production ...  blacks from Africa fit the bill ... no emotion is needed ... plain and simple capitalist motives as they also apply today ...

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Far from being a white supremacist conspiracy to create a slavocracy in the American colonies, the establishment of slavery in the colonies clearly had more to do with an ironic twist of epidemiological fate: Equatorial West Africans were genetically immune to the worst effects of malaria, while whites dropped like flies. 

 

Wow blacks in Africa were immune  from Malaria.  :wacko:  What in the hell does white supremacy have to do with pestilence?  Didn't Europe had the Black Death during the Middle ages?

Previous-prevalence-of-malaria-world-map

malaria-death-rates_v6_850x600.svg

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JakeHolman said:

Capitalists back then were, like now, always looking for the most efficient way to produce their product, in this case, with reliable and efficient labor ... a factor of production ...  blacks from Africa fit the bill ... no emotion is needed ... plain and simple capitalist motives as they also apply today ...

You're right, some things haven't changed. :(

Who cares long we have our smartphones and video games.

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSjc_h0oTjWpkChcI1HIFZ

hqdefault.jpg

 

 

and it's not just China.

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT4rKaNxspSH0fBBcmvJNG

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRO_RBkaI6B-84ogyWsxBk

 

Malaysia

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR8IJMFxFT5Zsz4Jv7JzyP

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hamradio said:

 

EXACTLY! Science contradicting itself

The problem with trying to formulate theories on the effects of lifestyle choices we make is that there are far too many variables involved to be controlled in an experiment.   Ideally, you'd like subjects to be exactly the same (same genetics, same diets, same activity patterns, same sleep patterns, etc) while varying only one aspect (in this case, eating eggs).  Doing that in a human population is impossible.  It's why they study effects on lab animals, as it's easier to control (but still imperfect), and then you have to extrapolate the results to humans.  All in all, an imperfect setup.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Eating eggs is like other foods i.e. meats, should be done in moderation. Eating an egg or two is not going to give one health issues no more than eating meat on occasion that's properly cooked. Other food groups insure a proper diet, fruits, vegetables, fish, cereal grains.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hamradio said:

Eating eggs is like other foods i.e. meats, should be done in moderation. Eating an egg or two is not going to give one health issues no more than eating meat on occasion that's properly cooked. Other food groups insure a proper diet, fruits, vegetables, fish, cereal grains.

Egg maybe a generic term--

But all eggs are not created equal.

It's stupid to make General comments about any one food unless you have scrutinized exactly how that food is created and/ or what has been added or what has not been added to it.

 

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, JakeHolman said:

Capitalists back then were, like now, always looking for the most efficient way to produce their product, in this case, with reliable and efficient labor ... a factor of production ...  blacks from Africa fit the bill ... no emotion is needed ... plain and simple capitalist motives as they also apply today ...

So, in essence just another manner in which to say that the one and TRUE "God" that all good capitalists pray to being "The Almighty Dollar".

And with as you said here Jake, "no emotion" being needed then OR now, nor for that matter and least of which the thought that "all men are created equal", which evidently must be a big lie in your eyes and even though it was your hallowed Founders who put this thought down on paper.

(...and which is yet ANOTHER historical fact for your information here Jake, you good ol' country boy, you)

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Princess of Tap said:

Egg maybe a generic term--

But all eggs are not created equal.

It's stupid to make General comments about any one food unless you have scrutinized exactly how that food is created and/ or what has been added or what has not been added to it.

 

Talking about the chicken eggs, your reply was idiotic, been eating them on and off my entire life with absolutely no health issues from it. 

Dozen-Eggs.jpg

 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, hamradio said:

Talking about the chicken eggs, your reply was idiotic. Know plainly well what we'll referring to.

Dozen-Eggs.jpg

 

Organic eggs,

cage-free eggs,

caged eggs ,

brand name eggs,

grocery store eggs,

generic eggs,

eggs with antibiotics,

eggs without antibiotics,

eggs with hormones,

eggs without hormones,

Eggs with hormones and antibiotics,

Eggs without hormones and antibiotics,

Vegetarian eggs,

Free range eggs,

 

 Pastured eggs with twice as much omega-3's--

like  Eggland's--

those are the kind  I eat from vegetarian-fed hens with no added hormones or antibiotics-- within that group they have organic, cage-free and conventional with no hormones or antibiotics.

They have 25% less saturated fat.

10 times the vitamin E

4 times the vitamin D

And twice the amount of omega-3 fatty acids

Than ordinary  grocery store eggs.

 I would think if you'd ever been in a grocery store in the Egg section and you saw all these different prices, you would just imagine that there was a reason why the grocery store eggs are so much cheaper than some of the other eggs.  LOL

Some of these egg categories can  overlap.

And I'm sure I left out some. But it would be interesting to ask different members what kind of eggs that they eat.

I've been eating  Eggland's Best omega 3's eggs for about 30 years because I found the grocery store types, the economically priced ones, to be tasteless if not downright putrid in taste.

Same goes for chickens.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

LewRockwell.com

anti-stateanti-warpro-market

 

Are Temperatures And Ocean Levels Rising Dangerously? Not Really.

By Dom Armentano

November 23, 2020

There are two widely held climate-change beliefs that are simply not accurate.  The first is that there has been a statistically significant warming trend in the U.S. over the last 20 years. The second is that average ocean levels are rising alarmingly due to man-made global warming. Neither of these perspectives is true;  yet  both remain important, nonetheless,  since both are loaded with  very expensive  public policy implications.

To refute the first view, we turn to data generated by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) for the relevant years under discussion.  The table below reports the average mean temperature in the continental U.S. for the years 1998 through 2019*:

1998 54.6 degrees
1999 54.5 degrees
2000 54.0 degrees
2001 54.3 degrees
2002 53.9 degrees
2003 53.7 degrees

2004 53.5 degrees

2005 54 degrees

2006 54.9 degrees
2007 54.2 degrees
2008 53.0 degrees
2009 53.1 degrees
2010 53.8 degrees
2011 53.8 degrees
2012 55.3 degrees
2013 52.4 degrees
2014 52.6 degrees
2015 54.4 degrees
2016 54.9 degrees
2017 54.6 degrees
2018 53.5 degrees
2019 52.7 degrees

*National Climate Report – Annual 2019

It is apparent from the data that there has been no consistent warming trend in the U.S. over the last 2 decades; average mean temperatures (daytime and nighttime) have been slightly higher in some years and slightly lower in other years. On balance–and contrary to mountains of uninformed social and political commentary—annual temperatures on average in the U.S. were no higher in 2019 than they were in 1998.

here is a wide scientific consensus (based on satellite laser altimeter readings since 1993) that the rate of increase in overall sea levels has been approximately .12 inches per year.

To put that increase in perspective, the average sea level nine years from now (in 2029) is likely to be approximately one inch higher than it is now (2020). One inch is roughly the distance from the tip of your finger to the first knuckle. Even by the turn of the next century (in 2100), average ocean levels (at that rate of increase) should be only a foot or so higher than they are at present.

None of this sounds particularly alarming for the general society and little of it can justify any draconian regulations or costly infrastructure investments. The exception might be for very low- lying ocean communities or for properties (nuclear power plants) that, if flooded, would present a wide-ranging risk to the general population. But even here there is no reason for immediate panic. Since ocean levels are rising in small, discrete marginal increments, private and public decision makers   would have reasonable amounts of time to prepare, adjust and invest (in flood abatement measures, etc.) if required.

But are sea levels actually rising at all? Empirical evidence of any substantial increases taken from land-based measurements has been ambiguous. This suggests to some scientists that laser and tidal-based measurements of ocean levels over time have not been particularly accurate.

For example, Professor Niles-Axel Morner (Stockholm University) is infamous in climate circles for arguing–based on his actual study of sea levels in the Fiji Islands–that “there are no traces of any present rise in sea levels; on the contrary, full stability.”  And while Morner’s views are controversial, he has at least supplied peer reviewed empirical evidence to substantiate his nihilist position on the sea-level increase hypothesis.

The world has many important societal problems and only a limited amount of resources to address  them. What we don’t need are overly dramatic climate-change claims that are unsubstantiated and arrive attached to expensive  public policies that, if enacted, would fundamentally alter the foundations of the U.S. economic system.

Dr. Armentano [send him mail] is professor emeritus in economics at the University of Hartford in Connecticut and the author of Antitrust and Monopoly and Antitrust: The Case for Repeal.

Copyright © Dom Armentano

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
© 2020 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...