jump to navigation

After 200 Years of Steady Shrinkage, Slavery is Growing Again – Thanks to Islam April 17, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, disaster, Ecumenism, error, General Catholic, history, horror, It's all about the $$$, paganism, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sickness, Society, unadulterated evil.

History takes many strange turns.  A relatively poor circa 1580 Elizabethan England, casting about for means to compete with Spain’s enormous wealth mined out of massive New World colonies, seized upon what seemed like a hideous get rich quick scheme put forth by the amoral pirates Drake and Hawkins – capturing natives along the west coast of Africa, hauling them in hellish conditions across the Atlantic to the New World colonies, and selling them at a tidy profit.  On the return trip, they would bring valuable commodities from the West Indies and other western hemisphere locales for sale at lucrative prices in English and Dutch markets, before heading south to gather more slaves.  Even though local Spanish authorities took a very dim view of this practice initially, capturing and executing the crews of several English pirate-slave ships, the terrible practice eventually took hold and spread throughout the new world (and was taken up by other nations, especially the Portuguese).  In fact, the practice grew so lucrative that it played a major role in encouraging English settlement of North America, since it was thought that extremely cheap labor to grow cash crops like sugar and tobacco would be easily available through the North Atlantic slave trade.  The Europeans bought their slaves from West African slave dealers who were as often as not muslim.

Of course, there were always opponents to this barbarous practice, in England and elsewhere.  Spain’s kings and the Holy See fought against the practice with varying degrees of intensity and varying degrees of success over the next 200 years.  But it was in England, gripped by one of its periodic bouts of (most often) disordered religious fervor, that eventually became the prime champion of abolition of the international slave trade.  Even disorders can produce happy outcomes, at times.  In 1807, after years of effort by Wilberforce and others, Parliament passed the Abolishment of the Slave Trade act.  Fortuitously for the world, England was approaching the zenith of her power, especially in the Royal Navy, which served as might and main to interdict the slave trade throughout the world and drastically reduce this practice.  Thus those who had done the most to help popularize mass enslavement across continents, did the most to eradicate the practice.

150 years later, as Western Civilization, uncoupled from the Christian moorings which helped precipitate two of the most horrific wars the world had ever seen, passed from zenith into rapid decline, the practice of slavery had been all but extinguished.  It still existed somewhat in Africa, particularly among some of the most backwards and isolated muslim sects along the transitional zone between Saharan Africa and tropical Africa.  Slaves were mostly acquired through tribal warfare in small numbers, and shipped in small numbers to the Arabian peninsula. The African muslim slave trade merely continued a practice that had been maintained, uninterrupted, for 3000 years or more. Contrary to Christendom, islam had never formally forsaken slavery as contrary to the dignity of the human person created in God’s image, because islam has no comprehension of that image.

But that was 60 years ago.  That was before the de-Christianized West, morally lost and full of self-loathing, withdrew its moral authority from the world stage, replacing moral substance with amoral harlotry exported via satellite dish and internet.  Islam has, in much of the world, rushed in to fill this vacuum.  The most radical forms of islam are growing the fastest, and these are the most comfortable with reducing other people to chattel and using them for the satisfaction of all manner of prurient desires.  In doing this, islam is only repeating what it has always done. Indeed, for much of its history, from its satanic birth in the 630s up until well into the 19th century of Grace, islam primarily preyed upon Christian regions as its source of slaves.  Barbary pirates were making slave raids on Cornwall as late as the 1710s.

And so today, thanks to the western intervention that ousted Gaddafi in 2011, the slave markets in Libya, under ISIS watchful eye, are booming again.  Indeed, there is more slavery afoot in the world than at anytime since the late 19th century, and all the trends are headed in the wrong direction, and it has almost entirely to do with the trademarked “religion of peace,” islam:

The US has engaged in regime change in at least 4 Mideast countries going back to 1979.  In every single case, what came out of the US intervention was drastically worse than what came before, especially for the local Christian minorities.  Carter’s weakness and waffling paved the way for regime change in Iran, and we’ve had nearly 40 years of terror and extremism as a result.  Iraq is a battleground, a made up nation with no real reason to exist anymore, and its ancient Christian populations have been decimated.  Libya is now dominated by ISIS and is a completely failed state.  We’re doing our best to drive Assad out of Syria and lay the groundwork for a new Caliphate, apparently, with millions more Christians, at least half of them Catholic, at dire risk.  Even Trump now seems to have fallen into this neo-con world government mindset with regard to Assad, all on the basis of a chemical attack that either never happened, or was committed by the radical islamist rebels themselves.

Where we have absolutely no idea what we’re doing, I think it best we stay the heck out.




1. Ben - April 17, 2017

It is extremely politically incorrect to say this, but Aristotle said that slavery was natural. Anybody who disagrees with Aristotle had better have an extremely good reason. I believe that the Church condemned slavery in the Middle Ages, but I’m not sure. Certainly slavery the way it was practiced by the US southerners counts as oppressing the poor – a sin that cries to Heaven for vengeance. For instance, marriages were routinely broken up permanently and remorselessly by the southerners, which is something that the Soviets only did when they executed a spouse. (Communism is merely a modern form of slavery.) I understand that both the French and Spanish slave codes were much milder than the de facto US customs for slavery. I believe that both French and Spanish slavery was regulated and moderated by law, though I don’t know the details. Mosaic law called for the liberation of all slaves after six years, I believe.
Slavery was an alternative to the welfare state before the welfare state. If carefully regulated, it would be far healthier and respectable than getting on the dole. Somebody who was starving during a Depression would just sell himself into slavery, and the slave owner was expected to take care of his slaves. When the slaves were liberated following the Civil War, their conditions were often worse than when they had been slaves, because as slaves, their owners often felt a great concern for them. Just something extremely politically incorrect to consider. Happy Octave of Easter. PS. I don’t speak for anybody but myself here.

Tantumblogo - April 17, 2017

It wasn’t just a US practice, but the English Common Law heritage practice of slavery that was more severe than the Latin/Spanish/French.

Having said that, while the early Church did not rail against slavery per se., the very Doctrine of the Faith militates against the practice, recognizing the inherent worth of every individual. It is wrong in this sense for one person to own another. Practically speaking, human nature being what it is and man so fallen a creature, the practice will almost always tend towards abuse.

Ben - April 17, 2017

Sometimes, the choice of the poor is between slavery and starvation. The Holodymyr might be a good example. Now, instead of slavery, we have the dole, which is shameful and is devouring the west, whether it is national pensions, the National Health Service, Medicare, or something else. I think your argument “it is wrong in this sense for one person to own another” fails badly. With the Latin slave codes, perhaps it would be a critical safeguard and help for the poor in time of need. With economic bubbles caused by rampant usury, this is not an academic question. The west is rapidly heading towards strict Marxism, which is a slavery much more severe and enduring than any slavery ever practiced in a free society. So, is it going to be a mild slavery with a free society, or a society plunging towards permanent ruin? In my opinion, the true choice is one or the other. The west as it is is not durable at all. On the other hand, saying “the practice will almost always tend towards abuse” may be right on the money.

2. wondering - April 18, 2017

“The Europeans bought their slaves from West African slave dealers who were as often as not muslim.”

I’ve got to wonder what the conditions of the people were before they were sold and what the conditions would be had they not been.

Would they have been slaves in Moslem society ? I don’t know how they were treated. Better than in America ?

Seems most of the Africans brought to the New World seem to have ended up as Christians and remain so today. Of course some black Americans have become moslem and changed their names. Ex. Mohammed Ali. Then of course there’s Louie Farrakhan and the “Nation of Islam.”

3. Canon212 Update: Does it Matter Whether a Pope Speaks Like a Catholic, or Have We All Just Become Fra Festings? – The Stumbling Block - April 18, 2017


4. After 200 Years of Steady Shrinkage, Slavery is Growing Again – Thanks to Islam | - April 19, 2017

[…] very well-argued post from Dallas Catholic that brings up certain topics we have been discussing recently on CP&S. (Warning: some strong […]

Sorry comments are closed for this entry

%d bloggers like this: