A Defense of the trans-Atlantic Slave Trade

A Defense of the trans-Atlantic Slave Trade

Before looking at any historical controversy we must ask most
importantly, “Who, and why?” Who was enslaved, and exported
from Africa to Europe, and the Americas? The Africans. Why
were they captured, and exported? That’s multifaceted, but
it can be said some of the central motivators were advantages
within warfare, profit generation, ensured labor, and colonial
interests, aswell as a collective sentiment of benevolent
paternalism. To understand this paternalistic sentiment
it must be understood the Africans were not fit for self
government,nor were they fit, or capable of the most
tawdry of anarchic imitations of civilization. They were,
and still are a servile slave race. A race to be utilized as
a tool for the protection of themselves, the uplifting of
the white race, and the betterment of all.

To discuss the perpetual warfare often found in Africa during the
period of the Atlantic slave trade, we find it not only abundant,
but fierce. To detain the African in war, and ensure his continued
compliance through absolute servitude was appropriate for both the
African tribes, and the European traders. To ensure safety, to pacify,
and to civilize. To export them from Africa was to accomplish a wide
variety of these goals. It negated, and lessened those who were prone
to violence, and unrest within the dregs of African society, and in
exporting them you placed them in a far more peaceful, agreeable
society that could cultivate their potential, and pacify them. The
African tribes, and the environment they cultivated that resulted
in mass bloodshed was not conducive to passive refinement, ethics,
or intellectual betterment. Meanwhile European, and American society
utilizing the divine institution of slavery acted as glorious
pacifying, civilizing forces for even the most barbarous
of the previously war prone Africans.

To reference financial profit is to touch upon a key motivator.
The trans-Atlantic slave trade was often profitable for the
chiefs of the previously referenced African tribes and for
the European, and American traders who utilized the African
as unpaid labor. The pure pursuit of profit although often
tending to not be predicated upon a basis of absolute voluntary
or egalitarian moral considerations need not have been. To project
pacifist or humanitarian morality on warring tribes, where if
a detainee is not exported into the foreign slave system they
had a great likelihood of being killed, or being subject to the
worst variants of brutalistic excess one could imagine is, without
question, irrational. For all the alleged, and often accurate
depictions of the horror of the trans-Atlantic slave trade,
Tribal war was often a far bloodier affair than most trips
from Africa to other land. African war servants were often
killed in mass, by virtue of the often true notion that they
were in large numbers, without any degree of legal, social,
or religious protection and although under stringent control
could rebel, and act as an internal disruptor/spy network
aiding rivaling forces, as a consequence those captured in
battle were often slaughtered in killing fields. Hundreds
at a time, the death toll is incalculable.

Labor is always necessary but we recognize the unfortunate troubles
that so often accompany the common laborer in perpetual competition
with all other facets of society he has no secure home, no secure
network, and at any moment could be apt to indulge in excess, anti
social behavior, or self destructive pursuits, as the pressures of
“free society” demands. The trans-Atlantic slave acted as a way to
give civilization her labor. Not through the degradation of her own
masses, being sullied in the demeaning drudgery of the lowest services,
but utilizing a people whose importation necessarily implies their
elevation. The free African in his native land, or in America
unguided had an aptitude for barbarism, and while the pacifying
pressures of civilization within free society were presented,
they could only do so much in mitigating the unfortunate
particulars of the African nature. Ensuring labor was not
only a money making affair, but also a moral affair.

The excesses of the trade, and loss of life are conceded.
Unintentional, or malicious death did occur, however when
we contemplate the populace in question, and the geographic,
and situational pressures of an absence of refined morality,
void of scriptural influence, and lacking common incentive
for mutual betterment, Is the question not begged to be
asked, “Was this loss avoidable, and did the exportation of
the Africans, in all likelihood, mitigate this loss of life?”
When we consider the lack of medicine present within Africa
the residence therein would not have had to suffer a three
month voyage, but instead a lifetime of suffering, disease,
and death. The continuous state of war, bloodshed, and chaos,
was not dependent upon the will of a few crew members over
a short span of months, but instead the will of the common
African who had minimal incentive to protect, shelter, or
aid. This open disregard for human life within Africa was
not viewed as a unforseen, universally dreaded consequence
of a long voyage, coupled with the uncontrollable medicinal
circumstances of the day, but instead these mass, violent,
barbaric deaths were perceived as a consequence of an unending
war of expansion, not in the name of the noble influences of
white civilization, but exclusively for the satisfaction of
unplacatable, selfish tribal desire. What’s the loss of a
few as a price for the elevation, and protection
of all facets of humanity?

The last subject will be colonial interests. The interests of
the European, and American colonizers should have great emphasis,
as it was a key motivating factor in the initial journeys to, and
eventual trade with the tribes of Africa. The acquiring of lands,
and the resources that accompanied these lands was of the highest
priority, and ensuring the most violent portions of African society
were not able to interfere with, and impede upon the noble spreading
of civilization was imperative, and thereby slavery, and the exporting
of many slaves to other lands was appropriate as it ensured the most
rebellious elements of African society were negated, and the righteous,
kind hearted representatives of all things civilized could accomplish
their all important course, and manifest a destiny of riches,
civilization, and paternalism.

Retrospectively the trans-Atlantic slave trade was not simply
moral it was the manifestation of the divine institution of
slavery in unprecedented, near perfect form constructing a
caste of the conscripted inferior race, and the master race.
Biological inferiority, necessary servility, all sanctioned,
and affirmed by, and with inspiration from the divine. Both
races bonded together by God for the betterment of all. Every
right minded student of history must concede the trans-Atlantic
slave trade just, productive, civilizing, Christianizing, and
recognize it as being an absolutely positive influence in world
affairs, deserving of being recollected without a trace of
despair, regret, or shame. Instead It should be rememberd
with great fondness, for it, like the divinely inspired
institution of slavery, was fundamentally defined by the
best virtues of human nature inspiring an unparalleled
era of philanthropy, and charity.

call to chat