DAILYKENN.com -- Jared Taylor published a video that cross examines the contention that black slavery is the source of America's wealth. This myth is used to support the advocacy of reparations for blacks.
Here are some of the (paraphrased) highlights from Taylor's video:
• If slavery made the USA wealthy, what about the other British colonies; Canada, Australia, and New Zealand? How did they become wealthy without slavery?
• What about other new world colonies that did have slaves? Why are they not wealthy?
The Emory University Slave Trade Database reveals that:
305,326 of the 12,521,337 Africans enslaved and shipped to the new world were sent to what is currently the USA; that's fewer than 2.5 percent. By comparison, 5,848,266 were sent to Brazil and other Portuguese territories, 3,359,441 were sent to other British territories, 1,381,404 were sent to French jurisdictions, 1,061,524 were sent to regions controlled by Spain and Uruguay, etc. Why are those regions not as wealthy as the USA?
• If slavery had been a source of wealth, we would expect the South to have been much wealthier than the North. Southern per capita income in 1840 was about 3/4 that of the North, according to one source.
• Frederick Law Olmsted (1822-1903) studied the antebellum South for five years. He concluded that about nine of ten Southerners lived in abject poverty, compared to Northerners.
• Slaves were unproductive. Olmsted concluded that slaves worked about one-third the hours of a hired farm hand in the North. Another observer at the time concluded that slave labor was about half as productive as a New England worker. Abolitionists recognized the unproductivity of slaves, contending that blacks would be more productive if free and employed.
• In 1860 there were 321 "public" schools in the North, but only 30 in the South.
• Cotton exports were a primary source of wealth for the South and accounted for about fifty percent of America's exports. Exports, however, were only six percent of the nation's GNP, meaning cotton exports comprised a mere three percent of the GNP; hardly a "driving force" of the USA's economy. What's more, just five years after the Civil War, the South produced as much cotton without slavery as it did just prior to the war.
• About 620,000 white men lost their lives during the Civil War which ended slavery and freed 3,953,761 slaves (1860 census.) For perspective, consider that 1,264,000 American soldiers have died in the nation's wars; nearly half of those died in the Civil War that freed slaves.
The cost of the war was the equivalent to 1.5 to 2 years' GNP.
In addition to Taylor's observations:
• Without African slavery, America would not be burdened with the high cost of black crime and disproportionate number of blacks on government assistance.
• Africans did not make Africa wealthy.
• The mere presence of blacks does not translate into wealth. Jurisdictions dominated by descendants of Africans (Detroit, Chicago, St. Louis) remain economically depressed.
• Slavery still exists in some nations. Why are they not prospering?
Conclusion: Slavery in American was more akin to foster care or adoption; particularly when compared to the horrendous conditions slaves suffered in Africa and elsewhere. Granted, some slaves were mistreated. However, some foster children are also abused.
Owner: Columbus Marketing Group, Inc. Permission is granted to use original material in this article providing (1) the byline is included in an obvious manner crediting DailyKenn.com as the author, (2) a link to this page is included and (3) no changes are made either by deletion, addition or annotation. Original compositions at DailyKenn.com are sometimes seeded with decoy data, such as hidden acronyms, to detect unauthorized use and plagiarism.