The trafficking of white women in the slave trade in the Barbary states is not discussed but it was as real as the slave trade in the US. Â
(Information for this article was provided by a good friend from overseas.)
According to one publication on the white slaves in the Barbary states in the 16th through 19th centuries:
“The White Slaves, or, better, the White Slavery in the Barbary States (so-called white slavery) was a phenomenon that reached its peak between the XVI and XVIII centuries, with the consolidation of state entities based almost exclusively on the spoils of war and the capture and trade of the slaves.
Islamic slavery, in particular the trafficking along Saharan routes of the Arab slavers’ caravans, included millions of Europeans who, over the centuries, fell into the hands of the latter and the Ottomans (from the end of the 15th century).
Charles Sumner, one of the most important senators in US history wrote the book White Slavery in the Barbary States (1853). A Republican and collaborator of Abraham Lincoln, Sumner was a staunch abolitionist and, throughout his work, compares the slavery of blacks in the southern United States with that of whites in the North African territories. Sometimes the parallel is bold, other times sensible, but in any case, it stimulated (and still stimulates) a historical, political and social reflection on the concept of slavery.
Another book, The Trade of the White Women shows that the trade continued from the mid-19th century up until around WWII.
In Europe, it is taught that the Americans didn’t even want the slaves. The Portuguese had colonies in western Africa and had debts with America, so instead of paying with money or gold, they convinced the Americans to take in some slaves. We all know the Portuguese brought Africans to Brazil as well with the same purpose, but nobody hates the Portuguese nor does any Portuguese of Portugal have any sense of guilt for it! However, the Portuguese themselves bought them from African slave owners, so those slaves they took were already slaves.
Still today, in Africa, there are Africans enslaving Africans. Some Middle Eastern countries, like Saudi Arabia, had legal slavery until the mid-1970s.
The bottom line is that the whole world should ask for reparations to the whole world! Also, another manipulative new term that liberals love to use against the whites these days, is “superior race”. That term was first used by Hitler and ever since weaponized by our politicians.
Before that time, nobody ever used that term, you cannot find it in any ancient literature. Before Hitler, we would refer to “developed” or “less developed” civilizations, or “tribal” civilizations. The “developed” were measured by the level of sophistication of arts and science, and social manners.
So you see, “racism” and “white supremacy” are a big lie, a ‘dividi et impera’ tool for the liberals. When they label whites and only whites as being racist and slave owners, one should always like to remind them of a little history and that whites are instead the ones and only ones on the planet that adopt children of other races, that have compassion and love for others unlike any other race, and are also the first ones in history to have abolished slavery by law (and then got other countries to follow).
Here is more from my European friend.
The first record of the “sale” of Irish slaves is dated 1612 and the trade is still documented in the late 1700s.
Who were the slavers? The slavers were the Protestant English and the enslaved were the Catholic Irish.
The first to take this initiative was James I, after the religious war that had bloodied the Kingdom, to punish the rebels and to satisfy the demand for manpower coming from the New World.
A few numbers can give an idea of the phenomenon: from 1641 to 1652 the Irish sold as slaves were 300,000, starting from 1650. The children between the ages of ten and fourteen were deported and sold as slaves, together with their mothers, in Virginia and New England, were over 100,000.
Other details are gruesome.
Women were used as sex providers and to “produce” mulattoes through mating with black slaves. This practice, economically more convenient than the importation of black slaves, was prohibited from a certain date onwards precisely so as not to damage the black slave trade.
In the transport ships slaves were loaded in such numbers that it was not possible to lie down to sleep without lying on top of each other. Mortality along the journey was very high, but the shipowners did not care much about it, the transport journey of the slaves served in fact only to avoid the “empty return” from England to the New World.
And in case of difficulty there was no problem getting rid of part of the cargo by throwing it overboard.
There are testimonies that document how in 1798 1,302 slaves were thrown into the Atlantic Ocean still alive to have more food available for the crew.
The “price” of a white slave was much lower than that of a black slave (about one-tenth) due to both lower physical endurance and lower “cost” – shorter travel and shorter supply chain since blacks, unlike the Irish, had to be bought by the Arabs who “supplied” them.
For those wishing to know more, I point out the book “White Cargo: The Forgotten History of Britain’s White Slave in America” by Don Jordan and Michael Walsh, still available on Amazon, from which many of the things written here have been taken.
What can we say in the face of so many atrocities? In addition to “understanding” the resentment that many Irish feel towards the English, with a certain bitterness it is pointed out that the slave trade is not a matter of racism but, alas, it is a manifestation of the wickedness to which the human being can reach especially when the wallet is in charge.
The painting above shows the white slave trade market where white women were coveted for their skin tone and bred for that reason.Â