See you're trying to undermine our point....but also acknowledging it at the same time....do you understand that?
Sure but there seem to be plenty of teachings that the church fathers don't explictly say came from the apostles or Jesus do they even by oral tradition? For example which apostle via oral tradition said Jesus had no brothers or sisters and it was talking about his cousins?
All this energy complaining about the past. They spend no time at all challenging the places where slavery still exists. Especially Mauritania
Western empires spent generations laundering their crimes through schoolbooks, dressing conquest as civilization, slavery as opportunity, and massacres as unfortunate footnotes to their supposed greatness. They taught their citizens to imagine that literacy, science, innovation, and freedom arrived in our societies aboard the same ships that carried their chains.
Then people raised on this carefully distorted history mistake their ignorance for superiority and ask, “Why do they hate white people?” Perhaps begin by asking why your education required so much silence about the people your national heroes enslaved, butchered, raped, robbed, and killed.
You cannot teach generations to celebrate an empire and then feign bewilderment when its victims refuse to applaud.
The elites defending these lies know exactly what an honest history threatens: their inherited estates, stolen artifacts, accumulated fortunes, and the “respectable” family namesattached to them. So they scream “anti-white racism” and recruit the poor and working class white people to defend wealth they will never touch, persuading the exploited to identify with their exploiters because they share a skin color.
They inherited the spoils and handed you a flag to guard them and you do it so proudly and ignorantly. Correcting those history books is a responsibility to your children as much as to ours, because peace cannot rest on the continued humiliation of people expected to honor the lies told about their suffering.
Call us bitter, call us victims, choke on your imperial nostalgia if you must. The truth will still demand an accounting and it will prevail.
It wasn't just african collaborators....they were already doing it. They were already trading in flesh for centuries before a white man ever visited them. And Mauritania still practices it today. It may be illegal on paper but its still practiced. Why not focus your energy
This is what happens when historical ignorance is accompanied by an astonishing degree of intellectual arrogance.
First, there were no “West African countries” during the transatlantic slave trade. The region comprised kingdoms, empires, city-states and independent societies. Applying modern national identities to centuries-old history is an extraordinary display of ignorance.
Second, Europeans did not arrive in Africa as benevolent abolitionists. For centuries, they financed, institutionalised and industrialised human trafficking, supplying weapons that fuelled wars and slave raids, creating an enormous market for human captives, and codifying racial slavery into their laws. African collaborators existed, but their complicity does not absolve the European empires that sustained this monstrous commerce.
Entire African communities were devastated, populations displaced, villages destroyed and societies destabilised. Millions were deported across the Atlantic, while countless others suffered captivity, violence and death on African soil. Africa was itself a vast crime scene, not merely the departure point of enslaved people.
And perhaps the most remarkable historical fraud is how European nations have managed to present themselves as the liberators of the very people they spent centuries enslaving.
I grew up in a former French colony in Africa being taught from primary school that slavery was abolished by a Frenchman named Victor Schœlcher. It was only in 2026 ( yes this year ) that I discovered that people in former British colonies had been taught a remarkably similar story, except that their white saviour was an Englishman named William Wilberforce.
Yet long before Britain abolished slavery in its colonies in 1833, enslaved Africans in Haiti had fought a revolution, defeated European armies and proclaimed their independence in 1804. Toussaint Louverture and Jean-Jacques Dessalines were central to that struggle.
In 1816, Haitian President Alexandre Pétion supplied Simón Bolívar with weapons, ammunition and military assistance to support South America’s liberation struggles, on the condition that he advance the emancipation of enslaved people. And he went on to free more than half a dozen Latin American countries.
And what was Haiti’s reward for daring to liberate itself? Diplomatic isolation and, in 1825, a crushing indemnity of 150 million francs imposed by France, effectively forcing formerly enslaved people to compensate the descendants of their enslavers for the loss of their supposed property.
Meanwhile, Britain compensated slave owners with £20 million following abolition, while the enslaved received nothing.
Where are these stories in the European narratives of abolition? Where are Nat Turner, who led an enslaved uprising in Virginia in 1831, Queen Nzinga, who resisted Portuguese expansion and slave raiding in Central Africa, or the countless African rulers, communities and freedom fighters who resisted enslavement?
Black people fought for their freedom. They rebelled, resisted, organised, sacrificed and died for it. Their liberation was never simply a gift bestowed upon them by benevolent Europeans.
There is something profoundly tragic about descendants of enslaved Africans, born and educated in the lands of their ancestors’ enslavers, regurgitating sanitised colonial history, seemingly incapable of distinguishing historical scholarship from imperial propaganda.
The greatest triumph of colonial indoctrination is when the descendants of its victims become the most zealous defenders of its mythology.
What a pity!
Sai opposes slavery very much which is why he only cares about historical slavery and never speaks out against the Mauritanias ongoing slave trade.
Again, this is historically illiterate.
I have said that we need to be making better arguments against a formal apology and reparations, not "The Arabs sold slaves too". That is just something you can expect from a random Redditor.
You keep saying that British people can't pay for historical wrongs made at a time when different laws applied. Still, you keep leaving out the fact that British taxpayers(including the descendants of the enslaved & the tax gotten from the colonies) kept paying the government loan used to compensate slave owners up until 2015.
That's 180 years of changing laws and governments, yet taxpayers kept paying that debt.
Why was this not applied to these institutions?
Classical estimates have the slave trade being responsible for 1-2% of Britains annual collective income reaching 5% in peak years. Portugal had a larger slave trade and Spains was quite large too where is the pressure for them to apologize. Also why doesn't ending the legal
This is a masterclass in selective historical hypocrisy.
Yes, African kingdoms, rulers and merchants participated in the slave trade, but that does not absolve Britain of its own responsibility or diminish the immense wealth it accumulated from enslaved labour.
British institutions profited enormously from slave trade. And it helped to fund Britain's industrial and global imperial expansion.
Dismissing the reparation conversation by citing the failure of past debt-relief efforts is a flawed argument. Debt cancellation and reparation are not the same thing, and the shortcomings of one does not automatically invalidate the case for the other. Reparations should and must not be reduced to a demand for free cash.
Today’ taxpayers should not be assigned personal guilt for historical crimes, but that does not mean the state and institutions that accumulated enormous benefits from those injustices have no responsibility to engage with the consequences.
Britain's eventual role in abolishing slave trade does not erase centuries of exploitation. To make matters worse, Britain compensated slave owners after abolition, while the enslaved received nothing. That historical injustice deserves honest scrutiny, not deflection.
You cannot celebrate Britain's slave trade abolition as a worthy legacy while conveniently dismissing the enormous economic benefits it derived from slavery. Historical accountability is not an attack on Britain, it is an acknowledgement of history.
You mean the guy you all accuse of basically being the devil incarnate and certainly an apostate? That guy?
Thats a great straw-man you have erected there. It makes it seem like you have never spoken to a straight white male and if you have you certainly spent no time listening. Not wanting whatever lgbtq flavor of the week character in my video games does not mean i think lgbtq are my
If there's one thing the closure of @bioware has taught me, it's that the majority of racists are straight, white males from low income brackets with low educations who are pissed off because they couldn't win a race that was literally rigged in their favor from being born straight, white males. And if they don't have somebody to blame, eventually they'd have to admit that the person responsible for most of their problems stares back at them in the mirror every morning. But they'll spend more time obsessing over immigrants, blacks, gays, and DEI "agendas" than they ever have trying to improve their own lives.
An immigrant didn't blow your paycheck at the bar. A gay couple didn't get your truck repoed. A trans kid didn't make you drop out of high school, lose your job, and get divorced. A black family didn't keep you from learning a trade, showing up to work, or acting like a decent human being. YOU did that. All by yourself.
So when you're standing there screaming that everybody else is getting special treatment, maybe ask yourself why you're getting lapped by people who had to climb over fences that you never even saw.
Racism isn't strength. It's what insecure people wrap themselves in when they don't have accomplishments to brag about. Homophobia isn't toughness. It's fear wearing work boots. And all that DEI whining is just you saying "I'm too scared to compete" when everyone else finally gets their fair shot.
The hard truth is that if your identity depends upon somebody else staying beneath you, you never stood very tall in the first place. Quit blaming minorities for your misery. Quit blaming LGBTQ+ folks because your life's a train wreck. Quit looking for scapegoats and just grab a mirror. Because that reflection has cost you more opportunities than every immigrant, every pride parade, every DEI program, and every person of color combined.
Tell that to the Arabs
Tell that to the Arabs
Tell that to the Arabs
Tell that to the Arabs
Tell that to the Arabs
Tell that to the Arabs
Tell that to the Arabs
Tell that to the Arabs
Tell that to the Arabs
Tell that to the Arabs
Tell that to the Arabs
Tell that to the Arabs
This is what passes for Catholic evangelism apparently. He claims infallible church authority as his guiding star then proceeds to just go around insulting people for no good reason.
Neo retweeted
Mr. Obama, your own administration selectively targeted people for their political beliefs.
Your IRS flagged Tea Party, Patriot, and 9/12 groups by name for years. Your IRS asked for prayer contents, membership lists, donor lists, backend access to websites, and more. Congressional testimony revealed Tea Party donors were 6 times more likely than the average taxpayer to be individually audited. Your actions chilled Tea Party groups, and many groups shut down rather than paying thousands to attorneys and accountants to answer the invasive, unconstitutional questions from your administration.
At the same time, your FBI’s Domestic Terrorism Unit repeatedly contacted True the Vote, an organization that grew directly out of the Tea Party, and its founder Catherine Engelbrecht, seeking membership lists and information about attendees. Your office audited her business and personal taxes and subjected her to ATF and OSHA inspections, all beginning after she applied for nonprofit status.
We know what selective targeting looks like because we lived it under your watch. Spare us the lecture.
It is a basic principle of American democracy that the government can’t selectively target individuals simply because of their political beliefs or what they say. But that’s exactly what the Trump Administration is doing to Congresswoman Ilhan Omar of Minnesota.
To understand why this is so appalling, it’s important to know the facts. Congresswoman Omar came to this country with her father when she was 12 years old. Five years later, her father became a naturalized citizen. If Ilhan had been 18 at the time, she would have had to apply for citizenship separately. But because she was 17, she became a naturalized citizen automatically.
Congresswoman Omar went on to graduate from college, work as a community organizer, become the first Somali-American legislator elected to public office in the U.S., and win a seat in Congress. There, she has been one of the Trump Administration’s fiercest critics, which has led the president to repeatedly single her out as someone who he believes does not belong in this country.
Now the Administration is actively trying to deport Congresswoman Omar, seemingly based solely on the unsubstantiated theory that she was actually 18 when her father was naturalized, and therefore is not a citizen. Federal agents have raided her home, confiscated personal records, and seized her phone — all to try and uncover a nonexistent smoking gun from 20 years ago that will somehow make their case.
Think about that. The full weight of the federal government is being brought down on a law-abiding elected official because she has dared to criticize the president. And it’s not the first time this has happened. Under President Trump, the Justice Department has repeatedly gone after those he considers his political enemies — from the Attorney General of New York, to the former head of the FBI, to members of the Federal Reserve.
In those cases, the prosecutions either stalled or were dismissed for having no basis in law, and the same is likely to happen in this case. But not before Congresswoman Omar’s life has been turned upside down, her legal bills have piled up, and she’s been forced to spend time fighting unsubstantiated charges instead of serving the people of Minnesota.
The fact that any president, or any administration, is willing to engage in such transparent efforts to intimidate someone should outrage all Americans, regardless of how they feel about Congresswoman Omar’s political views. Because if this becomes the new normal, there’s no reason to believe it will stop with her — or that future presidents, in either party, won’t do the same.




















