Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 22

Thread: Was Slavery Worst In The Caribbean or The United States

  1. #1
    NaturalBornRidah
    Guest

    Was Slavery Worst In The Caribbean or The United States

    Back to Hypertext History: Our Online American History Textbook
    The Origins and Nature of New World Slavery

    American Slavery in Comparative Perspective

    Period: 1600-1860

    Of the 10 to 16 million Africans who survived the voyage to the New World, over one-third landed in Brazil and between 60 and 70 percent ended up in Brazil or the sugar colonies of the Caribbean. Only 6 percent arrived in what is now the United States. Yet by 1860, approximately two thirds of all New World slaves lived in the American South.

    For a long time it was widely assumed that southern slavery was harsher and crueler than slavery in Latin America, where the Catholic church insisted that slaves had a right to marry, to seek relief from a cruel master, and to purchase their freedom. Spanish and Portuguese colonists were thought to be less tainted by racial prejudice than North Americans and Latin American slavery was believed to be less subject to the pressures of a competitive capitalist economy.

    In practice, neither the Church nor the courts offered much protection to Latin American slaves. Access to freedom was greater in Latin America, but in many cases masters freed sick, elderly, crippled, or simply unneeded slaves in order to relieve themselves of financial responsibilities.

    Death rates among slaves in the Caribbean were one third higher than in the South,and suicide appears to have been much more common. Unlike slaves in the South, West Indian slaves were expected to produce their own food in their "free time," and care for the elderly and the infirm.

    The largest difference between slavery in the South and in Latin America was demographic. The slave population in Brazil and the West Indies had a lower proportion of female slaves, a much lower birth rate, and a higher proportion of recent arrivals from Africa. In striking contrast, southern slaves had an equal sex ratio, a high birthrate, and a predominantly American-born population.

    Slavery in the United States especially distinctive in the ability of the slave population to increase its numbers by natural reproduction. In the Caribbean, Dutch Guiana and Brazil, the slave death rate was so high and the birth rate so low that slaves could not sustain their population without imports from Africa. The average number of children born to an early 19th century southern slave woman was 9.2--twice as many as in the West Indies.

    In the West Indies, slaves constituted 80 to 90 percent of the population, while in the South only about a third of the population was slaves. Plantation size also differed widely. In the Caribbean, slaves were held on much larger units, with many plantations holding 150 slaves or more. In the American South, in contrast, only one slaveowner held as many as a thousand slaves, and just 125 had over 250 slaves. Half of all slaves in the United States worked on units of twenty or fewer slaves; three quarters had fewer than fifty.

    These demographic differences had important social implications. In the American South, slave owners lived on their plantations and slaves dealt with their owners regularly. Most planters placed plantation management,supply purchasing, and supervision in the hands of black drivers and foremen, and at least two thirds of all slaves worked under the supervision of black drivers.
    Absentee ownership was far more common in the West Indies, where planters relied heavily on paid managers and relied on a distinct class of free blacks and mulattos to serve as intermediaries with the slave population.

    Another important difference between Latin America and the United States involved conceptions of race. In Spanish and Portuguese America, an intricate system of racial classification emerged. Compared with the British and French, the Spanish and Portuguese were much more tolerant of racial mixing, an attitude encouraged by a shortage of European women, and recognized a wide range of racial gradations, including black, mestizo, quadroon, and octoroon. The American South, in contrast, adopted a two category system of racial categorization in which any person with a black mother was automatically considered to be black.

  2. #2
    Registered User SKBai1991's Avatar SKBai1991 is offline
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    5,642
    Credits
    4,860,382
    Quote Originally Posted by NaturalBornRidah View Post
    Back to Hypertext History: Our Online American History Textbook
    The Origins and Nature of New World Slavery

    American Slavery in Comparative Perspective

    Period: 1600-1860

    Of the 10 to 16 million Africans who survived the voyage to the New World, over one-third landed in Brazil and between 60 and 70 percent ended up in Brazil or the sugar colonies of the Caribbean. Only 6 percent arrived in what is now the United States. Yet by 1860, approximately two thirds of all New World slaves lived in the American South.

    For a long time it was widely assumed that southern slavery was harsher and crueler than slavery in Latin America, where the Catholic church insisted that slaves had a right to marry, to seek relief from a cruel master, and to purchase their freedom. Spanish and Portuguese colonists were thought to be less tainted by racial prejudice than North Americans and Latin American slavery was believed to be less subject to the pressures of a competitive capitalist economy.

    In practice, neither the Church nor the courts offered much protection to Latin American slaves. Access to freedom was greater in Latin America, but in many cases masters freed sick, elderly, crippled, or simply unneeded slaves in order to relieve themselves of financial responsibilities.

    Death rates among slaves in the Caribbean were one third higher than in the South,and suicide appears to have been much more common. Unlike slaves in the South, West Indian slaves were expected to produce their own food in their "free time," and care for the elderly and the infirm.

    The largest difference between slavery in the South and in Latin America was demographic. The slave population in Brazil and the West Indies had a lower proportion of female slaves, a much lower birth rate, and a higher proportion of recent arrivals from Africa. In striking contrast, southern slaves had an equal sex ratio, a high birthrate, and a predominantly American-born population.

    Slavery in the United States especially distinctive in the ability of the slave population to increase its numbers by natural reproduction. In the Caribbean, Dutch Guiana and Brazil, the slave death rate was so high and the birth rate so low that slaves could not sustain their population without imports from Africa. The average number of children born to an early 19th century southern slave woman was 9.2--twice as many as in the West Indies.

    In the West Indies, slaves constituted 80 to 90 percent of the population, while in the South only about a third of the population was slaves. Plantation size also differed widely. In the Caribbean, slaves were held on much larger units, with many plantations holding 150 slaves or more. In the American South, in contrast, only one slaveowner held as many as a thousand slaves, and just 125 had over 250 slaves. Half of all slaves in the United States worked on units of twenty or fewer slaves; three quarters had fewer than fifty.

    These demographic differences had important social implications. In the American South, slave owners lived on their plantations and slaves dealt with their owners regularly. Most planters placed plantation management,supply purchasing, and supervision in the hands of black drivers and foremen, and at least two thirds of all slaves worked under the supervision of black drivers.
    Absentee ownership was far more common in the West Indies, where planters relied heavily on paid managers and relied on a distinct class of free blacks and mulattos to serve as intermediaries with the slave population.

    Another important difference between Latin America and the United States involved conceptions of race. In Spanish and Portuguese America, an intricate system of racial classification emerged. Compared with the British and French, the Spanish and Portuguese were much more tolerant of racial mixing, an attitude encouraged by a shortage of European women, and recognized a wide range of racial gradations, including black, mestizo, quadroon, and octoroon. The American South, in contrast, adopted a two category system of racial categorization in which any person with a black mother was automatically considered to be black.
    The last bit is actually very untrue. French conceptions of race and race-mixing are far more akin to those of the Spanish and Portuguese than the English, especially when you compare places like New Orleans, Martinique, Guadeloupe and even Haiti to any English-speaking territories.

    Additionally, the reason why 2/3 of the slaves in the New World lived in the south by 1860 is because by 1860, the overwhelming majority of nations had abolished slavery already. At that time, the only slaveholding nations left were the US, Brasil, Cuba and Puerto Rico
    Last edited by SKBai1991; 05-26-2011 at 08:54 PM.
    "sa ki ta'w sé ta'w, la rivié pé pa chayé'l "


    Father, before mi mind get bad
    Betta yuh flip it round and mek mi mind get mad
    Mi prefer fi work hard everyday fi achieve mi goals
    Nah grudge nobody fi dem own

  3. #3
    NaturalBornRidah
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by SKBai1991 View Post
    The last bit is actually very untrue. French conceptions of race and race-mixing are far more akin to those of the Spanish and Portuguese than the English, especially when you compare places like New Orleans, Martinique, Guadeloupe and even Haiti to any English-speaking territories.
    That maybe true considering New Orleans.Dominica also which was once a French Colony.

  4. #4
    Registered User SKBai1991's Avatar SKBai1991 is offline
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    5,642
    Credits
    4,860,382
    Quote Originally Posted by NaturalBornRidah View Post
    That maybe true considering New Orleans.Dominica also which was once a French Colony.
    Its true for more or less the entire French-caribbean. New Orléans, St. Domingue, Guadeloupe & Martinique all had populations of free blacks and mulattos called gens de couleur libres who were property owners and businessmen within the colonies. These groups ultimately gained alot of money and influence, so much so that they were able to petition for equal rights during the french revolution and for a short while actually got those rights recognised. There was never a one-drop rule in any French colonies, and mulattos were considered to be an entirely separate racial class from Blacks, although still inferior to whites.
    "sa ki ta'w sé ta'w, la rivié pé pa chayé'l "


    Father, before mi mind get bad
    Betta yuh flip it round and mek mi mind get mad
    Mi prefer fi work hard everyday fi achieve mi goals
    Nah grudge nobody fi dem own

  5. #5
    NaturalBornRidah
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by SKBai1991 View Post
    Its true for more or less the entire French-caribbean. New Orléans, St. Domingue, Guadeloupe & Martinique all had populations of free blacks and mulattos called gens de couleur libres who were property owners and businessmen within the colonies. These groups ultimately gained alot of money and influence, so much so that they were able to petition for equal rights during the french revolution and for a short while actually got those rights recognised. There was never a one-drop rule in any French colonies, and mulattos were considered to be an entirely separate racial class from Blacks, although still inferior to whites.
    When it says slave owners relied on a class of free blacks signifies the beginning of schism on the islands in the Caribbean.

    Many of these free blacks had a head start.

  6. #6
    Tu Papá Curry Crab n Dumplin's Avatar Curry Crab n Dumplin is offline
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Carolina, Puerto Rico
    Posts
    1,216
    Credits
    671,585
    Quote Originally Posted by NaturalBornRidah View Post
    Compared with the British and French, the Spanish and Portuguese were much more tolerant of racial mixing, an attitude encouraged by a shortage of European women.
    Ummm...I believe that's called rape...the Spaniards have NEVER been happy about "tainting" their bloodline as they would refer to it.

    The racial mixing was mostly encouraged once slavery was abolished...not because they were "more tolerant" but because it was part of a plan to "whiten" Latin America and that encouragement came mostly from blacks themselves who were already brainwashed by the white man into thinking that black is ugly and white is beautiful. So traditionally, even to this date, people are told from young to seek out light/white partners in order to "improve the race". This is the reason why the majority of Latinos you run into have this f*cked up mentality and confused perception about who they are. It's not their fault, it is years upon years of conditioning by the Eurocentric system they live in.

    But believe me, the Spaniards themselves don't want anything to do with us...they never did...except for slave labour...and if they had it their way, we'd still be slaves.
    Isla Del Encanto! 100x35 pal' mundo!

  7. #7
    Registered User SKBai1991's Avatar SKBai1991 is offline
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    5,642
    Credits
    4,860,382
    Quote Originally Posted by NaturalBornRidah View Post
    When it says slave owners relied on a class of free blacks signifies the beginning of schism on the islands in the Caribbean.

    Many of these free blacks had a head start.
    What I'm talking about is different though. The gens de couleur libres weren't generally intermediaries between Whites and Slaves as in the english colonies. These people were seen as a group entirely apart from both, with their own social circles, their own businesses and their own trades. Some were used as overseers and go-betweens but more often they simply struck off and started their own enterprises, rather than simply work for white people. That's why there's historically a stronger correlation between class and colour among the French territories than in English ones. Some of these elements were present in English colonies, but they were nowhere near as prevalent.

    In comparison to free blacks in French colonies, who were enterprising, enfranchised and often middle-class or wealthy in their own right, most free black communities in the United States were poor.


    Quote Originally Posted by Curry Crab n Dumplin View Post
    Ummm...I believe that's called rape...the Spaniards have NEVER been happy about "tainting" their bloodline as they would refer to it.

    The racial mixing was mostly encouraged once slavery was abolished...not because they were "more tolerant" but because it was part of a plan to "whiten" Latin America and that encouragement came mostly from blacks themselves who were already brainwashed by the white man into thinking that black is ugly and white is beautiful. So traditionally, even to this date, people are told from young to seek out light/white partners in order to "improve the race". This is the reason why the majority of Latinos you run into have this f*cked up mentality and confused perception about who they are. It's not their fault, it is years upon years of conditioning by the Eurocentric system they live in.

    But believe me, the Spaniards themselves don't want anything to do with us...they never did...except for slave labour...and if they had it their way, we'd still be slaves.
    +1

    The social architects of Latin America have been "mejorando la raza" for decades now, the whole point of allowing European immigration was to breed out the Blacks and Indians as best as possible until there would be little trace of them left. Believe it or not, Argentina once had one of the largest slave populations in south america.
    Last edited by SKBai1991; 05-26-2011 at 09:18 PM.
    "sa ki ta'w sé ta'w, la rivié pé pa chayé'l "


    Father, before mi mind get bad
    Betta yuh flip it round and mek mi mind get mad
    Mi prefer fi work hard everyday fi achieve mi goals
    Nah grudge nobody fi dem own

  8. #8
    NaturalBornRidah
    Guest
    This says article talks about slave narratives and some
    oral history in the Caribbean


    Anthurium: A Caribbean Studies Journal - V2I1 - Aljoe, Caribbean Slave Narratives...

    Caribbean Slave Narratives: Creole in Form and Genre
    by Nicole N. Aljoe
    Slavery in the Caribbean and West Indian Colonies
    3

    According to Orlando Patterson, “Since Eric Williams, scholars have agreed that the Caribbean area is unique in world history in that it represents one of the rare cases of human society being artificially created for capitalistic purposes” (Sociology 37). Unlike the United States, the West Indian colonies were not intended to become permanent settlements by investors, for instance, on the island of Jamaica fully “9/10 of all the land under cultivation by plantations on the island before emancipation was owned by absentees” (Patterson, Sociology 37). Furthermore, slaves in the West Indies were more likely to live on large plantations. In fact, “three-quarters of slaves in Jamaica were located on plantations of 50 or more slaves, whereas in the United States less than one-quarter of slaves were located on such plantations” (Engerman 265). Additionally,

    Slaves in the US had more extensive contact with white society in their daily lives. Moreover, in the US, even in the South, the slaves were basically in a white society: even in those states with the heaviest concentrations of slaves, whites represented one-half of the population. In the West Indies, the share of whites was generally on the order of 10%. (265)

    These distinctions, including the fact that more US slaves were native-born than were West Indian slaves (90% in US, versus less than 75% in Jamaica), make clear the marked differences in the conditions of slaves in the New World (265).[3]
    4

    Yet, one of the most important distinctions was the Caribbean itself: “an island bridge . . . connect[ing] North and South America as well as the various traces of Old World points of departure,” the Caribbean developed as “a series of artificially created societies aimed primarily at production of resources as opposed to permanent settler societies, a meta-archipelago” (Murray 177). Caribbean societies are marked by their nature as islands—foregrounding fragmentation, instability, uprootedness, cultural heterogeneity, contingency, impermanence, and syncretism (Benítez-Rojo 1). Numerous critics and writers agree that there is a connection between the geography and cultural context of the Caribbean and the writing that is produced there.[4] Benítez-Rojo has argued, “the Caribbean text shows the specific features of the supersyncretic culture from which it emerges” (29). He goes on to explain, “Caribbean literature cannot free itself of the multi-ethnic society upon which it floats, and it tells us of its fragmentation and instability” (27).[5] This syncretism of the Caribbean does not imply that all Caribbean cultures are the same.[6] Indeed, as Benítez-Rojo argues, the “Plantation proliferated in the Caribbean basin in a way that presented different features in each island, each stretch of coastline, and each colonial bloc. Nevertheless, these differences, [do not] negate the existence of a pan-Caribbean society” (72). This experience, writes Benítez-Rojo, includes cultural components that come from all over the globe: “European conquest, the native people’s disappearance or retreat, African slavery, plantation economies, Asian migration, rigid and prolonged colonial domination” (34). This distinctive feature of Caribbean societies developed into new cultural and social forms often referred to as Creole and had a major impact on cultural production, especially during slavery.[7] These factors must be seen as contributing to the necessarily distinct publication history of Caribbean slave narratives, which is closely bound to the cultural history of Caribbean societies.


    Caribbean and West Indian Slave Narratives


    Such extensive employment of Creole is unusual. Indeed, most slave narratives like Prince's and Warner’s, confined Creole to the speech of slaves.[9] In narratives by ex-slaves such as Harriet Jacobs or Frederick Douglass, formal English was a means of asserting intelligence. Yet in this passage, the deployment ofCreole asserts a sense of agency and intelligence. Although narrated in Creole, Williams and his fellow apprentices were obviously very aware of their “right” under the law and were able to use their “native” language to assert and secure those rights.
    14

    1). However, because Creole in these narratives is expressive of an alternative worldview, it should be considered within the purview of the dialogic. Moreover, Creole captures and conveys what is distinctive about slave culture, and consequently provides evidence of a different dialogic angle. Bakhtin himself observed in several essays that languages have access to different systems of power. Therefore, translated Creole, as in some of the narratives, can be read as a sign of a different language because the implication is that without translation Creole would be incomprehensible to most readers. Indeed, both Pringle and Strickland implied in their respective prefatory remarks that translation was necessary in order to ensure readability. Consequently, within these three narratives Creole subverts the consolidating and unifying power of formal English by affirming linguistic diversity. In lieu of a singular voice then, Creole attests to an inherent multiplicity within these narratives.[10]
    15



    Some critics have argued rather forcefully for the connection between testimonio and place—as a genre of as-told-to life narratives that developed and flourished in Latin America, especially in the 1960s, beginning with Miguel Barnet’s Biography of a Runaway Slave, a transcription of the life of the 105-year-old Cuban ex-slave Esteban Montejo.[11] Although Barnet invented the term testimonio with the publication of Montejo’s narrative, in fact this format had existed long before the 1960s. Indeed as Raymond Williams has argued, there is a long history of oral autobiography by oppressed people that is not limited to Latin America (qtd. in Beverly 71). Additionally, arguments by Alberto Retamar and Orlando Patterson among others who draw geographic and cultural connections between the Caribbean and Latin America encourage reading these Caribbean slave narratives through a Latin American socio-historical context.


    The multiplicity signaled by the polyvocality of the Creole testimony of Caribbean slaves illuminates the complexity of the slave narrative form. Far from a rigid or unchanging genre, it incorporates numerous rhetorical and narrative strategies that develop out of each narrative’s particular cultural context. Plantation slavery was a complex and varied system of power relationships. I try to embrace this complexity by attending to the various ways in which slaves communicated their stories. Although the dictated narratives do not provide easy interpretative access, they do have so much to communicate and to ignore them is to silence once again the voices of Caribbean slaves.
    Last edited by NaturalBornRidah; 05-26-2011 at 09:30 PM.

  9. #9
    NaturalBornRidah
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by SKBai1991 View Post
    What I'm talking about is different though. The gens de couleur libres weren't generally intermediaries between Whites and Slaves as in the english colonies. These people were seen as a group entirely apart from both, with their own social circles, their own businesses and their own trades. Some were used as overseers and go-betweens but more often they simply struck off and started their own enterprises, rather than simply work for white people. That's why there's historically a stronger correlation between class and colour among the French territories than in English ones. Some of these elements were present in English colonies, but they were nowhere near as prevalent.

    In comparison to free blacks in French colonies, who were enterprising, enfranchised and often middle-class or wealthy in their own right, most free black communities in the United States were poor.

    Interesting,what were the first enterprises these upper class of creole french could have,there basically on an island and are very secluded so what are their options?

  10. #10
    NaturalBornRidah
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Curry Crab n Dumplin View Post
    Ummm...I believe that's called rape...the Spaniards have NEVER been happy about "tainting" their bloodline as they would refer to it.

    The racial mixing was mostly encouraged once slavery was abolished...not because they were "more tolerant" but because it was part of a plan to "whiten" Latin America and that encouragement came mostly from blacks themselves who were already brainwashed by the white man into thinking that black is ugly and white is beautiful. So traditionally, even to this date, people are told from young to seek out light/white partners in order to "improve the race". This is the reason why the majority of Latinos you run into have this f*cked up mentality and confused perception about who they are. It's not their fault, it is years upon years of conditioning by the Eurocentric system they live in.

    But believe me, the Spaniards themselves don't want anything to do with us...they never did...except for slave labour...and if they had it their way, we'd still be slaves.
    Yes the encouragement for Blanquemieto, might of came from blacks but a lot of the government officials in these Latin American countries such as Brazil encouraged many Italians,Greeks,and Germans to migrate their country.

    I don't think any blacks would be part of the governmental jobs especially in Latin American countries.Now maybe mulattoes and creoles.

  11. #11
    Banned RedBlackNWhite is offline
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Farin =(
    Posts
    3,057
    Credits
    720,400
    I recall reading somewhere that if slaves in the Caribbean were unruly and unbreakable... they were sold to the United States... in particular the south.



    Or was it the other way around? anybody know?

  12. #12
    NaturalBornRidah
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by njtrini View Post
    I recall reading somewhere that if slaves in the Caribbean were unruly and unbreakable... they were sold to the United States... in particular the south.



    Or was it the other way around? anybody know?
    That may be true because a lot of slaves that worked on plantations in Haiti were later exported to the US.

  13. #13
    Juan Dan
    Guest
    maybe an easier way to tell these things is by SIMPLY asking yourself

    what is the situation like now?

    a hundred years from now many of your retarded children will debate this and come to certain conclusions

    and yes many a blak mercan has thought they HAD IT BADDDDDDDDDD IN THE WORLD
    lol
    lol
    lol
    lol

    perception

  14. #14
    NaturalBornRidah
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Carlo Musashien View Post
    maybe an easier way to tell these things is by SIMPLY asking yourself

    what is the situation like now?

    a hundred years from now many of your retarded children will debate this and come to certain conclusions

    and yes many a blak mercan has thought they HAD IT BADDDDDDDDDD IN THE WORLD
    lol
    lol
    lol
    lol

    perception
    You have many people on IMIX saying that African Americans dealt with a worst brand of slavery compared to the Caribbean blacks therefore, the shock and after effects that are currently permeating through the African community are a result of of this harsh slavery(plus jim crow,civil rights,crack introduction etc).:

    My whole intention is too see if this true, did the Caribbean blacks go through a less harsh and demeaning form of slavery,or was it worse?Or maybe it was just the same.

  15. #15
    Registered User SKBai1991's Avatar SKBai1991 is offline
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    5,642
    Credits
    4,860,382
    Quote Originally Posted by NaturalBornRidah View Post
    Interesting,what were the first enterprises these upper class of creole french could have,there basically on an island and are very secluded so what are their options?
    Their first forays into trade and enterprise were often contraband and illegal trade. Many in Haiti got rich growing and trading illegal indigo and tobacco to privateers from neighbouring colonies, since it was hard for them to get into the white-dominated sugar trade. Later, others became craftsmen, landowners, sailors, writers and even government officials.

    You have to understand that even though they were on a small island, there was still a demand for many services and products that needed to be fulfilled, and the relative shortage of whites meant that these fields were naturally filled by free blacks and creoles.

    Quote Originally Posted by njtrini View Post
    I recall reading somewhere that if slaves in the Caribbean were unruly and unbreakable... they were sold to the United States... in particular the south.



    Or was it the other way around? anybody know?
    It was the other way around sort of. Many slaves in the US were "broken" in the Caribbean, but those that were unruly within the caribbean were sent to even more violent colonies within the caribbean. Jamaica was a favourite drop-off spot for rebellious slaves, so much so that one could say deportations of the unruly to Jamaica has been a centuries long tradition lol.

    Within the lesser antilles I know St Kitts and Antigua got alot of slaves, St Kitts was more fertile and Antigua was comparatively more harsh, so masters would often threaten slaves in barbuda and nevis to be sent there if they didn't shape up.
    Last edited by SKBai1991; 05-26-2011 at 10:13 PM.
    "sa ki ta'w sé ta'w, la rivié pé pa chayé'l "


    Father, before mi mind get bad
    Betta yuh flip it round and mek mi mind get mad
    Mi prefer fi work hard everyday fi achieve mi goals
    Nah grudge nobody fi dem own

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •