Our recent reading, “American
Voices”, provided an immense amount
of background for me that ultimately answered the question that I have long
pondered over: Why did the Europeans have such an affinity for owning black
bodies? It was unclear to me how Europeans had the ability to justify kidnapping,
capturing, and exploiting African labor for capital gain. After reading “Major
Problems in African American History,” it became clear to me that the Europeans
depended on the Africans much more than the Africans depended on the Europeans.
These black captives allowed for “the rise of liberty and equality” in America
with an astounding work ethic and physical resilience that permitted the
Englishmen’s newfound economic and political success (Holt, 105-108). It was unclear
to me why the Africans did not use that same strength and ability to fight back
against the white men who originally coined them as useless, lazy, and
undeserving of freedom. Of course part of the answer to my frustration was the
fact that they would most likely have been killed if they had attempted to
resist or withhold their skills. The second half of that answer was that their
fellow Africans at home were also part of the problem.
I learned
through “African Voices” that Africa’s lack of “large, strong, stable political
units” inspired African rulers to sell other Africans for economic gain.
Africans would also sell aliens, war captives, and criminals off to Europeans
as a form of punishment (Mintz, 8-9). While reading this, all I could think
was- whether for money or punishment- how could Africans sell their brothers
and sisters to the ultimate enemy: the white man. What act could be so sinister
as to subject one’s own to the most horrific existence ever known? I then
connected American Voices back to our earlier reading, “Saltwater Slavery,”
that highlighted the fact that Africans each came from separate and distinct
communities, each tribe possessing their own unique cultures and customs. It
was not until their forced union during the slave trade that Africans of all tribes
united out of desperation and necessity that they started to share languages
and intertwine tribe-specific roles, ideas, and practices amongst one another.
Before that, community was a term limited to specific tribes, and only within
those tribes did loyalty lie. After all, “Africans thought of themselves not as
Africans, but members of separate nations” (Mintz 9). An African king or ruler
was unconcerned with the downfall of another village if it meant the prosperity
of his own. We saw this in Homegoing
when Chief Akeebu agreed to help sell off members of his neighbor tribe, the
Asantes, to the British for his own village’s economic benefit.
African rulers thought their act of
punishing and selling off criminal or alien Africans was an easy, profitable
way to rid themselves of burden and an opportunity for their villages to
flourish. In the short term, the slave trade “enhanced the power prestige and
wealth of particular West African rulers, merchants and states,” (Mintz 42) but
contributed to economic stagnation and long-term political instability, social
disintegration, and the spread of warfare. (Mintz 8). Not only did African
rulers allow their tribe’s governments to fall victim to the European’s
capitalist system, but allowed for their neighbors as well as themselves and
their kin to be further subjected to three hundred plus years of exploitation
and cruelty. While some African rulers contributed to what came to be known as
the American paradox, they were simultaneously contributing to what I like to
think of as the African paradox. While the American paradox of slavery and
freedom worked together to magnify the rights of freedom for Englishmen at the
expense of forced African labor, the African paradox was the Africans’ selling
their own countrymen, allowing the institution of slavery to thrive at their
own expense. Africans once regarded their communities as distinctive and
divided, and this subsequently played a part in their later union during the
darkest period in America’s history.
I definitely agree that Africans selling other slaves from Africa persisted as an economic problem. The fact that these African tribes saw themselves as separate nations perpetuated the desire for economic superiority and power through enslavement. Europeans as seen in Soul by Soul would spur conflict amongst African tribes in order to obtain more slaves through war. The result of selling slaves would be greater power through weaponry and money. Europeans imposed a capitalistic society on Africa. As you stated, the rulers did fall prey to the capitalistic pursuits of the Europeans. With this greater power, the African tribes would engage in more wars to obtain more power. The cycle would replicate itself many times and the African tribes desire for slaves would manifest through the engagement of war. While some African tribes such as Benin, as seen in “African American Voices”, refused to participate in the slave trade, these tribes would become weaker as they were unable to protect themselves from lack of weaponry. The slave trade touched the lives of the majority of all tribes in Africa even those not participating in it.
ReplyDeleteJames in Homegoing sees his tribe rise to power at the hands of the slave trade and finds rejection for his participation in the slave trade by the women he desires, Akosua Mensah. Ultimately, James sees the aftermath and destruction that the slave trade has laid in Africa and desires to leave the slave trade forever. Africa did indeed fall victim to the European capitalist society leading to their desire for wealth and power. For Europeans power was defined by wealth and warfare. This idea would soon transition to the setting of Africa as well.
I agree that Africa had continued the perpetuation of slavery in order to maintain economic stability. Tribe rivalry eased the burden of selling their own people.It is easier to justify selling someone in to slavery that are your enemy. Europeans still had the upper hand in Africa, although they were in a foreign land. If African sellers could not provide enough slaves, then they could easily be captured as well. Africa actively took part in slavery; however, it was force to continue due to the arrival of Europeans to sustain their weak society.
ReplyDeleteIt also came to me as a shock to find out that other African tribes were the main catalyst of the slave trade, especially for their reasoning. When thinking about how there was no unity between tribes back then makes me think of how our black community is still in a sense divided today by class. This divide amongst people is just another factor that haunts generations to come. Think about those African American parties who have found a better way of living, you have some that give back to where they came from and you have others who purposefully attempt to forget their roots. These are the ones that make me think back to the higher tribes that sold out their "enemies". It wasn't until they actually heard about how harsh and brutal slavery was here in the states, that they began to reconsider their choices in helping the Europeans. As stated above, there was no stopping it, the Africans were forced to continue their end of the bargain because of the Economic status they needed to achieve to ultimately survive themselves.
ReplyDelete