Can someone explain this?

[thekingsmen]

I’m not understanding your question??

The claim is that 388,000 slaves were imported in 300 plus years... That's 1000 plus slaves a year. Where are the other millions of black folks coming from?

A population can't strive in a controlled environment by slave owners. They picked who was going to reproduce and got rid of those that were rebellious. So that means the millions of black population was coming from black indeginous tribe already here.

 

[thekingsmen]

First off, as breh said this is also why you needed fresh supply vs waiting for reproduction to do its thing :



Second you do realize that it wasn't slaveowners who were hiring sailors, keeping boats afloat, etc? Thet were "just" customers. You aren't the one organizing the trip of your phone from China, they weren't organizing the deportation of Africa, just buying the product. Slavery was not one-off individuals who went back and forth between the Americas and Africa when random plantation owner needed two more slaves lol, it was huge companies backed by powerful empires (Spain, France, Portugal, Netherlands, etc) like the Dutch West India Company. Basically with this huge backing the average cost of deporting an African wouldn't be that high because you're literrally shipping millions and thinking long-term.

It's a business that effects all aspects of how it works. From ship yards to plantations to the production of the cotton. It too cost effective to bring millions over not knowing how these factors pay for cost and labor.

 

[Swirv]

I don’t believe for one second that “only” 388,000 slave were dropped off here.

How many of these 388,000 were able to procreate. I beg many mothers died in labor during this time due to poor conditions.

 

[thekingsmen]

i'm confused at the question. i dont think they're including the caribbean in "north america"
i'm guessing they're saying the 388k were brought directly to america nonstop, while the rest of slaves were purchased from the caribbean ports.

Correct

It's stated in the article. All plantation records show different plantations could only hold 10, some 75, others 100.

So where are the rest of the millions of black folk coming from as a population.

 

[13473]

Correct

It's stated in the article. All plantation records show different plantations could only hold 10, some 75, others 100.

So where are the rest of the millions of black folk coming from as a population.

there was a free population, not all were on plantations. in some places half of the white households had slaves.

Child-bearing started around the age of thirteen, and by twenty the women slaves would be expected to have four or five children. To encourage child-bearing some population owners promised women slaves their freedom after they had produced fifteen children.
Slave Breeding

 

[Wild self]

I’m not understanding your question??

How many slaves touched American soil from slave ships, is the question.

The accurate number will never fully be revealed, for *those* social reasons.

 

[thekingsmen]

there was a free population, not all were on plantations. in some places half of the white households had slaves.

Child-bearing started around the age of thirteen, and by twenty the women slaves would be expected to have four or five children. To encourage child-bearing some population owners promised women slaves their freedom after they had produced fifteen children.
Slave Breeding

This was known...the population of freeman tripled from 1700s to 1850.

 

[mbewane]

It's a business that effects all aspects of how it works. From ship yards to plantations to the production of the cotton. It too cost effective to bring millions over not knowing how these factors pay for cost and labor.

Breh...it was literraly Empires like Spain, Portugal, England, France etc...city-states in Italy with banks providing funding...that got extremely rich off slave trade. Where do you think the money to fund the Renaissance came? You think these empires and private companies would've been that for centuries if they weren't making big cash off of it? Again, it ain't rocket science : slave trade was extremely profitable, which is why it went for so long, and slave-owners in what would become the US used that and bred some new slaves themselves. I mean if you're endpoint is just saying "Black were here before" just stick with that, because talking about profitablity and cost-effectivness of slavery (where labor is, per definition, free) ain't really helping your point. Europe is littered with coastal cities, old money, palaces and whatnot that come slavery money.

 

[MajesticLion]

The number difference comes from the fact that quickly slavery in the US turned into a breeding factory instead of relying on shipments coming from Africa. Possibly because of longer distances (look how closer Brazil is from Africa), possibly because trade was dominated for a long time by the portuguese and spanish iirc, possibly because whites in america quickly understood that having slaves born in slavery directly was more efficient.

Edit : also these are official records. As in every "business", there was probably lots of stuff happening "off the books".

Just to add on to this: colonies traded with each other for various goods, even when their "mother countries" were at war...and they frequently were. Sometimes legitimately, many times off the books as you said. The use of privateers for such things was fairly common.

 

[thekingsmen]

Breh...it was literraly Empires like Spain, Portugal, England, France etc...city-states in Italy with banks providing funding...that got extremely rich off slave trade. Where do you think the money to fund the Renaissance came? You think these empires and private companies would've been that for centuries if they weren't making big cash off of it? Again, it ain't rocket science : slave trade was extremely profitable, which is why it went for so long, and slave-owners in what would become the US used that and bred some new slaves themselves. I mean if you're endpoint is just saying "Black were here before" just stick with that, because talking about profitablity and cost-effectivness of slavery (where labor is, per definition, free) ain't really helping your point. Europe is littered with coastal cities, old money, palaces and whatnot that come slavery money.

1. Catholic Church provided the funds .
2. No one is denying money profit off of it.
3. Cost effectiveness means alot in those empires because there were alot of things with war and trade issues with each other.

4. The narrative for having millions of slaves in America made no sense bc of the amount of time, cost and effort to get people there. Black folks were already here was my argument the whole time.

 

[Ghost Utmost]

1. Catholic Church provided the funds .
2. No one is denying money profit off of it.
3. Cost effectiveness means alot in those empires because there were alot of things with war and trade issues with each other.

4. The narrative for having millions of slaves in America made no sense bc of the amount of time, cost and effort to get people there. Black folks were already here was my argument the whole time.

5. Stop thinking YouTube vids are the ultimate authority.

 

[thekingsmen]

5. Stop thinking YouTube vids are the ultimate authority.

Didn't mention YouTube videos. Nice try.

 

[Ghost Utmost]

Didn't mention YouTube videos. Nice try.

So what college course did you learn these ideas in?

Or was it a History Channel special?

How about a lecture you attended?

Where did you develop your theory?

 

[thekingsmen]

So what college course did you learn these ideas in?

Or was it a History Channel special?

How about a lecture you attended?

Where did you develop your theory?

History in middle school, HS and college. Why does it matter what lectures? I went to the Library of Congress for documents on family background shyt, found more interesting stuff out about this subject when searching for family info.

 

[Ghost Utmost]

History in middle school, HS and college. Why does it matter what lectures? I went to the Library of Congress for documents on family background shyt, found more interesting stuff out about this subject when searching for family info.

So Its just a coincidence that there is a whole movement spearheaded by YouTube geniuses that shares the same flawed premise.

Well hopefully the facts that you have been presented will start to penetrate and you'll do a little more studying

You're completely wrong on this one tho