Is it wrong to stick up for people whose ancestors had slaves or give money to people whose ancestors had slaves or give money to people who had ancestors that traded slaves?

237

• (edited )

https://www.thoughtco.com/the-trans-atlantic-slave-trade-44544

from link

"The transport of slaves from Africa to the Americas forms the middle passage of the triangular trade. Several distinct regions can be identified along the west African coast, these are distinguished by the particular European countries who visited the slave ports, the peoples who were enslaved, and the dominant African society(s) who provided the slaves."

"Between 1450 and the end of the nineteenth century, slaves were obtained from along the west coast of Africa"

slavery ended in 1865

https://immigrationtounitedstates.org/327-african-immigrants.html

http://immigrationtounitedstates.org/uploads/posts/2011-05/1305662242_immigration-from-africa.jpg

1900 - 2008 time frame

If slavery ended in 1865 and what I posted above happened in 1900 - 2008 - many of those that came here might of had ancestors that had slaves and sold slaves to jews and/or whites alone if not blacks (in africa especially). That means reparations and/or etc alone could be going to blacks that had ancestors that had or sold slaves to whites, jews, and/or blacks (in africa alone for blacks).

Basically any reparations alone if they were paid could be going to blacks that came here after slavery had ended in 1865 or between 1900-2008 alone. Basically paying people who weren't slaves themselves and their ancestors (black) had and/or owned / traded slaves.

The title to this now. Many of the blacks alone in America could of had ancestors that owned and/or traded slaves.

It doesn't make sense to put all black people into this realm at all. I'm not saying anyone pay them anything either. More or so that if anyone does pay money they could be giving it to someone that never was a slave them self or their ancestors were never slaves, but their black ancestors owned and/or traded slaves to others if not just other blacks in africa alone.

Many people virtue signal and such alone not realizing many blacks in America alone could of had ancestors that owned and/or traded slaves in africa. Their ancestors were also never slaves and their ancestors bought, traded, and/or sold slaves if not just owned them as their slaves.

side note: Also many whites were slaves in north africa to as well.

https://face2faceafrica.com/article/the-shocking-history-of-enslavement-of-1-5-million-white-europeans-in-north-africa-in-the-16th-century

side note: many Irish and/or whites for that matter were slaves in America alone to as well.

https://www.globalresearch.ca/the-irish-slave-trade-the-forgotten-white-slaves/31076

If you get into it an Irish with ancestors that were slaves could of technically virtue signaled for blacks (never were slaves) whose ancestors bought, traded, sold and/or owned slaves for that matter in africa. As well as the Irish person donating (could of) money or something like that to as well through some various situation alone.

https://www.thoughtco.com/the-trans-atlantic-slave-trade-44544 from link "The transport of slaves from Africa to the Americas forms the middle passage of the triangular trade. Several distinct regions can be identified along the west African coast, these are distinguished by the particular European countries who visited the slave ports, the peoples who were enslaved, and the dominant African society(s) who provided the slaves." "Between 1450 and the end of the nineteenth century, slaves were obtained from along the west coast of Africa" ----- slavery ended in 1865 ----- https://immigrationtounitedstates.org/327-african-immigrants.html http://immigrationtounitedstates.org/uploads/posts/2011-05/1305662242_immigration-from-africa.jpg 1900 - 2008 time frame ----- If slavery ended in 1865 and what I posted above happened in 1900 - 2008 - many of those that came here might of had ancestors that had slaves and sold slaves to jews and/or whites alone if not blacks (in africa especially). That means reparations and/or etc alone could be going to blacks that had ancestors that had or sold slaves to whites, jews, and/or blacks (in africa alone for blacks). ----- Basically any reparations alone if they were paid could be going to blacks that came here after slavery had ended in 1865 or between 1900-2008 alone. Basically paying people who weren't slaves themselves and their ancestors (black) had and/or owned / traded slaves. The title to this now. Many of the blacks alone in America could of had ancestors that owned and/or traded slaves. ----- It doesn't make sense to put all black people into this realm at all. I'm not saying anyone pay them anything either. More or so that if anyone does pay money they could be giving it to someone that never was a slave them self or their ancestors were never slaves, but their black ancestors owned and/or traded slaves to others if not just other blacks in africa alone. Many people virtue signal and such alone not realizing many blacks in America alone could of had ancestors that owned and/or traded slaves in africa. Their ancestors were also never slaves and their ancestors bought, traded, and/or sold slaves if not just owned them as their slaves. ----- side note: Also many whites were slaves in north africa to as well. https://face2faceafrica.com/article/the-shocking-history-of-enslavement-of-1-5-million-white-europeans-in-north-africa-in-the-16th-century ----- side note: many Irish and/or whites for that matter were slaves in America alone to as well. https://www.globalresearch.ca/the-irish-slave-trade-the-forgotten-white-slaves/31076 ----- If you get into it an Irish with ancestors that were slaves could of technically virtue signaled for blacks (never were slaves) whose ancestors bought, traded, sold and/or owned slaves for that matter in africa. As well as the Irish person donating (could of) money or something like that to as well through some various situation alone.

(post is archived)