The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Was America's Brutal Racial History Really That Brutal?
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From the New York Times opinion section:

America’s Brutal Racial History Is Written All Over Our Genes
Our country has struggled to reckon with the horrors of the past. Could DNA tests help?

By Libby Copeland
Ms. Copeland is the author of “The Lost Family: How DNA Testing Is Upending Who We Are.” She has written about the consumer genetics testing industry for the Washington Post, Time and Slate.

Feb. 16, 2021, 5:00 a.m. ET

The consumer genetics testing company 23andMe this month announced that it is going public through a merger with a company founded by the billionaire Richard Branson, in a deal that valued it at $3.5 billion. This was just the latest big deal for the industry: Last year, the Blackstone Group acquired a majority stake in Ancestry, a 23andMe competitor, for $4.7 billion…

The debate around race consuming America right now is coinciding with a technological phenomenon — at-home genetic testing kits — revealing many of us are not who we thought we were. Some customers of the major DNA testing companies, which collectively have sold 37 million of these kits, are getting results that surprise them.

…Some people are discovering their ancestors were Black, or Jewish.

… Our country, riven by wounds old and new over centuries of racist mistreatment, hasn’t figured how to acknowledge the full horrors of the past and all the ways those horrors continue. The images from the Capitol Hill incursion drove that home…

Recent research conducted by 23andMe demonstrates how America’s brutal history is revealed through our genes. While the majority of enslaved people brought to the Americas were male, the study found enslaved women had a disproportionate impact on the gene pool of their descendants, evidence of the systematic rape and sexual exploitation of enslaved Black women. “Our genes tell a story that’s unflinching,” said Anita Foeman, a professor at West Chester University who studies people’s experiences with consumer DNA testing.

The NYT article cited shows that black slaves were treated far better in the US than in most other parts of the New World:

The scientists calculated that enslaved women in the United States contributed 1.5 times more to the modern-day gene pool of people of African descent than enslaved men. In the Latin Caribbean, they contributed 13 times more. In Northern South America, they contributed 17 times more.

What’s more, in the United States, European men contributed three times more to the modern-day gene pool of people of African descent than European women did. In the British Caribbean, they contributed 25 times more.

This genetic evidence, the scientists say, may be explained by local practices. In the United States, segregation between enslaved people and the European population may have made it more likely that the child of an enslaved mother would have an enslaved father. But in other regions where enslaved men were less likely to reproduce, dangerous practices like rice farming — in which harsh conditions and muddy fields made it easier to drown, and malaria was common — may have killed many of them before they could have children.”

Back to the new op-ed

A 23andMe study from 2015 revealed that close to 4 percent of the company’s customers who identified as white Americans had at least 1 percent African ancestry, consistent with an African ancestor within the last 11 generations or so. About 12 percent of whites from Southern states like South Carolina and Louisiana had 1 percent or more of African ancestry.

The Harvard scholar Henry Louis Gates Jr. has calculated that there are millions of contemporary whites who, “according to the old, notorious ‘one- drop rule’ of the Jim Crow era, would have been considered legally ‘black’” — proof not only of the absurdity of that definition of difference, he writes, but of the power of modern science to blow up false narratives about race and about American history. If modern DNA tests had existed during the heyday of mainstream eugenics in the early 20th century, Dr. Gates and others have suggested, they might have served as direct repudiation of that pseudoscience.

Ackshualllllllly … David Reich’s 2015 article cited by Ms. Copeland found that the average self-identified black customer of 23andMe is 73.2% black and the average self-identified white is 0.19% black. So, the average black is 385 times blacker than the average white.

In the long run, the United States of America was the best thing that ever happened to the black race. There are now about 100 times more blacks in the U.S. than were brought here in slave ships. The number of world famous blacks in America must be similarly more numerous than the number of world famous blacks in Africa.

 
Hide 356 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. El Dato says:

    Some customers of the major DNA testing companies, which collectively have sold 37 million of these kits, are getting results that surprise them.

    “The population of underserved minorities is increasing on a daily basis.”

    Europe: Peaceful immigration and diversity since Neanderthals is written in the genes.
    USA: Brutal Auschwitz Ambient since 1619 is written in the genes.

    But life goes on, and so does the writing.

  2. So? How much African DNA do I need before I can use the “N” word with impunity?

    • Replies: @Hubbub
  3. …Some people are discovering their ancestors were Black, or Jewish.

    That’s f’ing BS. My 23andMe results matched exactly what my family lore predicted. (German, Scandinavian, and Scots-Irish… but not that kind of Scots-Irish!) The idea that there is a vast underwater-iceberg of blackness or Jewishness in America is propaganda to make them seem less minoritarian. Black Lives Matter? Why, yes, that you, don’t you know!?

    • Replies: @Chrisnonymous
  4. It’s funny when people talk about their indignation at the rape of their great^4-grandmother, when they’re descended just as much from the guy who raped her.

  5. How can we confront our brutal past when the Amy Coopers of today are allowed to roam free?

    https://nypost.com/2021/02/16/charges-against-central-park-karen-amy-cooper-dismissed/

    • LOL: Kylie
  6. Gamecock says:

    ‘Our country, riven by wounds old and new over centuries of racist mistreatment, hasn’t figured how to Our country, riven by wounds old and new over centuries of racist mistreatment, hasn’t figured how to acknowledge the full horrors of the past and all the ways those horrors continue. and all the ways those horrors continue.’

    Nah. No one is riven. People live in the present, and have dreams for the future. The past dealt with the past.

    E.g., things happened at the Nuremberg Trials that I don’t like. But that was then; this is now. Redoing the Nuremberg Trials makes no sense. ‘acknowledge the full horrors of the past’ makes no more sense.

    Do you wish to compel me to acknowledge that Preston Brooks was a bad guy? Well, okay. Whatever.

    Ms Copeland seems to believe that the twitterverse is the real world. That her woke fringes of pop culture is where everyone dwells. All but a handful yawn over this silliness. But we have a concern about Kommie Harris sharing her views.

  7. AndrewR says:

    2^11 = 2048 so if your most recent African ancestor waa 11 generations ago you’d be less than 0.05% black

    Why can’t the NYT handle sixth grade math?

  8. @International Jew

    It’s like when Jews complain about their great great grandmother being raped by a Cossack. Are they complaining or are they bragging about their Cossack ancestry?

    • Agree: Not Raul
    • Replies: @International Jew
  9. You are saying that a black man brought over from Africa to the US to work as a chattel slave which is a most unpleasant state of existence physically and psychically actually enjoyed a stroke of great good luck because of the large number of his great-great-grandchildren who are no longer enslaved. In other words, his painful existence is outweighed by the happiness of his large progeny.

    That strikes me as an eccentric and heartless opinion.

  10. Bill P says:

    Most of the slaves brought to the US would have been sacrificed if they hadn’t been purchased and transported to the new world. Most American slaves’ transported ancestors embarked at the port of Whydah in contemporary Benin), which was under the control of the king of Dahomey for most of the duration of the slave trade.

    The king of Dahomey’s religion required yearly sacrifices to his ancestors in which hundreds – sometimes thousands – of captives were slaughtered. These sacrifices were called the “customs,” and none other than the New York Times wrote sensational accounts of them:

    March 2, 1861

    The Royal Mail steamship Ethiope, with the mails from the West Coast of Africa, arrived at Liverpool Feb. 11.

    Another of those horrible massacres, which are a disgrace to humanity, had taken place at Dahomey. The West African Herald publishes, statements from eye-witnesses of the barbaric “custom” just perpetrated at Dahomey. From this fearful narrative we learn that the recent “grand custom” of BADAHUNG, King of Dahomey, was one of the most revolting which had ever taken place. Several persons agree in stating that the number of persons slain on the occasion was estimated at 2,000, but another correspondent gives the number at 7,000. He says he was present by compulsion, and that the blood swept past him like a flood into a large reservoir. Another gentleman, referring to these in human butcheries, says: “I assure you it made me quite sick, and at the same time I felt stunned. The poor wretches met death with perfect indifference.” The Herald, which gave Government notice through its columns many months since of the intention of the King of Dahomey to hold an unusual “grand custom,” in remembrance of the death of the late King, concludes the recital of these butcheries by slating that “Consul FOOTE has come out with full powers to ‘treat’ with the King of Dahomey as to the abolition of these human sacrifices.” A correspondent, who is well acquainted with Dahomey, says: “The best way to ‘treat’ with the King is to ‘squelch’ him, deal fairly with the natives, and let the custom die out.”

    https://www.nytimes.com/1861/03/02/archives/the-massacres-at-dahomey.html

    Those who were sold into slavery were the fortunate ones. If their lives had not been purchased, they surely would have been put to the sword.

    Naturally, the narrative surrounding the Atlantic slave trade omits this fact. I don’t know what difference it would make if people knew that black Americans are descended from condemned men and women who would have been killed to satiate the bloodlust of an African king if they hadn’t been purchased by Europeans, but it would put a lot of things in perspective.

  11. Trinity says:

    (((23andMe))) is about as legit as the Biden presidency. Another scheme to make money and tell everyone that we all beez one race, the human race, yo.

    • Agree: Juckett
  12. Assuming all female slave were “raped” by their masters is only true if you define rape as a powerful person exploiting their position of power in order to have sex with a less powerful person.

    Like Willie Brown’s relationship with Kamala Harris.

  13. In general, the United States of America was the best thing that ever happened to the black race.

    Yep.

    Ingrates.

  14. Wilkey says:

    The debate around race consuming America right now is coinciding with a technological phenomenon — at-home genetic testing kits — revealing many of us are not who we thought we were. Some customers of the major DNA testing companies, which collectively have sold 37 million of these kits, are getting results that surprise them…Some people are discovering their ancestors were Black, or Jewish.

    I would bet that there are more whites being surprised by how white they are, than whites surprised to find some “exotic” (am I allowed to use that word?) ancestor in the gene pool.

    Yes, some people are finding out they have Jewish ancestry. But that shouldn’t really be surprising, since Jews have been living in Europe since Roman times. It shouldn’t be any more surprising than finding out you have any other random European ethnicity in your bloodstream. My father is ancestrally very, very British, but stuck in the gene pool somewhere is a great-great-great grandparent (iirc) who was Hungarian. Interesting – and more surprising to me than having a Jewish ancestor – but my jaw didn’t exactly hit the floor.

    But there are a lot of white people who were probably told they have Native American ancestry, or possibly even black ancestry, who are suddenly finding out that they don’t have any, and I would bet that those people outnumber the opposite cases. My wife’s family had some lore of a Native American ancestor, but when her parents took one of these tests they both found out they were 100% European.

  15. I don’t know about rice farming, but sugar production in the Caribbean was a real horror. Life was brutal and short. A few years for the field hand literally worked to death.

    “Liberty’s Exiles: American Loyalists in the Revolutionary World” by Maya Jasanoff

    Many reviews emphasize the portion of black exiles. The book covers the black side a lot as well, but they are only a fraction of the Loyalist diaspora.

    • Agree: Not Raul
    • Replies: @Paperback Writer
  16. Anonymous[333] • Disclaimer says:

    As someone pointed out here before, can you imagine what America would be like if the slave traders had gone with SE Asian slaves (which was an option)? The average American would look more like Keanu Reeves and the cities would be safe and beautiful and we wouldn’t have had to spend trillions on social welfare since the mid-60’s with negative results.

    • Agree: Bernie
    • Replies: @Unladen Swallow
    , @Polistra
  17. Wilkey says:
    @Paul Mendez

    Assuming all female slave were “raped” by their masters is only true if you define rape as a powerful person exploiting their position of power in order to have sex with a less powerful person.

    Yes, it was the slavery itself that was the crime. Within the context of that relationship even the slave women may not have thought of it as rape. The sad fact is that, historically, a very large percentage of human reproduction all across the world was in conditions that wouldn’t be considered consensual by modern, Western standards. That’s still true in many places even today.

  18. Anonymous[337] • Disclaimer says:
    @Wilkey

    Always omitted is miscegenation with blacks particularly was a very serious crime and social death for virtually all from the very rich to the most poor rural southern church goers. This persisted well into the 1970s.

    In the rare instance it occurred, it was often with free black women in brothels of towns with few if any other women. Abortion was still rare then, likely at similar levels as throughout history and dictated by war, famine etc.

    People generally lived and died within 30 miles of their birthplace and seldom survived into their late
    40s.

    • Replies: @Anon
    , @Art Deco
  19. As Mel Gibson taught us, they did not have their FREEDOM!

    And that is the most important thing. Better to kill a man than break him, your people now subjected to cringe for not having that common sense.

    • Agree: Anonymouse
    • Replies: @Anonymous
  20. @Paul Mendez

    I ‘aint sayin’ she’s a goldigger…

  21. In general, the United States of America was the best thing that ever happened to the black race. There are now about 100 times more blacks in the U.S. than were brought here in slave ships.

    May be true, but black people were definitely not the best thing to happen to the United States. I view them more as just another invasive species to the New World that brought catastrophic results like the Emerald Ash Borer or Chestnut Blight.

  22. In general, the United States of America was the best thing that ever happened to the black race.

    And, in general, the black race was the worst thing to happen to the United States of America.

    • Agree: Polistra, syonredux
    • Replies: @Trinity
  23. @Wilkey

    All good points. It’s possible that an exotic ancestor may very well be present in many people’s lines, but at some point the testing renders it statistically insignificant.

    We may have a new business in forged ancestries to prove one’s bona fides however. Elizabeth Warren is likely just an early and brazen example.

  24. Family trees are more fun for easily faking ancestry since so few people use historical documentation, but rather copy from sites of amateur enthusiasts. The familysearch site e.g. has me descended from Ojibwe chiefs, Charlemagne, and—in one line that clearly connects to some mythical heraldry—Marc Antony. Lots of other kings and famous nobles scattered in there as well

    • Replies: @Graham
  25. Bernie says:

    The black population in the U.S. soared from 750,000 in 1790 to 4.5 million in 1860 – not exactly the “genocide” we are taught it was.

    • Replies: @syonredux
  26. The scientists calculated that enslaved women in the United States contributed 1.5 times more to the modern-day gene pool of people of African descent than enslaved men. In the Latin Caribbean, they contributed 13 times more. In Northern South America, they contributed 17 times more.
    In the British Caribbean, they contributed 25 times more.

    What a contrast between Latin American/British Caribbean slavery and American slavery.

    As for the 1.5x more, female repro success is way greater than male anyway.

    American slavery protected female virtue more than Mother Nature herself.

    https://psmag.com/environment/17-to-1-reproductive-success

    • Replies: @BCB232
  27. @Paul Mendez

    Nice. I’m beginning to sympathize with Rosie. Lots of woman-hatred here.

    • Troll: ScarletNumber
  28. Rob McX says:
    @International Jew

    People of mixed race in public life (e.g. Obama) identify with their black parents or ancestors, and they assume that it was the whites who did the raping in the days of slavery.

  29. AP says:
    @Wilkey

    My wife’s family had some lore of a Native American ancestor, but when her parents took one of these tests they both found out they were 100% European.

    Probably accurate but this isn’t certain. If a particular native group left few Native descendants but lots of European ones it’s genetic footprint could be counted as European in the database. My wife, for example, has all blonde blue-eyed Slavic ancestors except for a great-grandmother who belonged to an obscure Asian ethnicity. Her half-Asian grandfather looked like a Mongol, her father looks like a white-skinned Mestizo and my wife has European features but dark “Asian” hair and round but dark eyes (from the back, she can pass for a pale Japanese girl). But 23andMe says she is 99.9% European. This is probably because there are lots of Russians with a little bit of her Asian background but few full-blooded people of that ethnicity in her database, so it just gets counted as “Eastern European.”

    I suspect there might be a similar situation with some of the smaller Indian tribes who might have mixed with American settlers. How many Pequots would have gotten into 23andMe?
    From the back).

  30. Jack D says:
    @Wilkey

    My wife’s family had some lore of a Native American ancestor, but when her parents took one of these tests they both found out they were 100% European.

    It’s extremely common (and not just among pathological liars seeking pecuniary advantages like Elizabeth Warren) for American whites to have family lore claiming Amerindian ancestors and for DNA tests to reveal that the family lore is false. From the earliest days, American Indian blood was nothing to be ashamed of. Indians were brave warriors.

    Until recently at least, family lore almost NEVER claimed that white people had black ancestors, especially not falsely – no one was going around inventing imaginary black ancestors. If there were any, this was a shameful thing. They were never spoken of and the knowledge was not passed on thru the generations if at all possible.

  31. syonredux says:

    In general, the United States of America was the best thing that ever happened to the black race. There are now about 100 times more blacks in the U.S. than were brought here in slave ships.

    Yup. Blacks in mainland Anglo-America experienced tremendous natural population growth (I.e., growth via people having babies). In contrast, the sugar islands in the Caribbean were population sinks for Blacks, with plantations having to be constantly replenished with fresh Black bodies from Africa (For example, roughly half the Black population in Haiti at the the time of the 1791-1804 Revolution was born in Africa).

    About 12 percent of whites from Southern states like South Carolina and Louisiana had 1 percent or more of African ancestry.

    Louisiana is not exactly representative of the Anglo-American South. It’s racial mores (Somewhat more permeable racial lines, greater acceptance of intermediate shades of Blackness/Whiteness, etc) were more in line with those in Latin America.

    South Carolina also had a lot of cultural connections to the Caribbean:

    While Carolina did receive migrants from other colonies and the British Isles, its most important early influx came from the British sugar islands in the Caribbean, particularly Barbados. The Barbadian families gave the burgeoning colony a Caribbean influence which remained important up to the Civil War.

    In the 1790s the political turbulence in Europe brought numbers of political refugees to South Carolina. Republican radicals from France and Ireland were a large element of this group, but the largest was those fleeing the slave revolution of the French colony of St. Domingue (Haiti). These French-speaking refugees and their slaves made a major impact, particularly in Charleston.

    https://www.scencyclopedia.org/sce/entries/immigration/

    • Replies: @Federalist
    , @vinteuil
  32. @Chrisnonymous

    Come. On.

    Really, Steve-o? I’m the first comment and sitting in moderation? F’ing BS moderation.

    • Replies: @Jon
    , @Jim Christian
  33. @Paul Mendez

    That’s correct. I always wondered how many of the so-called “rapes” of black women that blacks have been complaining about since the 1960s were just “arrangements” whereby the Marse of the young Marse would fancy one of his field slaves for a roll in the hay.

    It wasn’t just the power imbalance that would compel compliance from the black woman. For at least a little while, she didn’t have to chop cotton in the hot sun along with all the other field hands. If her owner took a real fancy to her, she could get a permanent job in the “Big House” with its much better working conditions.

    Kamalah Harris, had she been in that situation, would maximize her value as a “high yeller” to snag such a position.

  34. About 12 percent of whites from Southern states like South Carolina and Louisiana had 1 percent or more of African ancestry.

    That seems highly unlikely, at least with respect to Louisiana.

    For most white people, a significant part of one’s ancestry will come from more recent European immigrants. For example, if I have a grandparent whose parents were born in Germany and immigrated to the Unites States in the early 2oth Century, I can safely assume that at least one-quarter of my ancestry is white only. If I can trace an additional grandparent or set of great-grandparents directly to Europe, then at least half of my ancestry is exclusively white.

    A portion of a white Louisianan’s ancestry can usually be traced to European groups that were not recent immigrants and were present prior to the Louisiana purchase such as Acadians, non-Acadian French, Spanish, Germans, etc. However, when members of any of these groups had mixed race children, these children and their descendants were virtually always identified as either black or mixed race (i.e., not white). So, whites and blacks may often have a common ancestor but that ancestor is almost always white. In other words, whites may have black “cousins” but hardly ever black ancestors.

    Finally, a white Louisianan may have “American” ancestors who came from elsewhere within the United States since the Louisiana Purchase. This is particularly true in the case of New Orleans, which attracted a lot of internal migration. A white ancestor from, for example, the Midwest is highly unlikely to himself have any non-white ancestry.

    • Replies: @Charlotte
  35. Anon[272] • Disclaimer says:

    I’m sure there are many white people with one percent black genes, but it may not be possible to determine this with DNA tests. Razib Khan wrote about how reported ancestries below 5 percent were unreliable because of the essentially probabilistic statistical way the tests work. This may have improved with more granular sampling of different population groups, but still, one percent is pretty small.

    It amounts to a form of holocaust denial, but I’ve always doubted that everyday life was that bad for American slaves, on average. I think life was pretty hard for everyone back then. But things like the Uncle Remus stories don’t seem like they came from a place of constant torture and lack of any social or family life. The same with things like the food traditions.

    There are no blacks remaining from the huge number sold to Arabs because those guys just cut their balls off as a matter of course. I think the survival rate from the procedure was worse than the Middle Passage. Given the dryness of the climate, I keep waiting for a headline, “Archeologists mull newly uncovered huge midden of human testicles.”

    • Replies: @fnn
  36. For most of human history, the world was a brutal place for almost EVERYBODY.

    As for the slave trade, there’s evidence that British colonialists (and probably also the French) were much nicer than the Spanish and Portuguese, who often could be quite brutal.

    As for today’s Blacks, they’re very lucky to be here. If not for the slave trade, they’d be living in poor African villages.

    As for mating with slave women, British men seemed to be relatively sexually restrained and (more importantly) had access to their own women. In contrast, the Spanish and Portuguese were huge horn dogs who’d bang anything that was unfortunate enough to cross their paths. Very over the top in their lecherousness and perversion, which resulted in the creation of hordes of mulattos and mestizos. Also, they didn’t bring their own women.

    Anecdotally, there seems to have been a difference in sexual aggression between Northern and Southern Whites. Northern White Men often felt Puritanical shame towards their urges, while Southern men were into the whole “good ole boy” thing. Like Bill Clinton, Strom Thurmond, Roy Moore, etc. However, instead of sleeping with slave women, White Southern plantation owners had affairs with White servant girls or kept secret mistresses. It may not be PC to say, but Black women aren’t hot, while there are lots of hot White Southern girls.

  37. @Jack D

    It’s extremely common (and not just among pathological liars seeking pecuniary advantages like Elizabeth Warren) for American whites to have family lore claiming Amerindian ancestors and for DNA tests to reveal that the family lore is false. From the earliest days, American Indian blood was nothing to be ashamed of. Indians were brave warriors.

    IIRC, this was an postbellum phenomenon in the U.S. South: a way of Southern whites tying themselves to the land as rightful inheritors of it after the humiliation of the War and during Reconstruction.

    After a generation or two it would be related as part of family lore in good faith. It seems utterly harmless unless and until it could be used as a chip by certain social climbers in the Affirmative Action derby.

  38. Anonymous[138] • Disclaimer says:

    The NYT article cited shows that black slaves were treated far better in the US than in most other parts of the New World.

    Indeed. American “slaves” enjoyed a higher standard of living than White people in France of the same time period.

    The truth is that blacks thrived in the antebellum South. The birth rates don’t lie.

  39. @Wilkey

    Why sad? There is a lot of space between rape and the modern western idea of consenuality. I’d don’t see that this idea is objectively the right standard.

    • Agree: ScarletNumber
  40. Anonymous[671] • Disclaimer says:
    @Bill P

    Gives a whole new meaning to Johnny Rotten’s celebrated quip about “two and a half minutes of squelching”.

  41. I remember quite a few years ago arguing in a paper I wrote on public health issues that in Darwinian terms the single black mother who started having children young, had children by several fathers, and who had several children were arguably the most successful Americans as they would provide genes to the largest number of future Americans.

    The consensus in the public health community was of course that young women should desist from having babies so that they could obtain an education and become economically productive citizens.

  42. By the way, there has been a huge amount of sexual mixing between Middle Easterners (Arabs, Berbers) and Blacks in North Africa (Algeria, Morocco, Tunisia, Sudan, Egypt, Somalia, Ethiopia, etc). In much of the gulf (especially Yemen), the same type of mixing often took place.

    In many of the above cultures, wealthy Middle Eastern men sometime take Black or mixed-race women as concubines. The view among them is that Middle Eastern women make respectable wives, but Black women are sexually promiscuous and wild in bed. So keeping Black concubines makes sense, from their perspective.

    If men weren’t so horny 24/7, there’d be fewer mixed-race people.

  43. Rob McX says:
    @Bill P

    I wonder how today’s NYT would deal with Badahung’s spectacular holocaust…”Experts find no direct link between 7000 deaths and human sacrifice”.

    • Thanks: cronkitsche
    • Replies: @Rob McX
    , @AnotherDad
  44. Abe says:

    how to acknowledge the full horrors of the past and all the ways those horrors continue. The images from the Capitol Hill incursion drove that home…

    Steve had a post on Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s new book last week. The cynical part of me wants to say the Ferguson-Hirsi Ali’s must have needed money to put in a new pool-hot tub combination. The really cynical part of me wants to say that despite the impeccably pro-American, pro-West credentials of this conservative intellectual powercouple, what are the chances their children DO NOT resort to claims of intersectional victimhood at some point in their lives, if not to get into an Ivy now then certainly to advance their careers further down the road, with the cherry on this particular sh!t sundae the crocodile tears sure to wet the daughters’ head-coverings as they recount mommie’s anti-Islamic bigotry and how they may never recover from the trauma of being denied clitorectemies in their pre-teens.

    Mostly, though, I just want to bash my head against the nearest concrete wall at being forced to go round and round in this same retarded circle. Yeah, it’s 2003 again! Let’s recycle the same books and articles by intersectional conservatives about how mean Islam is and then recycle the same debate club nerd fact checking-sans-actual-facts rebuttals from THE NEW YORK TIMES and WASHINGTON POST. Can we next have a why-Islam-is-mean-from-the-gay-perspective long read by Andrew Sullivan followed by a rebuttal by Frank Bruni? And then a why-Islam-is-mean new atheist/rationalist hot-take from Sam Harris followed by brave, devastating clapback on why new rationalists are all icky neck-beards and Afghani immigrant polygamists are the real male feminist allies by Jessica Valenti? Maybe then we can go to war against a Muslim country that never attacked us, recoil in disgust at the colossally wasteful folly of such an enterprise, elect a populist President vowing to break the Invade-the-World/Invite-the-World cycle, have him soft-liquidated by the Deep State, after which I’ll pick up my copy of Hirsi Ali’s next…

    I go off on this tangent because when thinking last week about Hirsi Ali’s new book I surprised myself to recall she had been collaborating with Theo Van Gogh on his next film before he was butchered like a pig in the street by a Muslim fanatic. I can pretty much guarantee you every midwit journalist chick who considers herself a card-carrying member of the Notorious RBG fan club would have had a reprint of STARRY NIGHT hanging on her wall at some point in her life. Thus you’d think the brutal martyrdom of the great-grandnephew of one of the most beloved artists in history for the principle of free speech would count for something. But, no, it’s been completely memory-holed and in its place we cycle over the sick, neurotic fantasies of the Megaphone Holders as to what “really happened” on Jan 6 at the Capital. Yes, there is no proof Officer Sicknick died of injuries sustained during an altercation, yes, we the lying media even used the medical condition-related demise of several demonstrators to pad our body counts, but when you “really think about it” QAnon Shaman’s strutting around the place like he owned it was “redolent” of him kidnapping AOC and abusing her for 6 months in his sex dungeon, itself reminiscent of the interracial rape recounted in that historical monograph THE COLOR PURPLE (redolent and reminiscent being examples of the sort of weasel words, WE, the megaphone-holders get to use to imply causality while making YOU, a deplorable, run 30 years of meta-studies before acknowledging there is maybe, possibly a teensy arrow of causality between BLM and the 2014-2020 rise in murder rates). The horrors, oh the horrors that continue on even today- I mean, if you really think about it….

    • Replies: @Jack D
    , @Achmed E. Newman
  45. I must confess that it was satisfying to get back my results from 23andMe, confirming that there were no negroes in the proverbial woodpile.

  46. @Wilkey

    I would bet that there are more whites being surprised by how white they are, than whites surprised to find some “exotic” (am I allowed to use that word?) ancestor in the gene pool.

    Yes, some people are finding out they have Jewish ancestry. But that shouldn’t really be surprising, since Jews have been living in Europe since Roman times. It shouldn’t be any more surprising than finding out you have any other random European ethnicity in your bloodstream. My father is ancestrally very, very British, but stuck in the gene pool somewhere is a great-great-great grandparent (iirc) who was Hungarian. Interesting – and more surprising to me than having a Jewish ancestor – but my jaw didn’t exactly hit the floor.

    The retail genealogy tests are deceptively marketed – they’re really good at identifying your relatives, but the ancestry part of it is speculative horsesh*t at best. The latter relies upon the self-reporting of pools of populations which is itself suspect.

    One way to conceive of the ancestry part that is more accurate is to state that the results show that the test taker shares genetic markers with a certain ethnic population as it has self-reported itself to be, rather than being necessarily descended from that population in the past. Ergo, if your test shows 50% Ashkenazi ancestry and you were raised an Italian Catholic you should probably (or not depending upon circumstances) have a discussion with your mother. If, on the other hand, it shows a very small percentage of shared genetic markers, it probably simply means that there was a shared ancestor at some point whose genes made it into the self-reported Ashkenazi/Italian/whatever pool as well as your own.

    I have heard from people whose results have changed in the same service over time as the genome database has expanded, erasing up to 5% ancestry results that they had previously returned. (Not to mention that you will frequently get different results from each of the well-known retail services).

    Recall also that one of the services was issuing the reports to U.S. Southern Whites with a <1% Subsaharan African result just to screw with them (justifying it on the grounds that 0% is less than 1% so it was technically accurate).

    • Thanks: Polistra
  47. Anonymous[138] • Disclaimer says:
    @Nigerian Nationalist

    And that is the most important thing. Better to kill a man than break him, your people now subjected to cringe for not having that common sense.

    What do you mean by this? Is it better to be dead than to be employed by someone else? Most people would choose employment. That in fact was the choice most American “slaves” made.

    American “slaves” were not broken. In most cases, they were part of the family and community. They had economic and personal well-being and security beyond the wildest dreams of most of the rest of the world at that time.

    • Replies: @Jon
  48. Rob McX says:
    @Rob McX

    Or “Festivities in Dahomey Coincide With Spike in Homicide”.

    • Thanks: cronkitsche
  49. Well….

    I am not 100% certain all these tests are accurate for European ethnic components. But, it is of not much importance…

    As far as I’ve seen, whites doing these tests are 100% white. They are sometimes surprised by discovering some unsuspected European ancestor. And virtually all have 1% Finnish ancestry. “In like a Finn…”

    Mulattoes & Mestizos are frequently astonished how much white ancestry they have. Blacks/mulattoes look pretty confused, while Mestizos are, generally, glad.

    Real Asians rarely do these tests; mixed Euro-Asians do.

    Mixed couples, especially in Britain, seem to be fond of this stuff.

    • Replies: @Jon
  50. Mike Tre says:

    Repatriation would solve pretty much everything.

  51. @International Jew

    I’m the descendant of a raped slave and I’ve also always found this rather curious. I don’t feel any particular indignation since I carry just as much rapist DNA as I do of the rape victim.
    So it goes.
    We sat next to the legitimate family of said rapist in church for my entire childhood. It never occurred to me that I was entitled to air any grievances.

    • Replies: @Curle
  52. @Jonathan Mason

    The US teen pregnancy rate has fallen by ~75% over the last 30 years. Mostly because everyone is too busy with their electronic devices (smartphones, iPods, iPads, video games, etc) to hang out.

    “Fast Times at Ridgemont High” is a realistic glimpse at what the culture was like before all the screens and helicopter parents.

    Teens definitely still have sex, but only occasionally. They spend a lot of time texting each other or conversing on social media.

    That has had a huge impact on the fertility rates of young working-class women of White, Black, and Hispanic descent. Even after they get married or move in with someone, they frequently have abortions to control their family sizes. Contrary to popular stereotype, it’s not college-educated White women who have a high abortion rate, rather it’s less affluent women from non-white (especially Black) backgrounds. Abortion is highly eugenic.

    If abortion providers were more easily available and affordable (especially in the South), that would have a eugenic impact. When Southern politicians attempt to tighten up abortion restrictions, the impact is to create more low-income Blacks.

  53. Dr. X says:

    Compared to what the Mongols did, the Romans did, the Ottomans did, the Japanese did to Korea and China, and to what the National Socialists did, America’s racial history is not brutal at all, but benevolent.

    The U.S. made treaties with Indian tribes and gave them sovereign lands; it ended the slave trade it inherited from the British in 1808; it amended its constitution to emancipate Negroes in 1865, and to guarantee them the right to vote in 1870; and it gave Indians citizenship in 1924.

    The U.S. could have exterminated every last Indian and Negro man, woman, and child — like the Jews did to the Amalekites — but chose not to because it was a Christian nation populated by fundamentally decent people.

    • Agree: Polistra, HammerJack
  54. nebulafox says:
    @Wilkey

    Well, Genghis Khan did not win the gene lottery because he was super-skilled at seduction. Of course there was a lot of straight-up rape. There always is with slavery, no matter the time or place or culture. The women are human property. By definition, they have no legal right to say no to whatever their master wants (be it for himself or his son or his guests), and physical resistance would have lead to torture and death. Rape was *expected* to the point of the mundane, by both slave and master, throughout most of human history.

    But we’re deluding ourselves if (a) slave women never sought out opportunities to improve their lot in life by becoming concubines, and (b) we think America is in any way special here. Even if we speak strictly about the African slave trade-what about the French in Haiti? The Portuguese in Brazil? The Spanish in the Caribbean? The Ottoman nobility and court? The Arabs, going back all the way to the Middle Ages and the days of the Zanj? Are we really supposed to believe that the dynamics for captive women in any way differed from the laments of the Trojan women being loaded onto the ships?

    One of the reasons pre-modern soldiers in all civilizations really looked forward to sacking enemy cities was sex. I don’t think I need to tell anybody with basic historical awareness what mixing horny, angry, and brutalized young men with young women destined to be slaves would mean. For Pete’s sake: the Old Testament has price guidelines on slaves, male and female. Slavery has been a very sad part of the human story for the overwhelming majority of human history, and sadly has not been completely erased in some parts of the world today. Especially with the sex trade. You think a lot of prostitutes in places like Mumbai or Dongguan are there because they want to be?

  55. @Bill P

    Does this mean that Africa was not sending their best?

    • Replies: @bruce county
  56. Somewhat interesting to know that neurotic Jewish yowling about how their Others don’t like them is now trumped by neurotic black yowling about how their Others don’t like them.

    • Replies: @Not Raul
  57. @Bill P

    From Wikipedia

    As many as 4,000 were reported killed In one of these ceremonies in 1727.[5][6][7] Most of the victims were sacrificed through decapitation, a tradition widely used by Dahomean kings, and the literal translation for the Fon name for the ceremony Xwetanu is “yearly head business”.[8]

    Yearly head business (Knock-out game, anyone?)

    Schedule
    By day, according to Yoder.[1]

    Procession from Cana
    Private receptions or levées
    Parade through Great Square, more petitions
    Historical songs sung by court singers
    Parade of the king’s wealth
    Distribution of wealth, including slain captives
    King reviews troops
    Display of king’s wealth

    Distribution of wealth, including slain captives (Ritual, white statue toppling?)

    I say it again, we are witnessing primitive tribal behavior wrapped in the language of erudite, woke liberals.

    Erudite, but still foolish. ” … and the great beast lay immotile from all the ropes and chains wrapped about its torso. The townspeople hid behind whatever cover they could find. One or two, then a few more, crept towards it until close, whence they could dash forth and quickly touch some part of the creature, and then flee back to their imagined refuge secure and proud in the knowledge they had challenged nature.”

    Or something.

  58. Wilkey says:

    The consensus in the public health community was of course that young women should desist from having babies so that they could obtain an education and become economically productive citizens.

    Children born to teenage mothers tend to do poorly because of who their parents are, not because they were born to teen parents, per se. I can rattle off the names of plenty of friends who were either born to teen parents, or who became teen parents themselves. They’ve all managed to do just fine – some are even quite successful. But then I was raised in an upper middle class home in upper middle class communities, so there is that.

    If you’re a doctor, lawyer, engineer or even just some reasonably well-educated person and your teenage daughter gets knocked up by a boy from a similar background you probably have little need to worry. Don’t make them feel ashamed and give them a little help to get established, if at all possible, and they will do just fine. I would be far more worried about having a daughter (or son) grow up to be 40 and childless.

    • Replies: @ScarletNumber
  59. tyrone says:

    0.19%…..big woop….3%to 4% neanderthal …….do you ever find yourself staring into a campfire in rapturous wonderment ?

  60. nebulafox says:
    @Paul Mendez

    An intern or work subordinate has legal rights. Slaves were human property. What rights they had, if any, were more ignored than not.

    Yes, there was a grey area, in the Hobson’s choice sense. Throughout history, whenever one population is at the mercy of another, some women in the former inevitably recognize that the quickest route to a better life is getting protection with a man from the latter: better one wolf than being vulnerable to the whole pack, be they soldiers or random guests of the master. If possible, some semi-official mistress status that could ensure a degree of security. But we’re deluding ourselves if we don’t think that some men from the latter just didn’t take whatever they felt like rather than bothering with the niceties. Even in the relatively civilized world of the 19th century, human nature hadn’t changed that much.

  61. Jack D says:
    @Abe

    The Capitol Hill Insurrection was just the Democrat talking point of the week and the jornolists of America had to weave that point into every possible article. You have to be very creative sometimes – writing an article about ice cream in the Food section – maybe the late Officer Sicknick loved ice cream before his brutal murder that was ordered by by Donald Trump? Etc.

    That was last week. What with the failure of the impeachment and the inconvenient revelations that Officer Sicknick may have died of natural causes, it’s on to the next talking point. It will be as if they never really cared about Officer Sicknick (who under other circumstances would have been portrayed as a brutal pig) and were just using him as a prop. What is Kamala Harris’s favorite ice cream flavor?

  62. Anonymous[141] • Disclaimer says:

    Dude, even for you, this is a little extreme. I doubt anyone would have volunteered for a slave ship transit.

    P.s. And spare me with the “they had slaves in Africa”. Yes, sure. But what did it mean that there was a huge market for slaves in Brazil, Caribbean and US? It meant market demand. The beginning of Roots is very much on target in terms of that demand feeding back into Africa.

    • Agree: notsaying
  63. MEH 0910 says:
    @Wilkey

    My wife’s family had some lore of a Native American ancestor, but when her parents took one of these tests they both found out they were 100% European.

    It’s possible to have a genealogical ancestor from whom you have no genetic inheritance. Of course, family lore is not to be taken as seriously as researched genealogy.

    https://thegeneticgenealogist.com/2009/11/10/qa-everyone-has-two-family-trees-a-genealogical-tree-and-a-genetic-tree/

    Q&A: Everyone Has Two Family Trees – A Genealogical Tree and a Genetic Tree

    […]
    DNA is randomly passed down from generation to generation. A parent does not pass on their entire genetic makeup to a child; as a result, bits and pieces of DNA are lost in each generation.

    Cousins will only share DNA if they happen to have randomly inherited that DNA from their shared ancestors. With each generation that separates the cousins, the probability that they share DNA decreases, because with every generation it is more likely that they will not inherit DNA from their ever-more-remote shared ancestors.
    […]
    In reality, everyone has two family trees. The first is a Genealogical Tree, which is every ancestor in history that had a child who had a child who had a child that ultimately led to you. Every decision made by every person in that tree contributed to who and what you are today.

    However, not every person in that tree contributed a segment of your DNA sequence (because of random inheritance, as discussed above). As a result, we have a second family tree – a Genetic Tree – which is a tree that contains only those ancestors who contributed to our DNA.

    • Thanks: Voltarde
  64. kihowi says:
    @Paul Mendez

    Slave owners didn’t need to rape anybody.

    Unless “being clearly powerful and wealthy and socially way above all the other men” is abusing your power, then yeah they raped a lot of women.

    It’s a bit like “hey see that blonde over there? The perfect 10 with the big tits? Yeah she can’t get laid and has to resort to rape. Watch out dude.”

  65. Wilkey says:
    @nebulafox

    You really don’t even have to go that far. In most of the world women were considered the property of their parents, usually the father, and sometimes, absent a father, even just the closest male relative, who had, at minimum, veto rights over their choice of husband, and often simply chose for them.

    If slave women had still be living as in Africa would their choice of spouse have been any more consensual than it was as slaves in America? Probably not. We have no way of telling. We would have no way of telling through the genetic record since either way the fathers of their children would have been black.

    • Replies: @Rob McX
  66. Though it states something very obvious to those who know a decent amount of history, putting in this paragraph was a gutsy move, Steve, even on your unz-based blog here. No, it shouldn’t be. It ought to quiet those who give you a hard time about not being tough:

    In general, the United States of America was the best thing that ever happened to the black race. There are now about 100 times more blacks in the U.S. than were brought here in slave ships.

    What this won’t do for you is help your chances to get hired by the NY Times, if that was one of your life goals. What color is your parachute?

  67. @Jack D

    They’ve always got their fallback Kung Flu PanicFest to put us in our places, Jack. It’s only a year old- good for a decade, probably, if the SDHTF otherwise.

  68. Whiskey says: • Website

    There were far more White women in Boston than the Bahamas. Plus black women are the least desired of all races.

    The study just measured the paucity of desirable women.

  69. syonredux says:
    @Wilkey

    But there are a lot of white people who were probably told they have Native American ancestry, or possibly even black ancestry, who are suddenly finding out that they don’t have any, and I would bet that those people outnumber the opposite cases. My wife’s family had some lore of a Native American ancestor, but when her parents took one of these tests they both found out they were 100% European.

    My father always thought that he was part-Cherokee, and, since he was from Oklahoma, I granted the family lore on the topic a certain level of credence. But a DNA test bought by me for my Dad’s birthday revealed that he was 100% European (Mostly English), without the slightest trace of Amerind.

    • Replies: @ATate
  70. The 1619 project advances the notion that the Revolutionary War was fought over slavery. Under this theory, the Brits are the good guys, the emancipators, versus the evil colonialists who want to keep D’Aquan in chains. It’s hilarious–the Brits ran a thriving slave colony in Jamaica until 1833–but also worth noting that this is precisely what British children are taught in schools. So 1619 is essentially a British psy-op.

  71. indocon says:

    Number of slaves important to USA is about the same as the number imported into Jamaica, let that sink in.

  72. @syonredux

    Louisiana is not exactly representative of the Anglo-American South.

    Happy Mardi Gras.

    (12% of white Louisianans having black ancestry is almost certainly incorrect. See my comment if/when it gets out of moderating purgatory).

  73. Two more things, on-topic, but unrelated to each other:

    1) The big implication here that is completely wrong is that the racial history of the US is any major part of our history in other than the South to begin with! For centuries, black/white relations werent’ any big part of most Americans’ lives. It’s a another lie of misplaced priority, just as Black History Month is. My boy is just plain sick and tired of it, and he is telling me how many more school days he has to put up with this crap for. (I believe it’s 9, counting today.)

    2) I wonder how much longer these 23andme outfits will be able to keep their integrity. Besides being bought up by big woke corporate business, once slave reparations get brought up, and they will, the plan will be to use all this data to work out who owes whom money. There will lots of room for corruption with these tests. Yes, doing this would be complicated, but we got computers now.

    If we’re gonna do this, though, it would save a lot of money and time for the US Feral Gov’t to implement the Peak Stupidity Reparations Plan. Here’s the gist of it:

    Our plan, and yes, it’s a generous one, is ONE MILLION DOLLARS of reimbursement to every living American who has been a slave. That money will be collected from all living Americans who have owned black slaves, with an option for a payment plan with monthly reparations coupons. Not every former slave owner can come up with the money required by next April 15 (the cruelest day). Of course, reparations contributions will be pro-rated based on years of slaveholding practices, while reparations payouts will be pro-rated by years of jumping-down-turning-around-picking-bales-of-cotton.

  74. One has only to observe that the Africans who were sold into slavery are far more prosperous than the Africans who sold them.

    • Agree: Rob McX
  75. anon[110] • Disclaimer says:

    The original work force for English North America consisted of indentured people from the British isles. When the English wound up in control of small islands such as Nevis and St. Kitts they also imported workers via the same system. There are various claims as to who first smuggled sugar cane into the Caribbean from the far East – Jewish merchants are one likely possibility but there are others.

    The agricultural work involved in sugar cane is heavy, and the diseases of the tropics were not at all understood in the 17th century. But what did happen was brutally obvious: a man or woman might have a fairly good chance of surviving a 7 year term of indenture in Virginia, but almost no chance at all in the islands. Word got back from the sugar islands to the British islands that indenture to the sugar plantations was death in a couple of years. Soon it was all but impossible to obtain indentured workers from England / Scotland / Wales / Ireland or anywhere on the Continent for that matter.

    Enter the slave trade, operating on the not unreasonable notion that black Africans would not die nearly as fast on a tropical sugar plantation compared to English peasants. It worked well enough, and the rest literally is history.

    As a post script, when the king of France really wanted a city established on the lower reaches of the Mississippi and few were willing to volunteer, he ordered the gaols of Paris combed for potential colonists. The criminals who got caught, in other words. Thus most of the original settlers of New Orleans were petty thieves, inferior gamblers, muggers, robbers, cut throats and of course…prostitutes. For some reason the first settlement didn’t work out too well. Go figure.

    • Thanks: baythoven
  76. @Jack D

    In Canada between 2006 and 2016 more than 500,000 formerly white people claimed they were now Indians, rather than white. That goes hand in hand with the 350,000 Metis ( half breeds) who sued the government so they could be declared Indians, too.

    Indians in Canada are so oppressed that everyone wants to be one.

  77. this is about lucrative shakedowns, not facts, reason, or logic. they sue America, not third world dumps with no money to win in lawsuits. there aren’t any sports leagues or universities in third world dumps worth suing. what are top shelf affirmative action lawsuit victories worth in third world dumps? they want permanent AA and free money and moral superiority over US institutions, where it matters, not in the caribbean or latin america.

    View post on imgur.com

    • Replies: @The Alarmist
  78. The historical reality that seems to lie behind the hallucinatory bumph is an actual ante-bellum South given to a kind of pseudo-medieval romanticism in which the black slaves played the role of the ideal serf while their masters were the lords and ladies of Victorian historical fiction.

    Mark Twain — who was hardly sympathetic to the system but was familiar with it — apostrophized the Old South as suffering from ‘Sir Walter Scott Disease.’ That’s of a piece with the archeological and historical evidence suggesting black slaves were relatively well-treated, usually not terribly interested in escaping, etc. They were cast as the mentally limited but beloved and devoted serfs in a pseudo-medieval fantasy.

    I don’t think the whole thing could have lasted — too at odds with the values and the economics of the times. Then too, my description is wildly over-simplified and omits great chunks of Southern society.

    But the point is the South really wasn’t the proto-Auschwitz modern commentators try to paint it as. Inaccurate as it too may be, Gone with the Wind would be a lot closer to the truth than Django Unchained.

    • Replies: @Redneck farmer
  79. Gordo says:
    @Jonathan Mason

    Remember what P.J.O’Rourke said about making cat food free?

  80. Rob McX says:
    @Wilkey

    What can be said about sexual consent/coercion applies equally to the question of human labour. Chattel slavery was not a qualitatively unique institution. It was at the extremity of a continuum of servitude. In Europe there was serfdom and villeinage. When America had black slaves, England had ten-year-olds working in factories and mines for twelve hours or more a day. “Free” workers could quit their if they chose, but if they did they would starve.

    • Agree: Jonathan Mason
    • Thanks: Voltarde
    • Replies: @Voltarde
    , @Jonathan Mason
  81. vinteuil says:
    @syonredux

    Blacks in mainland Anglo-America experienced tremendous natural population growth…

    A little appreciated point.

    The British historian David Starkey recently got into
    big trouble for remarking in an interview that “slavery was not genocide – otherwise there wouldn’t be so many damn blacks in Africa or Britain would there? An awful lot of them survived…”

    Indeed. And, in America, they not only survived, but multiplied and prospered. Funny sort of genocide!

    But blacks must be worshipped as the victims to end all victims, so they are entitled to every sacred title of holy victimhood. So Starkey was pilloried.

    • Replies: @james wilson
  82. @Rob McX

    I wonder how today’s NYT would deal with Badahung’s spectacular holocaust…”Experts find no direct link between 7000 deaths and human sacrifice”.

    Mostly peaceful sacrifices.

  83. Spangel12 says:
    @International Jew

    It is pathetic. If all 19th century white male ancestry that present day blacks have was caused by white male masters raping their slaves and servants, then it’s black descendants of slaves who are descended from the slave holding rapists, not the 98% of white Americans that do not have an American slaveholding ancestor.

    Realistically everyone everywhere has a rapist ancestor, hundreds of such ancestors probably. No one race comes out looking more victimized if we make that the mark of Cain.

    • Agree: Not Raul
    • Replies: @Rob McX
  84. Gamecock says:

    Geneology. For the purpose of proxy trials of people from the past.

    As we just had a proxy impeachment of the former president.

    ‘acknowledge the full horrors of the past’

    As the nephew of a great historian, I am pleased to see her interest in history. A rare trait these days. Maybe she can get others interested.

  85. Voltarde says:
    @Rob McX

    Similarly,

    Impressment

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impressment

    Impressment, colloquially “the press” or the “press gang”, is the taking of men into a military or naval force by compulsion, with or without notice. European navies of several nations used forced recruitment by various means. The large size of the British Royal Navy in the Age of Sail meant impressment was most commonly associated with Great Britain and Ireland. It was used by the Royal Navy in wartime, beginning in 1664 and during the 18th and early 19th centuries as a means of crewing warships, although legal sanction for the practice can be traced back to the time of Edward I of England. The Royal Navy impressed many merchant sailors, as well as some sailors from other, mostly European, nations. People liable to impressment were “eligible men of seafaring habits between the ages of 18 and 55 years”. Non-seamen were sometimes impressed as well, though rarely.

    Shanghaiing

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shanghaiing

    Shanghaiing or crimping is the practice of kidnapping people to serve as sailors by coercive techniques such as trickery, intimidation, or violence. Those engaged in this form of kidnapping were known as crimps. The related term press gang refers specifically to impressment practices in Great Britain’s Royal Navy.

    • Thanks: Rob McX
  86. @Jack D

    From the earliest days, American Indian blood was nothing to be ashamed of.

    Jack, you have a lot of experience in urban areas, but this was really not true of the first generation of half-breeds in country areas. Then, there was a lot to be ashamed of. However, it passed quickly and after another generation of mixing was forgotten. This was mostly a cultural thing, rather than a racial one. There is no one drop rule for Injuns.

    With blacks it’s different, as Steve Sailer knows but continually misrepresents. You could look 100% white but still be thought of as black.

  87. In general, the United States of America was the best thing that ever happened to the black race. There are now about 100 times more blacks in the U.S. than were brought here in slave ships.

    I wish that weren’t true. But alas …

    This is the key rhetorical point that needs to be given in rejoinder to every black whine–more broadly to all the minoritarian lies:

    The big beneficiaries of American slavery are American blacks.

    Some–long dead–white slave owners and traders made a good living at the time. Wealth that was mostly wiped out in the Civil War. But American blacks were removed from Africa where they would have been slaves or human sacrifices and moved to America, where they had a huge 100X population expansion and live at levels of prosperity that no African nation, no black nation can produce.

    Slavery was a big loser for white Americans. We’ve netted Civil War, high levels of violent crime, huge social welfare costs, wrecked cities, civil strife and toxic–probably fatal–minoritarian politics.

    • Thanks: Seneca44
  88. Bill P says:
    @Wilkey

    My family genealogy book claims we have Pocahontas in the family tree. I don’t know whether it’s true, but it seems plausible, since my first direct-line paternal ancestor to come to the colonies arrived in Jamestown in 1610. Not having any Indian ancestry at all would seem unlikely.

    As for Jewish ancestry, it’s very hard to say what exactly that means, because Jews have a whole lot of European ancestry. For example, an entire Hungarian sect converted to Judaism hundreds of years ago, and all their descendants are counted as Ashkenazi Jews in Jewish DNA data today. Therefore, if you have Hungarian “jewish” ancestry, you may simply be descended from the same people as the Szekely Sabbatarians rather than ancient Israelites.

  89. vinteuil says:
    @nebulafox

    Almost totally agreed – it’s just amazing, and a tribute to the power of propaganda, that most white gentiles today seem to believe that slavery was mostly something that their ancestors did to blacks.

    Just one quibble:

    …physical resistance would have [led] to torture and death.

    Ummm…I wouldn’t be too sure about that. I suspect that, for the sort of guys who were into raping slaves, a bit of physical resistance would have been just the ticket…

    • Replies: @nebulafox
  90. @International Jew

    IJ, too late for a study but is it possible that enslaved women in the South preferred to have a child with the masters of their fate, instead of a field hand? And, Ms Copeland reminds us that racism is the cause of slaves drowning in rice fields, because I guess they couldn’t swim. But, all of the photos I have seen of workers in a rice field, most often women, the water was at best mid calf deep. Sigh, whatever. Wasn’t joe biden the lifeguard at a rice paddy?

    • Replies: @AnotherDad
    , @anon
  91. Sigh.

    Steve and his many great commenters do an admirable job breaking down, refuting, and when appropriate mocking these NYT “White Man Bad” pieces, but sometimes I think it’s like spending 6 hours erecting a sandcastle by the ocean. Great job! And then high tide comes in and these people are right back at it the next day:

    “The Ice Cream Man: What the History of Mobile Soft Serve Sales Reveals about America’s Reckoning with Gender and Racial Inequality.”

    • Agree: R.G. Camara, HammerJack
  92. ATate says:
    @syonredux

    I love reading genealogy forums and this topic comes up a lot!

    It’s hysterical. “My Great Me-moo told me I was half Sioux!” and then much mental contortions follow to discount the DNA test and restore Memoo’s legacy.

    Too many people are disgusted by their own whiteness.

    Or they’ll have 68% British, 29.5% Northern European and 2.5% Broadly Western Asian & North African” and they’ll focus on their “blackness”.

    Gross.

    • Replies: @Bardon Kaldian
  93. @International Jew

    Why do they assume that the black woman was raped by her owner? Knowing black people, it’s not too far a stretch to imagine that she enjoyed it or eagerly sought it out. It’s not like black women, even today, are all that reticent about showing an interest in men, regardless of race.

  94. @Paul Mendez

    Or, the house slave had a great advantage over the field slave in work and advancement. Being mulatto was an advantage, just as it is still. Females in much of Africa did not rely on males to support them in the first place and they were given less reason to do so in America. Ergo female house slaves took the opportunity to lighten up their children further, advancing the female and her children. Sally Hemmings was essentially Caucasian and at least one of her children lived in Ohio passing for white.

    The great mixing of genes began in a small minority of slaves who evolved more white than black and did not spread to the general population of Africans until after the War, when mulatto women owned the field and spread the wealth. Rape had, comparitively, less to do with it than rational choice. One can see the women as victims, made helpless to make proper choices, or as coldly rational to advancing their lives. We see the same choice of frame today.

    • Agree: tyrone
    • Replies: @ScarletNumber
  95. Truth says:

    Well, these articles are fairly easily summarized with one question:

    If slavery was such a good thing, would you recommend the lifestyle for YOUR children?

    • Agree: notsaying
    • Troll: Spud Boy
  96. Anonymous[138] • Disclaimer says:

    In general, the United States of America was the best thing that ever happened to the black race.

    Steve, to protect yourself, you should correct this to capitalize the word “Black.” The assertion that blacks are a race can thereby be attributed to someone else. In fact, the claim is now attributable to the Powers that Be.

  97. @vinteuil

    A J Froude details in Bow of Ulysses the failure of Caribbean slavery to reproduce and the constant need for importing more slaves, a problem apparently not shared with American slavery.

    • Replies: @vinteuil
  98. PSR says:

    “Our country, riven by wounds old and new over centuries of racist mistreatment, hasn’t figured how to acknowledge the full horrors of the past and all the ways those horrors continue. ”

    Of course I know what the NYT would say about me, but honestly not one person I know cares a whit about this, except when they have to wade through made-up history.

  99. Anon[341] • Disclaimer says: • Website

    You are.missing the point. Americas racial history is horribly brutal compared to the progressive inclusive utopia that progressive urms aregoingvto bring us.

  100. from Lincoln’s Second Inaugural Speech “Fondly do we hope—fervently do we pray—that this mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away. Yet, if God wills that it continue, until all the wealth piled by the bond-men’s two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk, and until every drop of blood drawn with the lash, shall be paid by another drawn by the sword, as was said three thousand years ago, so still it must be said “the judgments of the Lord, are true and righteous altogether.”

    One hundred sixty years later commentators here blythely overlook the economic and existential reality Lincoln refers to.

    • Agree: notsaying
    • Replies: @anon
  101. @International Jew

    It’s hilarious that they just assume it was rape–and not, say, the more obvious situation: a low-level servant getting a crush on rich, powerful master and making herself available to him.

    As if whitey just can’t control himself around all that black flesh! Such projection of a female fantasy.

    In the real world, traditionally, female servants realized that becoming a liaison for a man of the house was a great way to get cushy work and better accommodations, and the females accordingly seduced when they could. I have no doubt most of these black-white pairings in slave days was precisely that: a female slave throwing herself at master in both passion and calculation.

    In England the scullery maid position was the worst in the house. It was low-level grunt work. The position usually filled by impoverished teenage girls on their first job and away from home. Such girls were a constant source of problems for the ladies of the house, because such girls had crushes and amorous, lonely attentions on the men of the house.

    Most girls didn’t last at the scullery maid position long, either due to the work being so hard they ran away or else they were dismissed after being caught in a willing indiscretion with another male member of the household.

    • Agree: Polistra
  102. The consumer genetics testing company 23andMe this month announced that it is going public through a merger with a company founded by the billionaire Richard Branson…

    “Virgin Genetics” has a nice ring to it.

    • LOL: Farenheit
  103. @Buffalo Joe

    Wasn’t joe biden the lifeguard at a rice paddy?

    And it wasn’t easy he had to see off both Rice Pop … and his sidekick Puffed Rice.

  104. anon[667] • Disclaimer says:
    @Buffalo Joe

    Wasn’t joe biden the lifeguard at a rice paddy?

    No, a corn field. Pop corn, in fact.

  105. Forget about those johnnies-come-lately blacks – what about the Slavs?

    https://www.etymonline.com/word/slave

  106. Race doesn’t exist, but “ethnicity” does.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/feb/16/covid-almost-2m-more-people-asked-shield-england

    Until now the NHS identified those most at risk on the basis usually of a single underlying health condition, such as specific cancers, together with age. But a more sophisticated modelling tool developed by the University of Oxford has shown that the shielding list should nearly double, adding 1.7 million people on the basis of multiple risk factors.

    Among the issues the model takes into account are ethnicity and postcode, which will give a measure of economic deprivation. There have been higher rates of death among people from black, ethnic minority and Asian communities and also people from poorer neighbourhoods with cramped housing. Body mass index will also be factored in, because obesity is known to increase the risk of severe illness.

    The NHS website goes into vast detail about the factors – but doesn’t mention the weightings. I presume these are ranked risk factors.

    https://digital.nhs.uk/coronavirus/risk-assessment

    Risk factors used are (Ranked IMHO from the most risky – YAA):

    Age
    Body mass index (BMI)
    Down’s syndrome
    Chemotherapy grade C
    Chronic kidney disease stage 5 with transplant
    Chronic kidney disease stage 5 with dialysis
    Chronic kidney disease stage 5
    Sickle cell disease or severe immunodeficiency
    Type 1 diabetes
    Type 2 diabetes
    Chemotherapy grade B
    Lives in residential or nursing home
    Bone marrow or stem cell transplant in past 6 months
    Cerebral palsy
    Motor neurone disease, multiple sclerosis, myasthenia gravis, or Huntington’s
    Dementia
    Ethnicity: Black African
    Ethnicity: Caribbean
    Chemotherapy grade A
    Ethnicity: Other ethnic group
    Radiotherapy in past 6 months
    Ethnicity: Other Asian
    Ethnicity: Indian
    Chronic kidney disease stage 4
    Cirrhosis of liver
    Parkinson’s disease
    Ethnicity: Bangladeshi
    Ethnicity: Pakistani
    Solid organ transplant (excluding kidney and bone marrow) – such as liver, lung, heart, pancreas, small bowel and heart-lung transplants
    Oral steroids (4 or more prescriptions in past 6 months)
    Epilepsy
    Ethnicity: Chinese
    Pulmonary hypertension or pulmonary fibrosis
    Respiratory tract cancer such as lung, laryngeal (larynx), nasopharyngeal or mouth cancer
    Townsend material deprivation score (5 points above national average)
    Homeless according to GP records
    Learning disability apart from Down’s syndrome
    Congestive cardiac failure (heart failure)
    Blood cancer (such as acute myeloid leukaemia, chronic myeloid leukaemia, acute lymphoblastic leukaemia, chronic lymphocytic leukaemia, Hodgkin lymphoma, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, multiple myeloma)
    Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)
    Peripheral vascular disease (also known as peripheral arterial disease)
    Stroke (including TIAs or mini strokes)
    Osteoporotic fracture (hip, spine, wrist, humerus) – fractures as a result of osteoporosis
    Severe mental illness
    Thromboembolism
    Chronic kidney disease stage 3
    Immunosuppressant medication (4 or more prescriptions from GP in past 6 months)
    Rheumatoid arthritis or SLE (systemic lupus erythematosus, more commonly known as lupus)
    Atrial fibrillation
    Leukotriene or long acting β agonist 4 or more prescriptions in past 6 months
    Rare lung conditions (bronchiectasis, cystic fibrosis, or alveolitis)
    Coronary heart disease
    Congenital heart disease
    Asthma
    Ethnicity: White

    The weightings can be seen here. “Ethnicity: White” does NOT seem to be a risk factor but rather the baseline against which other ethnicities are measured. Bit like IQ in fact!

    https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m3731

  107. @AnotherDad

    In general, the United States of America was the best thing that ever happened to the black race. There are now about 100 times more blacks in the U.S. than were brought here in slave ships.

    The population expansion does bring something to mind.

    I mock the Jewish–politically useful, but intellectually vapid–Black-Jewish Siamese twins of white oppression trope. (A prosperous middle man minority that tribally refuses to integrate with the majority and a slave race that the majority does not want to integrate with. Same thing!)

    But there’s more here than i give credit for:

    — Both Americans blacks and Ashkenazi Jews had huge–a couple orders of magnitude–expansions at the expense of their host white gentile populations. (Though the black one on much faster time scale. And the Jewish one had a rather unhappy ending.)

    — Both blacks and Jews have done really really well in America compared to the opportunities in their homeland … and are deeply grateful to white Americans for it.

  108. @AnotherDad

    “high levels of violent crime, huge social welfare costs, wrecked cities, civil strife and toxic–probably fatal–minoritarian politics”

    We have all those in the UK, too, without a history of importing African slaves to the UK. We imported former slaves over the last 60 years, then Africans, with results you can read about every night.

    https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/drill-rapper-bis-death-crosslom-davis-knife-crime-london-trial-b920002.html

    A drill rapper was stabbed to death in a “savage and merciless attack” hours after filming his latest music video, a court has heard.

    Crosslom Davis, also known as Bis, suffered at least nine wounds to his head, back and chest when he was set upon by four armed youths in a passageway in Deptford, south-east London, early on December 6 2019, the Old Bailey was told.

    Fans at the time expressed their grief and paid tribute on social media to the 20-year-old including England footballer Jadon Sancho.

    Prosecutor Brian O’Neill QC told jurors: “It was a savage and merciless attack.

    “Crosslom Davis did not stand a chance. The forensic pathologist who carried out the post-mortem examination of his body concluded that he had bled to death as a result of multiple wounds.”

    As someone said

    https://genius.com/Enoch-powell-rivers-of-blood-speech-annotated

    Nothing is more misleading than comparison between the Commonwealth immigrant in Britain and the American Negro. The Negro population of the United States, which was already in existence before the United States became a nation, started literally as slaves and were later given the franchise and other rights of citizenship, to the exercise of which they have only gradually and still incompletely come. The Commonwealth immigrant came to Britain as a full citizen, to a country which knew no discrimination between one citizen and another, and he entered instantly into the possession of the rights of every citizen, from the vote to free treatment under the National Health Service.

    Whatever drawbacks attended the immigrants arose not from the law or from public policy or from administration, but from those personal circumstances and accidents which cause, and always will cause, the fortunes and experience of one man to be different from another’s.

    But while, to the immigrant, entry to this country was admission to privileges and opportunities eagerly sought, the impact upon the existing population was very different. For reasons which they could not comprehend, and in pursuance of a decision by default, on which they were never consulted, they found themselves made strangers in their own country.

    They found their wives unable to obtain hospital beds in childbirth, their children unable to obtain school places, their homes and neighbourhoods changed beyond recognition, their plans and prospects for the future defeated; at work they found that employers hesitated to apply to the immigrant worker the standards of discipline and competence required of the native-born worker; they began to hear, as time went by, more and more voices which told them that they were now the unwanted. They now learn that a one-way privilege is to be established by act of parliament; a law which cannot, and is not intended to, operate to protect them or redress their grievances is to be enacted to give the stranger, the disgruntled and the agent-provocateur the power to pillory them for their private actions.

  109. Barnard says:

    Is there any good information on how Indians treated their black slaves compared to Southern whites? I just saw the video James Kirkpatrick posted to Twitter showing how Don Cheadle reacted when Henry Louis Gates told him his ancestors were owned by Chickasaw Indians and not whites. The crestfallen look he gave was hilarious.

    • Thanks: MEH 0910
    • Replies: @anon
    , @MEH 0910
  110. @Paul Mendez

    At least the female slaves got a good proper hot bath and shampooing with top shelf soaps and skin care products of the day before pleasuring their masters.

  111. vinteuil says:

    In general, the United States of America was the best thing that ever happened to the black race. There are now about 100 times more blacks in the U.S. than were brought here in slave ships. The number of world famous blacks in America must be similar more numerous than the number of world famous blacks in Africa.

    Well, at any rate, those blacks who were enslaved by other blacks and then sold to slave traders – the ones who who made it the USA were the lottery winners.

  112. The Harvard scholar Henry Louis Gates Jr. has calculated that there are millions of contemporary whites who, “according to the old, notorious ‘one- drop rule’ of the Jim Crow era, would have been considered legally ‘black’”

    This is exaggerated.

    About 12 percent of whites from Southern states like South Carolina and Louisiana had 1 percent or more of African ancestry.

    And many suspected it. Pitchfork Ben’s brother George Tillman made an impassioned speech in the South Carolina legislature about the potential dangers of the rule. It passed anyway, but in a less absolute manner. He had made his colleagues nervous.

    PASSING FANCY: In the Jim Crow South, courts understood that rigidly enforcing the rules against mixed marriage would have been a disaster—for whites.

  113. @Bill P

    As for Jewish ancestry, it’s very hard to say what exactly that means, because Jews have a whole lot of European ancestry.

    Basically all white Americans have some sort of Jewish ancestry. (There may be a few exceptions, but they are few.)

    Jewish defections were rare on a generational basis. If you defected you lost the Jewish business network and family associations. (Ashkenazi Jews built up a very gentile hostile religious and social culture to keep themselves Jewish against the strongly open-integrative pressure of Western Christendom.) Nonetheless there were defections and the typical white American is descended from basically everyone in Western Europe who was alive in the year 1000 and has surviving descendants. And then 1000 years prior to that, Jews were spread all over the Roman Empire in communities that were–in many cases–more open and had more direct associations with peoples.

    However, having ancestry and having DNA are two different things. 32 generations (a millennium) gives you 4 billion ancestors. (Many of whom are your ancestors hundreds or even thousands of times over.) While you only have 20K protein coding and maybe 50K total genes depending on what you count.

  114. Dmon says:

    Was America’s racial history all that brutal? Not compared to this.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mfecane
    My favorite Shaka factoid – after the death of his mother:
    “Shaka ordered that no crops should be planted during the following year of mourning, no milk (the basis of the Zulu diet at the time) was to be used, and any woman who became pregnant was to be killed along with her husband. At least 7,000 people who were deemed to be insufficiently grief-stricken were executed, although the killing was not restricted to humans: cows were slaughtered so that their calves would know what losing a mother felt like.”

    Under Shaka, the Zulus killed between 1 and 2 million black Africans, leaving much of the Transvaal basically empty and easy pickings for the Voortrekkers. Yet, in a blatant example of the ongoing racism that permeates our society, he is never listed among the all-time great exterminators. Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot – those guys get all the glory. But on a per capita basis, Shaka is right up there with them, and every one of the Zulu’s total was dispatched by hand with an assegai. The only reason the Zulus only accounted for 1-2 million is because that’s all the people that were within reach.

    • Thanks: Achmed E. Newman
    • Replies: @nebulafox
    , @anon
    , @Polistra
  115. nebulafox says:
    @vinteuil

    Yes: in addition to punishment if she annoyed or hurt the rapist, it wouldn’t have changed the outcome anyway.

    Again: most slave or otherwise subjugated women throughout most of human history would have known what was coming as part and parcel of life at the bottom for women. They would have known the futility and possible danger of resisting the attack. So, my guess is that they would have would have tried to simply get it over with as quickly as possible. And again, an additional motive on top of material benefits to becoming a mistress or concubine with semi-official status (and, if she was particularly lucky and ended up with a “benevolent” type, perhaps eventual freedom for herself and resulting children) would have been protection from other men in the master/conqueror class. Better one man than whoever your master decides to give to you as a reward or a comfort.

    • Replies: @Paul Mendez
    , @El Dato
  116. @R.G. Camara

    The scenario you describe is mathematically impossible.

    For it to happen, given the staggering degree to which European genes were imparted on African slaves, effectively, all black slave women would have to be having these liasons for “favorable positions”. Yet a slavemaster can’t give everyone a “favorable position”, whatver that means.

    You need to stop coping and hypothesizing about things you know nothing about.

    • LOL: R.G. Camara
  117. SLM says:
    @Jack D

    Re family lore about Amerindian ancestors, the other thing I’ve noticed is that the referenced ancestor is usually Comanche or some other warrior tribe. I’ve never heard anyone claim to be part Pueblo or Chumash.

    • Replies: @Jack D
  118. anonymous[754] • Disclaimer says:
    @AnotherDad

    What can be gained from this sort of whining? Blacks are going to be around in America.

  119. vinteuil says:
    @Truth

    If slavery was such a good thing, would you recommend the lifestyle for YOUR children?

    Depends on the alternatives, sport.

    (I pass over in silence the point that there is, quite literally, nobody here who thinks that slavery was a good thing, or who doesn’t deeply regret that any Africans were ever transported to America against their will.)

  120. nebulafox says:
    @AnotherDad

    >The big beneficiaries of American slavery are American blacks.

    Presuming your ancestors survived the slavery experience, which was far from a sure bet between the journey itself and the disease and the overwork…

    Now, I get your the point. And you aren’t alone in making it: Keith Richburg, himself black, said it back when he covered the African beat for the Washington Post in the 1990s. You can still look up his coverage on the chaos and misery of post-Cold War Africa in the WaPo archives. (Amazing they haven’t memory-holed that yet.) But come on. Leaving aside the morality of that argument, would we really have all of the social issues that we have with America’s black underclass if they were the descendants of people who came of their own free will, rather than being hauled over solely for personal profit, followed by a century of systematic discrimination by all official institutions in American society? I don’t think so. It’s not hard to connect that to how the changes of the 1960s and later decades, from economic hollowing to family implosion to drug addiction peddled by mainstream America, the same things wreacking havoc in poor white communities today, impacted poor black people harder and faster than anyone else. Just because blank-slate theory is bunk doesn’t mean genetics are deterministic, either.

    In truth, there’s an easy counterpoint to make to 1619-esque arguments on how America owes its power primarily to slavery without even digging back into the past. Brazil is the only country in the Western hemisphere to have imported more African slaves than the USA, and they abolished slavery over 20 years after us, without having a massive civil war over the issue. Northern Brazil today, I suspect, is a lot like what a surviving Confederacy would have eventually developed into: an undeveloped neo-feudal agrarian backwater, verging on dystopian levels of corruption and poverty. Why isn’t Brazil more economically powerful than the USA? It had more oppressed Africans. That should lay to rest any arguments about slavery somehow developing economic superpowers.

    In the end of his Pulitzer winning work on the American Civil War, James McPherson makes the point that the South was essentially correct in that they were on the side of tradition: in a global sense. An agrarian society with an unfree or semi-free bonded labor class was the default for most of human history. The North was following a new, industrialized model that made this anachronistic. It has to be stressed that this was revolutionary, and only being elsewhere pursued by a handful of Western European countries. Even then, a small percentage of the world’s population. The Civil War decided which camp America as a whole would end up in-on the side of human tradition, or the newfangled radical experiment.

    It turned out to be the right bet.

    • Agree: notsaying
    • Thanks: Rob
  121. Alfa158 says:
    @Wilkey

    I was surprised when I did my genetic profile. If I look in the mirror, I see Muammar Gadaffi with more of an Afro, so I was expecting some North African in my profile, but there wasn’t a trace of it. I was mostly central Italy around Rome, with about 20% Balkan and 5% Iberian.

  122. @Rob McX

    Yes indeed! Charles Dickens was sent to work in a blacking factory at the age of 12 to pay off his father’s debts, while the rest of his family was held in the debtors prison to which Dickens returned at night.

    And hard work and whippings never did him any harm, as he went on to become a world famous author and dramatist.

    Yet strangely enough when he visited America in the early 1840s, he was very much opposed to slavery as practiced in the United States, and remarked on the classified ads for runaway slaves who were frequently identified by various forms of mutilation and injury.

    • Replies: @Bardon Kaldian
  123. @nebulafox

    …an additional motive on top of material benefits to becoming a mistress or concubine with semi-official status …would have been protection from other men…

    In the book, Defiance: the Bielski Partisans, one of the female partisans recalled the women learned to pick a boyfriend as quickly as possible. The bigger and badder the better. Either that or have every man in the camp watching you bathe and trying to crawl into your bed each night.

  124. @R.G. Camara

    There’s slavery still around today as well as millions of servants whose autonomy is barely better than slaves. It seems there are still plenty of complaints of rape from these people held in bondage, which seem believable. Plenty of ISIS female captives risked their lives and health to escape their captors, and they say they feel nothing but hatred for them, not a desire for them. When you look at the men who are still enslaving- in Darfur, in the middle east- there are numerous accounts of unwanted sex from obviously traumatized victims. Now, it’s entirely possible that calculation to become a man’s concubine and hatred of the man coincide. But it’s also entirely possible that when in a situation that there are zero consequences for rape to the rapist, it happens.

    In an American slave plantation, it wasn’t just the owner who could get away with raping female slaves , it was almost any white man in the vicinity- relatives who stayed for a night, other businesspeople who happened to be on the property etc. Any one of them could have knocked a few too many drinks back and basically gotten away with anything with black female slaves. I would be surprised to learn that only a small percentage of black-female/white male offspring from the 19th century were not conceived through coercion or outright force. Women, black women included, rarely go about setting out to seduce men. It’s men who are the initiators in sexual relations 99% of the time. When successful initiation requires as much or as little as a man wants to invest in it, he probably invests little.

  125. Rob McX says:
    @Spangel12

    If all 19th century white male ancestry that present day blacks have was caused by white male masters raping their slaves and servants, then it’s black descendants of slaves who are descended from the slave holding rapists…

    That’s why blacks commit more sex crimes – their white ancestors are to blame.

  126. nebulafox says:
    @Dmon

    Brutal? Certainly. Out of line with the overwhelming majority of human history. No. Modern people have a hard time truly comprehending how harsh human society has been to its lowliest members for the overwhelming majority of our time on the planet. Slavery must be looked at in this context: as the worst of any number of nasty statuses you could have in a time where a 13 year old could be hung in England for stealing a loaf of bread. It’s precisely *because* stuff like indentured servitude was dying out in the spirit of the Enlightenment that slavery began to stand out more, as a unique form of evil, and led to abolitionist sentiment-above all, in the Northern USA.

    Compared to contemporaries? I also don’t think so. I’ve seen Brazilian sugar plantations. Sugar plantations were miserable places to work, to the point where masters in the US could scare slaves with the threat of selling them to one. And unlike the British, the Portuguese were in the habit of deporting hardcore felons-we’re talking uniformly young, malignant, and male serial murderers and rapists and violent robbers, not petty debtors or child pickpockets and prostitutes-to the colonies and letting them having free reign over the slaves. The slaves also outnumbered the Europeans heavily in a way they never did in the US (I believe the highest it ever got was a roughly 1:1 ratio in South Carolina), leading to a siege mentality in the owner class. The only way to prevent uprisings, in their mind, was to take a “Crassus” approach to the slaves. American owners never had to deal with those kinds of demographics.

    So, overall, the culture of institutionalized sadism that developed in Brazil (and Haiti, where everything above minus the criminals also applied) as a result seemed to lack any equivalent in the US (and in British owned Jamaica), however horrific certain masters could be.

  127. El Dato says:
    @nebulafox

    OT:

    I hear that ‘Central Park Karen’ has been released from the reeducation sessions. Apparently the brain tunings were successful, she is no longer afraid of “bird watchers”.

    Also, some black in Congress goes full brainless and “sues Trump over Capitol riot under Civil War-era KKK Act, says he ‘suffered emotional distress’”.

    The optics are fantastic, more like this.

  128. … Our country, riven by wounds old and new over centuries of racist mistreatment, hasn’t figured how to acknowledge the full horrors of the past and all the ways those horrors continue. The images from the Capitol Hill incursion drove that home…

    I’ll take a radical position here. Just as there wasn’t anything remotely “horrific” about the Capitol Hill incursion, slavery in the US was not an endless series of horrors. Slave holders paid for their slaves. Those slaves were an integral part of the economy of the slave holding family. Slaves weren’t beaten, starved or otherwise mistreated as part of some bizarre entertainment or sadistic ritual. That would have made absolutely no sense. Furthermore, men and women of that era were significantly more aligned with Christian morality, owning a slave notwithstanding.

    The life of a slave was qualitatively the same as that of any of the indentured servants in 18th century America.

    • Replies: @scrivener3
  129. Ragno says:

    Haven’t checked all the responses, so my apologies if this is a dupe of somebody else’s comment; but the last word on the matter goes to the late Muhammad Ali, who – having won the Rumble in the Jungle vs George Foreman in Zaire, returned to the United States and was asked by a reporter, “Champ, what did you think of Africa?” Ali replied with his usual animated bluster, “Thank God my granddaddy got on that boat!!”

  130. This genetic evidence, the scientists say, may be explained by local practices. In the United States, segregation between enslaved people and the European population may have made it more likely that the child of an enslaved mother would have an enslaved father.

    More accurately, U.S. legislation outlawing the transatlantic slave trade in 1808 made it desirable thereafter for slaveholders to encourage their slaves to be fruitful and multiply. Slaves were valuable livestock – any replenishment of their numbers henceforth had to result from breeding them domestically.

    In other parts of the world where African slaves were held, their conditions were less favorable. The Arabs, for example, routinely gelded male slaves. Little value was placed on the fecundity of the slave population. If more slaves were needed they were simply imported.

  131. The idea that slaveowners regularly raped their female slaves is widespread, but evidence for it is rarely cited. As others here have mentioned, these relationships may have been consensual, but it is also possible that the rate even of consensual sexual relations between masters and slaves has been exaggerated.

    In the 1970’s, Fogel and Engleman wrote in Time On the Cross that interracial sexual relationships on plantations, though they obviously occurred (Thomas Jefferson being the most famous example), were much more uncommon than often supposed. According to them, most of the white ancestry in American blacks came from free black women who worked as prostitutes or had illicit relations with poorer white men. Slaveowners often frowned on such relationships because they undermined the discipline that a well-functioning plantation required

    • Replies: @Polistra
  132. Muggles says:

    Slavery is common in human history. It still exists in a few places, usually unmentioned or not acknowledged.

    Sexual exploitation is part of that, not always but certainly sometimes. Even children, especially noted in accounts of Muslim pirates who raided small towns in the Mediterranean.

    We often — nearly always — in accounts of ancient warfare read about ‘booty’, war spoils. Until the late Middle Ages this was often mainly human slaves. Abrahamic religions (Christian, Jewish, Muslim) wren’t supposed to enslave co-religionists but this seems to have been often violated.

    Also, some servitude conditions were technically not ‘slavery’ though were close to it.

    Only the extremely desperate would volunteer to be slaves at any time or place. But it was common and existed in all racial categories. Slave markets followed conquering armies.

    Fairly modern ‘commercial slavery’ for labor was a recent addition. Though not unique to European slavers just in Africa. Slaves were routinely used for agriculture.

    Legal importation of slaves to the US ended over 200 years ago. Legally abolished over 150 yeas ago. Almost zero descendants or freed African slaves chose or sought to return to Africa, since few had any remembrance of family or being there.

    Yes, they started out with nothing, but generations later they have much the same status as anyone else. Asian immigrants in the 19th century were also racially discriminated against and usually were dirt poor, spoke no English, had no family here. Yet they do not continue to blame their failings today as individuals on those origins. Their failings are not exceptional.

    As we all know, there are some people who live for the excuses they can use to justify their personal failings or laziness, envy, etc. In our families and in all races. Why this is now a major tenant of Woke Religion is merely convenient. The High Priests of Woke are all power hustlers and grifters, using whatever they can invent to create ‘enemies’ ripe for plundering and guilt mongering.

    You can’t change history.

    • Replies: @nebulafox
  133. Anonymous[194] • Disclaimer says:
    @nebulafox

    One of the reasons pre-modern soldiers in all civilizations really looked forward to sacking enemy cities was sex. I don’t think I need to tell anybody with basic historical awareness what mixing horny, angry, and brutalized young men with young women destined to be slaves would mean. For Pete’s sake: the Old Testament has price guidelines on slaves, male and female. Slavery has been a very sad part of the human story for the overwhelming majority of human history, and sadly has not been completely erased in some parts of the world today. Especially with the sex trade. You think a lot of prostitutes in places like Mumbai or Dongguan are there because they want to be?

    The old Soviet soldier’s Rape Rule was “from 8 to 80.”

    When I was a child, in the early ’60’s, I would visit my grandparents in Inglewood. Their neighborhood was still chock full of German women who had immigrated after the war. My grandmother had become friends with quite a few of them, and we would make regular visits to the neighborhood German women, who often had one or more kids and no husband around.

    At that time, German women who wanted the hell out of Germany would allow themselves to fornicate with US servicemen, to enable them to emmigrate more quickly to America. More than half the time, rather than meeting up with their new “fiancé” in the states, the soldier was never heard from again. Lots of German girls in Inglewood with a kid, looking for a husband. Often harder for then to secure, since american men knew their backstory without it being shared by the German women.

    As a kid, I noted quite a few of them acted strangely, that is, highly submissive. As if they felt if they made one wrong move, something terrible could happen to them. Even when speaking with my saintly little old grandma.

    I remember a couple of kids I played with. One was the most aryan-looking white-haired girl, and the other was this little boy with jet-black hair, porcelain white skin. He looked just like baby Hitler. All he needed was the mustache, and he was good to go. Extremely happy little guy, but his mom seemed like a neurotic wreck, looking back on it. Submissive, and always ready to cry.

    Some of the German women would tell their absolutely horrible stories to my grandma, and she took it upon herself to help them out when she could. Some of their submissive behavior was remarkable, almost comical, as I still remember it to this day. I guess I was in a way fortunate to be able to witness the historical discharge of unchecked evil that black people never really experienced, with the unrelenting raw intensity of the women and men of East Germany at the close of the war, and beyond.

    That is, I know what real hell looks like. As a child, I saw it in the eyes of many, many German women. I never forgot it.

    • Thanks: JohnnyWalker123
  134. anon[298] • Disclaimer says:
    @Barnard

    Is there any good information on how Indians treated their black slaves compared to Southern whites?

    Probably only anecdotal, like the Cheadle / Gates video.

    We know that the Civilized Tribes took their slaves with them on the Trail of Tears, and that they still refused to give them up later on. Stand Watie’s Indian forces were still fighting Union troops after Lee had surrendered to Grant. Fighting for their way of life, which included slaveholding.

    • Thanks: cronkitsche
  135. anon[298] • Disclaimer says:
    @Dmon

    Agree with all of the above except for this detail:

    Shaka is right up there with them, and every one of the Zulu’s total was dispatched by hand with an assegai.

    Not true. Many Zulus who were killed on Shaka’s order were impaled, and many of them went to death loudly singing Shaka’s virtues, so strong was the brainwashing. The similarities between Shaka Zulu and Stalin are notable.

    • Replies: @Rob McX
  136. Mike Tre says:
    @Anonymouse

    “You are saying that a black man brought over from Africa to the US to work as a chattel slave”

    …was already a slave in Africa, bound to a rival tribe of Africans that almost certainly did not feed and shelter him to the extent that his new southern masters did. His masters in Africa would have likely tortured, raped, killed and eaten him (for they had no crops to harvest) and his wife, and his children, if he had any.

    “…enjoyed a stroke of great good luck because of the large number of his great-great-grandchildren who are no longer enslaved.”

    Yes but not exactly, because not only are his descendants not enslaved, they are empowered and coddled like no other group of humans ever before in history. Well, then (((again…)))

    “That strikes me as an eccentric and heartless opinion. ”

    And yours is completely devoid of any sense of proportion or objective observation.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  137. nebulafox says:
    @Muggles

    >Abrahamic religions (Christian, Jewish, Muslim) wren’t supposed to enslave co-religionists but this seems to have been often violated.

    Infidels were considered free game, as much as pagans. Actual co-religionists, people tended to be more careful in dealing with, although this wasn’t perfectly obeyed: for example, Venice got its initial wealth largely from selling Christian slaves to Muslim powers. Still, one of the motives for the various Slavic peoples to convert to Christianity would be that-theoretically-they would not be targets for slavery anymore. The Muslims, similarly, seemed to try to focus on non-Muslims for the slave trade, although again, this wasn’t always respected, especially during civil wars.

    During the worst of the Dark Ages, Arab and Berber pirates would regularly raid Europe (one time, in 846, they made it just outside Rome itself) as much as the Vikings did. One of the big motives was capturing locals and selling them back homes: slaves always brought a tidy profit. Caliphate raids on the Byzantine empire had a similar dynamic, with slaves always being taken as part of the booty extracted from Anatolia. Of course, the Christians did much the same when they got their turn to dish it out rather than taking it. The Crusades get all the headlines, of course, but Byzantium’s 10th Century reconquests regularly involved torching a town, selling the Muslim or pagan inhabitants into slavery if they could make a profit and it was logistically feasible, and deporting or killing them if they couldn’t.

    • Replies: @Muggles
  138. @JohnPlywood

    lol. Looks like I hit a nerve with this paid troll! He’s literally in denial about women throwing themselves at men in power who can give them an easier time. “Mathematically impossible” he asserts! So there!

    • Replies: @JohnPlywood
  139. @Spangel123

    I would be surprised to learn that only a small percentage of black-female/white male offspring from the 19th century were not conceived through coercion or outright force. Women, black women included, rarely go about setting out to seduce men. It’s men who are the initiators in sexual relations 99% of the time.

    rofl. And now we know you’re either a troll or deep in denial about female agency.

    Thanks for the lulz.

  140. @Truth

    Your mom certainly liked it.

    • Replies: @Truth
  141. @JohnPlywood

    mathematically impossible

    Show your work.

    • Agree: R.G. Camara
    • LOL: James Speaks
  142. None of us were there to see slavery at first hand, so we can only rely on contemporary accounts. Here is one written by a visit to the United States in 1842, when America was still great:

    The following are a few specimens of the advertisements in the public papers. It is only four years since the oldest among them appeared; and others of the same nature continue to be published every day, in shoals.

    ‘Ran away, Negress Caroline. Had on a collar with one prong turned down.’

    ‘Ran away, a black woman, Betsy. Had an iron bar on her right leg.’

    ‘Ran away, the negro Manuel. Much marked with irons.’

    ‘Ran away, the negress Fanny. Had on an iron band about her neck.’

    ‘Ran away, a negro boy about twelve years old. Had round his neck a chain dog-collar with “De Lampert” engraved on it.’

    ‘Ran away, the negro Hown. Has a ring of iron on his left foot. Also, Grise, his wife, having a ring and chain on the left leg.’

    ‘Ran away, a negro boy named James. Said boy was ironed when he left me.’

    ‘Committed to jail, a man who calls his name John. He has a clog of iron on his right foot which will weigh four or five pounds.’

    ‘Detained at the police jail, the negro wench, Myra. Has several marks of lashing, and has irons on her feet.’

    ‘Ran away, a negro woman and two children. A few days before she went off, I burnt her with a hot iron, on the left side of her face. I tried to make the letter M.’

    ‘Ran away, a negro man named Henry; his left eye out, some scars from a dirk on and under his left arm, and much scarred with the whip.’

    ‘One hundred dollars reward, for a negro fellow, Pompey, 40 years old. He is branded on the left jaw.’

    ‘Committed to jail, a negro man. Has no toes on the left foot.’

    ‘Ran away, a negro woman named Rachel. Has lost all her toes except the large one.’

    ‘Ran away, Sam. He was shot a short time since through the hand, and has several shots in his left arm and side.’

    ‘Ran away, my negro man Dennis. Said negro has been shot in the left arm between the shoulder and elbow, which has paralysed the left hand.’

    ‘Ran away, my negro man named Simon. He has been shot badly, in his back and right arm.’

    ‘Ran away, a negro named Arthur. Has a considerable scar across his breast and each arm, made by a knife; loves to talk much of the goodness of God.’

    ‘Twenty-five dollars reward for my man Isaac. He has a scar on his forehead, caused by a blow; and one on his back, made by a shot from a pistol.’

    • Thanks: notsaying
    • Troll: R.G. Camara
  143. As a proud heterosexual anglo saxon white male with zero percent black or jewish genetics, I would state we should have picked our own cotton and created our own banking system. And finished that #$%ing wall on the southern border prior to 1950 and also kept out the Irish of the Kennedy ilk.

  144. Anon[395] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous

    “People generally lived and died within 30 miles of their birthplace and seldom survived into their late
    40s.”

    That people only lived to be in their late 40’s is a misunderstanding of the role of infant mortality on life expectancy. Until modern times, if you lived to be 20, you had a good chance of living to be 65. Half of all people born died by age 10, until quite recently.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
  145. @Jonathan Mason

    ‘Twenty-five dollars reward for my man Isaac. He has a scar on his forehead, caused by a blow; and one on his back, made by a shot from a pistol.’

    Twenty-five dollars was real money in those days. It would buy you twelve acres or two cows in 1820s South Carolina. How could this Isaac possibly be worth a fraction of that? We wouldn’t pay twenty-five cents for him today!

    Where was the ROI?


    Sane employers fire runaways. These bounties are a sign of clinical insanity.

    Were Irishmen really that expensive? Or wouldn’t take to the whip?

  146. @Jonathan Mason

    And hard work and whippings never did him any harm, as he went on to become a world famous author and dramatist.

    Most Dickens’ biographers agree that this ruined childhood for good & left an indelible scar on his psyche.

    It was his, softened version of Dostoevsky’s mock execution.

  147. @Jonathan Mason

    Cruelty and pain over and over again. Those are established facts of the antibellum South. They are not be whitewashed by supposed documented or undocumented horrors elsewhere in the world. Negro spirituals from that era that prayed and hoped for Jesus to deliver them likewise testifies to the inhumanity of slavery in the US.

  148. @ATate

    I don’t understand whites who would like not to be white. To me, it is something unimaginable.

    On the other hand, I don’t get homosexuals either, so I guess some mental currents remain alien to me, at least on a gut level.

  149. @Spangel123

    I’m not sure ISIS captives are the apropos comparison, as ISIS captives were captured and traded specifically as sexual slaves. They might be made to do some domestic work incidentally during “downtime”, but that was just a fringe benefit to the main function for which their captors unabashedly acquired them.

    Unlike the American South, the Islamic State had no real real economy. All wealth was either looted or bequested in some way: there was no economic production per se. A plantation slave, by contrast, has a productive economic function from which sexual exploitation is a subtraction, albeit one the owners made from time to time.

    Then you can look at the motives from the slavers themselves. There are videos of ISIS soldiers openly lusting over what kind of sex slave they will get. (Your surprise-o-meter should be at zero to learn they desire women with lighter skin, eyes and hair.) If there were any record of a white slaver salivating over African lady flesh for its own sake, we’d be hearing about it 24/7, so it’s pretty safe to say that the African slave trade wasn’t driven by other races’ desire to oil-drill.

    Come to think of it, there’s a passage in the great Richard Burton’s memoirs where he cures some Abyssinian women slaves of an Arab slave trader of some minor ailments. Short version of the slaves’ response to Burton: “Why don’t you buy me?”, which Burton notes is not so different from the response of a free woman.

    • Replies: @Spangel12
    , @JohnPlywood
  150. Muggles says:
    @nebulafox

    Yes, your ‘co-religionist’ was someone of your same faith only. Or same faith and particular sect.

    Even then I imagine there were many instances of ignoring that. And yes, conversion to the faith of potential slavers was a common practice to avoid being a slave first.

    As for enemy combatants captured in battle, I think if they weren’t killed outright many became enslaved if not worth holding for ransom. Worked in mines, quarries and other dangerous venues.

    I think Jews were usually left unmolested in Muslim nations since many had lived in these places prior to Islam and Mohammad had specifically set them apart to be protected and unmolested. Though probably still subject to the special non Muslim tax in many instances. Also Jews didn’t have armies of their faithful battling anyone, post Roman times.

    Crusaders had a bad reputation for killing everyone in captured cities regardless of faith. Probably also sold survivors into slavery as well.

    One reason why it was illegal to baptize or otherwise convert African slaves in the South was this issue of enslaving co-religionists.

  151. George says:

    Frances Anne “Fanny” Kemble: During her time there, she kept a diary and wrote about the horrific treatment and living conditions of the slaves.

    Her daughter Frances Butler: In Frances’ view, blacks fared better under slavery than freedom. Due to the lack of slave labor, and the postwar depression in the South, plantations were doomed to fail, and the fifth generation of Butlers sold the remains of their lands in 1923.[11]

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butler_Island_Plantation

  152. Anon[166] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous

    Submissive women are more likely to be both raped or seduced. For rapists, they’re easy prey, and for seducers, they’re easy to fool. It’s very likely that submissive women have low IQs. Smart women stay away from trouble and are good judges of dangerous situations.

  153. Not Raul says:
    @San Fernando Curt

    Somewhat interesting to know that neurotic Jewish yowling about how their Others don’t like them is now trumped by neurotic black yowling about how their Others don’t like them.

    Are they neurotic if they’re right?

  154. Jack D says:
    @SLM

    Cherokee is a popular choice.

  155. @Anonymouse

    Prior to (and even concurrent with) the Atlantic slave trade, the fate of most African captives was to be tortured and eaten or maybe become the personal slave, possibly as a form of furniture, of their African captor’s tribe. Servitude in the American South, even plantation slavery, really was a better outcome.

    But that’s not really Steve’s point. His point is that compared to other Atlantic trade destinations (Brazil, the Caribbean), US was relatively more humane, as the genomic history shows.

    Would any of us like to live that way? Of course not. But then almost no one today would like to live as anyone in the much harsher conditions of the 18th and 19th centuries.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  156. SF says:

    My Ancestry.com results are 100% European, showing no regions less than 3%, to minimize noise. But my 23 and me results show 0.3% western Asian and Middle east, plus 0.1% Nigerian. Is that company trying to promote diversity?

  157. @Bill P

    Most of the slaves brought to the US would have been sacrificed if they hadn’t been purchased and transported to the new world.

    Or they would have been sold into the Arab slave trade. They would have had to walk in a chain gang across the Sahara Desert to an Arab slave market. Ever wonder why Arab countries do not have a large black minority? The enslaved men were castrated, and the children of enslaved women were drowned at birth.

    The Moynihan Report points out that US slave laws were harsher than elsewhere – but this only applies to the New World. Old World slavery was far, far worse.

  158. babu says:

    The yellow and brown races in the US are owed reparations because they were denied the benefits derived from slavery of the black peoples and the extermination of the indigenous peoples unlike the white people who are still benefiting from these profitable atrocities.

  159. What the fuck is wrong with people – handing their DNA to for-profit entities, so that it can be on-sold to insurers. That’s why these firms were always going to have value as merger targets.

    I guess that I can’t pretend to be surprised, given how much personal data people willingly give to the tech giants (talking to Siri, Alexa etc): people really are fucking stupid.

    At least make them work for it; I give out biographical vignettes all the time (some of them true, some of them as barium meals), and linking from my pseudonym to my meatbag is deliberately trivial. However the effort required by the Panopticon is not zero; there is deliberate mis- and dis-information; and I’m not giving the unfiltered information straight to Amazon, Google, Facebook or Twitter.

    And I’m certainly not giving my fucking genome to the insurance industry (not that I’m a big consumer of their products; in my income range and with my preferences, utility curvature is not enough to make betting against myself a good bet – especially once their propensity to (((welsh))) on the deal is considered).

    • Agree: Achmed E. Newman
    • Replies: @Rob McX
  160. @nebulafox

    Good comment.

    One of the reasons pre-modern soldiers in all civilizations really looked forward to sacking enemy cities was sex. I don’t think I need to tell anybody with basic historical awareness what mixing horny, angry, and brutalized young men with young women destined to be slaves would mean

    Pretty much.

    The Spanish Conquistadors definitely fall into this category.

  161. @R.G. Camara

    Prince Andrew is said to have lost his virginity to a member of the palace domestic staff. Sounds plausible to me.

    • Replies: @prosa123
  162. And here is more from a visitor to the United States in 1842:

    The upholders of slavery in America—of the atrocities of which system, I shall not write one word for which I have not had ample proof and warrant—may be divided into three great classes.

    The first, are those more moderate and rational owners of human cattle, who have come into the possession of them as so many coins in their trading capital, but who admit the frightful nature of the Institution in the abstract, and perceive the dangers to society with which it is fraught: dangers which however distant they may be, or howsoever tardy in their coming on, are as certain to fall upon its guilty head, as is the Day of Judgment.

    The second, consists of all those owners, breeders, users, buyers and sellers of slaves, who will, until the bloody chapter has a bloody end, own, breed, use, buy, and sell them at all hazards: who doggedly deny the horrors of the system in the teeth of such a mass of evidence as never was brought to bear on any other subject, and to which the experience of every day contributes its immense amount; who would at this or any other moment, gladly involve America in a war, civil or foreign, provided that it had for its sole end and object the assertion of their right to perpetuate slavery, and to whip and work and torture slaves, unquestioned by any human authority, and unassailed by any human power; who, when they speak of Freedom, mean the Freedom to oppress their kind, and to be savage, merciless, and cruel; and of whom every man on his own ground, in republican America, is a more exacting, and a sterner, and a less responsible despot than the Caliph Haroun Alraschid in his angry robe of scarlet.

    The third, and not the least numerous or influential, is composed of all that delicate gentility which cannot bear a superior, and cannot brook an equal; of that class whose Republicanism means, ‘I will not tolerate a man above me: and of those below, none must approach too near;’ whose pride, in a land where voluntary servitude is shunned as a disgrace, must be ministered to by slaves; and whose inalienable rights can only have their growth in negro wrongs.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @Curle
  163. Jack D says:
    @JohnPlywood

    If it was all, then the US would be like Mexico where the most of the population is Indian in its female line and Spanish in the male line, resulting in a 50% European population (roughly). But in the US it’s more like 20% genes among blacks, indicating that most pairings were black/black.

    Note that black-white pairing did not end when slavery did, nor even under slavery did all such pairings involve slaves or even black women – matches between white females and free blacks were not unknown.

    • Replies: @JohnPlywood
    , @Rob
  164. Affirmative action comes to France.

    https://www.barrons.com/articles/hyliion-doesnt-fear-disruption-it-has-plans-of-its-own-51613171398

    President Emmanuel Macron on Thursday announced a plan to make France’s ruling class more diverse by creating dedicated places for young people from disadvantaged backgrounds at the elite ENA college that has groomed generations of French leaders.

    Macron has repeatedly complained that France’s social elevator is stuck, and that young people from low-income families, particularly children of African or Arab immigrants, have no route out of the grim high-rise housing estates where they grow up.

    On Thursday, he unveiled a “Talents” programme that will reserve six places at the Ecole Nationale d’Administration (ENA), the Strasbourg-based finishing school for senior civil servants, for students from poorer backgrounds.

    Four other prestigious colleges will also be involved in the programme, which aims to level the playing field for students whose education prospects have suffered by dint of where they grow up.

    Macron made the announcement during a visit to the western city of Nantes, where he met students from housing projects and rural areas, who said they felt closed off from the gilded halls of top French colleges.

    “I don’t want to go to ENA. I would feel like an imposter,” one student told Macron, admitting that he had not passed the school finishing exam, the baccalaureat.

    Macron told the students to resist being “relegated to the social milieu or place where one is born”.

    Macron, who grew up in the northern city of Amiens, later transferred to a top Paris school, and told AFP that “I didn’t even know ENA existed. I found out by chance, in Paris”.

    While many countries have similar programmes to counter inequality, in France, affirmative action or “positive discrimination” was long dismissed as running counter to the idea of a meritocracy.

    The move to diversify the student body of the colleges that produce France’s elites marks an about-turn for the centrist Macron, who had at one point vowed to scrap ENA, seen as a symbol of French elitism.

    “We will need to abolish ENA, among others, to be able to build something else,” Macron said in April 2019 in a bid to calm months of often violent “yellow vest” protests over inequality and the perceived arrogance of France’s elites.

    But faced with an outcry from defenders of an institution that has turned out generations of public administrators, Macron decided to reform the institution instead.

    He said Thursday that 1,000 places would be created in two new programmes to prepare students from disadvantaged backgrounds for applying to France’s top colleges.

    Of these, six will go on to study at ENA, and a similar number at four other elite colleges.

    ENA graduates, known as enarques, form a network of influence that stretches across the top echelons of politics and business, making it a target for critics of the French establishment for decades.

    Despite an entrance exam that is open to everyone and supposedly meritocratic, studies show that ENA’s student intake is dominated by the children of wealthy families.

    Macron is the fourth president since World War II to have graduated from the school created in the aftermath of World War II, following in the footsteps of Valery Giscard d’Estaing, Jacques Chirac and Francois Hollande.

    • Replies: @Rob
  165. Brutal racial current events: “Aspiring rapper” + Gorilla Glue + TikTok =

    MAN ENDS UP IN EMERGENCY ROOM AFTER TIKTOK CHALLENGE GOES WRONG

    It’s hard to get a grip on his age, but he looks more like an aspiring pensioner. Nice ballcap, though. Hard hat riding a beam. Anyone recognize it?

    Both individuals are in Louisiana. Is it something in the water, or is it the lack of common law? Looks like they’ll miss Mardi Gras. Laissez les bons temps rouler!

    • Replies: @Rob McX
  166. Ed says:

    I’ve always wondered if the white genes among US blacks came more from intercourse during slavery vs post slavery. When you look at pics of blacks before 1900 they look very African.

    I think lots of the white dna came through prostitution and illicit relations in urban centers in the 20th century.

  167. @Wilkey

    a very large percentage of human reproduction all across the world was in conditions that wouldn’t be considered consensual by modern, Western standards.

    While that is a true statement, I would argue that modern Western standards, especially those espoused by feminists, have gone too far in the other direction.

  168. @Anonymous

    Ironically, that was were most of slaves in South Africa came from, not from Africa. I remember hearing roughly 5 percent of Boer ancestry is non-European, SE Asian makes up the largest component of that.

  169. @Anonymous

    The Red Army committed mass rape in every Eastern European country they entered. It was so bad that even high level Eastern European communists complained to Stalin about the sexual crimes the Red Army was engaging in. I’ve read that in East Germany organized rapes were occuring through 1946.

  170. In the end, we have the Gatling gun, and so do they because we gave it to them.

  171. @Wilkey

    Children born to teenage mothers tend to do poorly because of who their parents are, not because they were born to teen parents, per se.

    Correct. Mormon girls start their families young and they don’t seem worse for the wear.

    If you’re a doctor, lawyer, engineer or even just some reasonably well-educated person and your teenage daughter gets knocked up by a boy from a similar background you probably have little need to worry.

    This is the issue. If the local town hoodlum is doing the knocking up, then it’s a different kettle of fish.

  172. Richard B says:
    @International Jew

    It’s funny when people talk about their indignation at the rape of their great^4-grandmother, when they’re descended just as much from the guy who raped her.

    Brian: You mean you were raped?

    Brian’s mom: Well, at first.

  173. Rob McX says:
    @Reg Cæsar

    Note that he placed the cup on his lip, well away from his reproductive organs. Like a lot of stuff blacks do – stupid, but not stupid enough to remove him from the gene pool.

  174. fnn says:
    @Anon

    Yeah, life was tough for everyone back then:
    https://abuse.wikia.org/wiki/Occasional_Discourse_on_the_Negro_Question

    The Negro Question was written in 1849, when the infant mortality rate for working class people living in Manchester, England was around 50% for children under five years old. Carlyle stated that “British whites are rather badly off–several millions of them hanging on the verge of continual famine” (as with the potato people in Ireland in 1849).[1] The infant mortality rate recorded for southern slaves in mainland America was 48%.

    • Replies: @Polistra
  175. @Colin Wright

    I once read a claim that the War Of The Rebellion occurred because Northerners read Harriet Beecher Stowe and Southerners read Sir Walter Scott.

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
    , @Wielgus
  176. @Anonymouse

    That strikes me as an eccentric and heartless opinion.

    It is not an opinion. It is an observation. The man brought as a slave had two choices, death, or slavery.

    But your fever-swamp perspective is that the choices were an idyllic existence as a king in Africa, with a harem, personal servants (which we call slaves), and a kingdom of subjects who worshipped the victim, or, slavery. And some white guy enslaved him. But it was an African that defeated and enslaved him.

    The slave lived, but he could have died in Africa. The slave’s descendants enjoy the best of all polities on the face of the globe. That they do is verified by the fact that the descendants of the slave have emigration to Africa as an option. Virtually none of them choose to return to their homeland. Watch what people do, not what they say.

    Your perspective is one-dimensional. And that is a generous interpretation of your perspective.

  177. @Bill P

    As for Jewish ancestry, it’s very hard to say what exactly that means, because Jews have a whole lot of European ancestry. For example, an entire Hungarian sect converted to Judaism hundreds of years ago, and all their descendants are counted as Ashkenazi Jews in Jewish DNA data today. Therefore, if you have Hungarian “jewish” ancestry, you may simply be descended from the same people as the Szekely Sabbatarians rather than ancient Israelites.

    Not really. Until the 1870s there was no intermarriage between Ashkenazim and Szekely Sabbatarians, as the Sambatianer were not practicing Rabbinic Judaism (they had no circumcision , family purity etc.) The remnants of the Sambatianer community that converted in the 1870 was only a couple of hundred people – many past childbearing age – so the chances a random Hungarian Jew is of Szekeler descent are pretty low.

    • Replies: @Bill P
  178. Art Deco says:
    @Anonymous

    People generally lived and died within 30 miles of their birthplace and seldom survived into their late 40s.

    Your mind is in Medieval Europe, not 19th century America.

  179. G. Poulin says:

    It is a mistake to assume that all, or even a majority, of sexual relations between white male slave owners and black female slaves were of the brutal, completely coercive type. Some were, but very often there was something to be gained on the part of the woman: status, gifts, privileges. It was more of a calculated exchange of benefits. And we shouldn’t overlook those cases where there was a genuine affection between the two parties. History is complex, and not easily reducible to narratives of good vs. evil.

  180. Anon[399] • Disclaimer says:

    The idea of the epidemic of slave rape in the US has always struck me as questionable.

    Today we have exponentially more white men and black women in the country and yet white on black rape is virtually nonexistent. Add in that the black women of the 17 and 1800s were much more “African” in appearance and probably of poor hygiene and the prospect of sex with a black woman gets even less desirable.

    I understand that the situation of slave and slave owner adds a different dynamic, but to think it was anywhere near as frequent as it’s made out to be today seems highly unlikely.

    • Replies: @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
  181. If rice farming is so dangerous, why are there so many Asians?

  182. anon[273] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymouse

    You are saying that a black man brought over from Africa to the US to work as a chattel slave which is a most unpleasant state of existence physically and psychically actually enjoyed a stroke of great good luck because of the large number of his great-great-grandchildren who are no longer enslaved. In other words, his painful existence is outweighed by the happiness of his large progeny.

    That strikes me as an eccentric and heartless opinion.

    American blacks in the antebellum period enjoyed a higher standard of living than the people of France. They received food and shelter. They had steady employment. They had cradle-to-grave social security. They married and raised children. The lived under the protective umbrella of White civilization and rule of law. There is a reason they mostly chose to remain where they were at the end of the war.

    Heartless is the treatment the Jews are meting out to the Palestinians, and to the other Arabs who have tried to defend them. The bombing and killing. The ethnic cleansing, both sudden and gradual. The genocide.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  183. anon[273] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymouse

    from Lincoln’s Second Inaugural Speech “Fondly do we hope—fervently do we pray—that this mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away. Yet, if God wills that it continue, until all the wealth piled by the bond-men’s two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil

    One hundred sixty years later commentators here blythely overlook the economic and existential reality Lincoln refers to.

    Lincoln lied.

    The economic reality is that all “slaves” in the United States were compensated for their labor, and most were compensated well. Food, shelter, civilization, a degree of security. Some developed their own trades, and were allowed a business on the side. One need only look at the standard of living they enjoyed compared to the rest of the world. They were in fact treated better than indentured servants, because the “owners” depended on them over the long term, developed relationships with them, cared for them.

    Compare this to the attitude of Jewish Israelis to Palestinians. They just want them gone.

    • Agree: GeneralRipper
  184. @Anonymouse

    No one is denying that being an African slave in the New World sucked unimaginably. Debate can be had on how much worse it was compared to realistic alternatives. Keep in mind that the life of an 18th century plantation owner was no picnic compared to the way most of us live today. What Steve is saying is that said slave’s descendants benefitted tremendously because of his enslavement.

    Perhaps this quote from one such descendent will help:

    “Thank God my granddaddy got on that boat!”

    -Muhammad Ali (upon his return to the United States after
    the “Rumble in the Jungle” in Zaire)

  185. Jon says:
    @Chrisnonymous

    I get the same thing sometimes. Sort of a semi-shadow ban, where the comment is near the top, but won’t show up to others until the thread is down in the 100’s – so no one ends up seeing/replying.

  186. @Just another serf

    I don’t know. I’ve heard of men beating their horse, even though a horse was an expensive and valuable possession on a farm.

    • Replies: @Just another serf
  187. prosa123 says:
    @Jonathan Mason

    Prince Andrew is said to have lost his virginity to a member of the palace domestic staff.

    How’d that work out for his future?

  188. Anonymous[194] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jonathan Mason

    The third, and not the least numerous or influential, is composed of all that delicate gentility which cannot bear a superior, and cannot brook an equal; of that class whose Republicanism means, ‘I will not tolerate a man above me: and of those below, none must approach too near;’ whose pride, in a land where voluntary servitude is shunned as a disgrace, must be ministered to by slaves; and whose inalienable rights can only have their growth in negro wrongs.

    Providing citations would be nice. It would be nice to consider the source. Btw, I’ve read too many slave testimonies, available at the library of Congress website, to consider your submission to be the final word on slavery. Too many ex-slaves recount experiencing some good aspects with their life situation. That is, they were well taken care of, fed well, and didn’t have a crazy Irishman with a bullwhip sorting things out.

    I’m not trying to make it better than it was, as much as ensuring it’s not portrayed as worse than it was either.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  189. @John Henry

    Slavery in South Carolina was similar to the Caribbean. In the Upper South it was gentler.

    As in the phrase, “to sell someone down the river.”

  190. notsaying says:
    @Jonathan Mason

    This is beyond awful but it is good to know what we are really dealing with. Slavery is a terrible thing. I am so sorry we ever had it here.

    • Replies: @Anon
  191. The Harvard scholar Henry Louis Gates Jr. has calculated that there are millions of contemporary whites who, “according to the old, notorious ‘one- drop rule’ of the Jim Crow era, would have been considered legally ‘black’” — proof not only of the absurdity of that definition of difference, he writes, but of the power of modern science to blow up false narratives about race and about American history.

    Definition of difference. Tread carefully, NYT. Don’t invite “modern science” to your next Zoom cocktail hour.

  192. @nebulafox

    The huddled, European masses came willingly to these shores. A good portion of their descendants became tax leeches.

  193. Jon says:
    @Anonymous

    He’s saying kill them now, or pay for it later.

  194. @Spangel123

    Can you provide a link to your source for sexual behavior on plantations?

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
  195. Bill P says:
    @kaganovitch

    Of course there was intermarriage. The ones who intermarried (lots of them) were simply absorbed into the wider Jewish community.

    The late 19th century remnants were the most hardcore of the sect who had not already assimilated with ordinary Jews.

    There were lots of Unitarian sects in Eastern Europe in the early Reformation. Lots of them became Jews with little to no fanfare. Ariel Sharon was in part descended from these people. It’s nothing to be ashamed of either way, but Ashkenazim should really quit with the ridiculous claims of racial purity.

    Even earlier, a number of powerful western Christians became Jewish when the Roman church made celibacy a requirement. One particular Norman convert is remembered today for his study of Jewish music in the 12th century.

    Finally, there isn’t a great deal of genetic difference between Levantines and Europeans anyway. Southern Europeans are mainly derived from similar racial stock, which is pretty obvious from simply looking at them

    • Replies: @kaganovitch
  196. @Redneck farmer

    ‘I once read a claim that the War Of The Rebellion occurred because Northerners read Harriet Beecher Stowe and Southerners read Sir Walter Scott.’

    Sounds reasonable. It was a literate age, and given to wallowing in sentimentality.

  197. I say potato, You say it’s rayciss
    I say tomato, You say it’s rayciss
    Potato, it’s rayciss
    Tomato, it’s rayciss
    Let’s call the whole thing off

  198. Jon says:
    @Bardon Kaldian

    Mulattoes & Mestizos are frequently astonished how much white ancestry they have. Blacks/mulattoes look pretty confused, while Mestizos are, generally, glad.

    Here is Jessica Alba on Lopez Tonight finding out that she is mostly white. She was not glad. Imagine someone that looks like Alba sitting across from someone that looks like George Lopez and not only thinking they have similar ancestry, but being disappointed to find out that they don’t.

    • Replies: @Bardon Kaldian
  199. @Macumazahn

    Apparently not… and still doesn’t.

  200. Lagertha says:

    No. Slavery has been around 12,ooo+ years. Ask the “cultures” that built the pyramids that were supposed descendants of well, those, just robust, happy men who built those pyramids on every continent? Hahhaaaa – I just despise cultural relativism with a hatred that is so, so, so deep. This is what we share, my friend!

    Who were the bigtime slavers of blacks (1600+) to USA/Islands/SAm?:

    Well, blacks who worked for Jews & Muslims – don’t pin it on my people, ever: oldest white culture in the world: European Arctic Circle (Nordics + Baltics) + uninhabited Iceland. And I should add: Karleilians Latvians, Estonians, Lithuanians, Ingerians…the first enslaved women and children of all warparties who trafficked these women & children to the South, East, & West…never North.

    • Replies: @prosa123
  201. Rob McX says:
    @Kratoklastes

    They’re already using people’s freely-given DNA to catch criminals, e.g. the Golden State Killer, using forensic genealogy. And who’s to say what kind of activity will be criminalised in the future?

  202. Lurker says:
    @JohnnyWalker123

    There is a lot of talk here about the slave girls and masters. Isn’t it more likely that it was the white indentured servants/slaves who are generally the white ancestors of current year African-Americans?

    Of course there is going to be some master/black slave action too. Faced with a choice of two field hands – Lizzo or Rhianna – which one is going to get the attention?

    • Replies: @Lurker
    , @Jon Halpenny
  203. Kylie says:

    America’s racial history was and is and will continue to be as brutal as it needs to be for the left to use it as a weapon against whites.

    • Agree: GeneralRipper
  204. Lurker says:
    @Lurker

    Rhianna of course having a lot of white ancestry herself.

  205. @Abe

    GFR, Abe!

    Great Rant, that is. Thanks.

  206. fondolo says:

    I seem to recall that one of the ancestry sites made a practice of adding a little black ancestry to many reports with the admirable intention of increasing interracial feelings of brotherhood. So maybe those stats aren’t completely reliable.
    Also, did any slave culture other than the Christian ones ever believe that sex with slaves was somehow wrong?

  207. @Jack D

    The Capitol Hill Insurrection was just the Democrat talking point of the week and the jornolists of America had to weave that point into every possible article. …

    That was last week. What with the failure of the impeachment and the inconvenient revelations that Officer Sicknick may have died of natural causes, it’s on to the next talking point.

    Don’t agree on the last point.

    The Democrat/establishment media have worked hard–if you call what they do “work”–to puff up this silly political demo, into an “insurrection”, and “attack on ‘democracy’. (As if they knew what democracy is.)

    It’s their Reichstag fire. And it serves them perfectly in their great minoritarian war against republican government, in favor of elite diktat. The forms of republican government are under “attack” by deplorables … and they can blur and massage that easily. See we are “democracy” and those deplorable hicks-from-the-sticks are totalitarians against “democracy”. When actually the reverse is true. The deplorables simply want to be free of the swamp.

    I just don’t see them giving this up. They’ve invested a lot in building it up. And it’s pretty much the perfect lie–the swamp as “democracy under attack”. They’ll keep trotting it out to delegitimize any deplorable resistance. Minor quibbles about truth aren’t going to stop them. When have they ever cared about truth?

  208. Polistra says:
    @fnn

    https://radishmag.wordpress.com/2013/01/25/slavery-reconsidered/

    When I Was a Slave — selected memoirs of the last generation of slaves from the WPA Slave Narrative Collection, commissioned as part of Roosevelt’s New Deal stimulus. ‘Slavery days was Hell,’ Delia Garlic, 100, stated. But Andrew Goodman, 97, recalled: ‘I was born in slavery and I think them days was better…than the days we see now. I was never cold or hungry.’

    Slave Sophie Belle also had a more cheerful memory: ‘Master Hicks had a bell to ring for all the children to be put to bed at sundown. “Let them grow!” The children’s diet was milk and bread and eggs…we had duck eggs, guinea eggs, goose eggs and turkey eggs.’ Master Hicks gave them molasses in biscuits on Sundays.
    https://spectator.us/horrors-plantation-whitney-museum-slavery/

    Brazil received far more African slaves than any other country in the Western Hemisphere, about 4.9 million through the Atlantic trade, while mainland North America imported about 389,000, according to the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade Database.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/09/world/americas/a-slice-of-the-confederacy-in-the-interior-of-brazil.html (well over 10 times as many slaves. where’s all the wealth they built?)

    [MORE]

    “Edmund Kirke, a northern businessman… could hardly believe the indulgence shown to slaves who did half as much work as northern free laborers. He snapped at a planter friend: ‘You waste enough in one day, to feed the whole North for a week. It’s a sin– the unpardonable sin– for you know better.’ His friend replied softly, ‘Well, it is wrong, but how can we help it? We can’t make the negroes anything but what they are– shiftless, and careless about everything but their own ease.’”

    Eugene D Genovese and Elizabeth Fox-Genovese, Fatal Self-Deception: Slaveholding Paternalism in the Old South (2011), p.63

    ‘Ownership of human beings was an everyday, unremarkable part of human society for most of our history and doubtless our prehistory. As offensive as the events recounted here are to modern sensibilities, North American slavery, where the captive population actually grew despite importation largely ceasing after 1807, compares favorably with the sugar plantations of the Caribbean or the mines of South America, which consumed some 90% of the trans-Atlantic trade. We can only imagine conditions for slaves building the Pyramids, working Roman lead mines, or hauling Ottoman siege equipment over the Carpathians. The human saga is absolutely full to overflowing with jawdropping barbarity, from Sumer to the Gulag. The miracle is that chattel slavery was essentially abolished pretty much over the course of one century. Slavery is dead, as are its victims. Time to move on.’

    Glenn Baldwin, Bella Vista, Ark.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/17/us/georgetown-university-search-for-slave-descendants.html

  209. Probably better to be a slave boy than a breaker boy.

    Of course, what is a breaker boy but a slave?

    • Thanks: Just another serf
    • Replies: @JMcG
  210. @Truth

    Well, these articles are fairly easily summarized with one question:

    If slavery was such a good thing, would you recommend the lifestyle for YOUR children?

    That goes both ways. Places where slavers ruled the roost are now the 🚽 of the land. It’s back below zero (F) at the moment, and it’s well worth it not to have to deal with the legacy of slavery.

    The legacy of serfdom, yes. But there are some benefits to that.

  211. Curle says:
    @Jonathan Mason

    You should have provided the link to the Dickens’ excerpt as it elaborates a great deal on the subject at hand, including giving a time range for the ads (covering 4 years) and following the escaped slave descriptions with similar outrage over white on white honor violence occurring in both North and South. Dickens was a man with an appetite for outrage.

    That Dickens comes from a country that previously solved its negro problem by exporting the lot of them to Sierra Leone argues implicitly for an solution many here would endorse, separation. Though if you’ve read the diaries of ex-slaves in Liberia at the hands of their co-ethnics, your sense of outrage might be somewhat tempered. It is worth remembering that Liberia failed as an solution to slavery because slaves didn’t want to go, even when offered freedom.

    http://www.online-literature.com/dickens/americannotes/18/

  212. “David Reich’s 2015 article cited by Ms. Copeland found that the average self-identified black customer of 23andMe is 73.2% black and the average self-identified white is 0.19% black. So, the average black is 385 times blacker than the average white.”

    But if the average self-identified black customer of 23&Me has roughly 26.8% white admixture, how many times is he whiter than the average black who does not get their DNA tested?

    Also let’s reflect on how little black admixture the average white has, it suggests that they simply didn’t have many encounters with blacks for most of their genetic history. This is not good news for Afrocentric historians, nor for that black Classics professor Steve recently wrote about a few weeks ago. I mean, if during Antiquity a significant percentage of blacks lived in Rome and Greece, then it’s fairly obvious that it would show up in white people’s DNA (especially in Southern and Eastern Europeans). So basically Shawntavius and Shaniqua were not living in Rome and Greece next door to Aristotle and Augustus. Because it would definitely show up in the DNA record if they were there. Perhaps they were too busy building Wakanda during this period of time.

    Any encounters appeared to have been entirely one sided, judging from the average self-identified black containing 26.8% non-black admixture but not even one percent of white’s DNA includes black DNA. Wonder if, as Elizabeth Warren claimed American Indian heritage, we won’t suddenly start to see whites claiming to have DNA that can be traced to Wakanda? In other words they’ll start claiming “My distant ancestors were from Western Africa, and maybe some of them were slaves.” Might help them score some Intersectionality points within mainstream society.

    • Replies: @danand
  213. Spangel12 says:
    @Almost Missouri

    I’ve never once heard a white man claim he prefers black women to any other race of women. But that’s precisely what would make sexual relations with black slaves so loveless. In a free world, white men rarely seek out black women (without significant Caucasian admixture) as serious partners. And black women don’t appear to even attempt to seduce white men.

    In a world where black women were slaves, white men probably desired them even less than they do now. That doesn’t mean sex didn’t happen. The record is clear that it did. But it implies that sex was not about becoming a favorite rather just being available for an opportunistic liaison. Men who’d lost their wives or young men who didn’t have wives yet might face a dry spell, but how would a fully sub Saharan woman maintain favorite status for long?

  214. syonredux says:
    @Bernie

    The black population in the U.S. soared from 750,000 in 1790 to 4.5 million in 1860 – not exactly the “genocide” we are taught it was.

    Indeed. And the “genocide” talk becomes even more ludicrous when you factor in the fact that the approx 450,000 Blacks transported to Mainland Anglo-America have multiplied to the point where there are now approx 42 million of them…..

    And how many of these 10.7 million Africans were shipped directly to North America? Only about 388,000. That’s right: a tiny percentage. In fact, the overwhelming percentage of the African slaves were shipped directly to the Caribbean and South America; Brazil received 4.86 million Africans alone! Some scholars estimate that another 60,000 to 70,000 Africans ended up in the United States after touching down in the Caribbean first, so that would bring the total to approximately 450,000 Africans who arrived in the United States over the course of the slave trade.

    Incredibly, most of the 42 million members of the African-American community descend from this tiny group of less than half a million Africans

    https://www.abhmuseum.org/how-many-africans-were-really-taken-to-the-u-s-during-the-slave-trade/

  215. Anon[331] • Disclaimer says:

    The slaves probably would have preferred to stay in Africa, but their descendants did well in the long run. I don’t suppose anyone reading this would volunteer to be forcibly shipped off to a far away land for labor, with the hope that their descendants might be OK.

    Talking about famous African Americans, one wonders if black celebrities like Michael Jackson (arguably achieved demigod status in the latter part of the 80s and early 90s) or pre-murder OJ Simpson would ever be able to cross racial boundaries and build up huge fan followings in the more polarized and racialized 21st century.

    • Replies: @Anon
  216. syonredux says:
    @Anonymouse

    I think that we can all agree that shipping Blacks across the Atlantic to the New World was a big mistake.

  217. SafeNow says:

    In 1865, slavery in the U.S. (such as it was) existed in 7% of households. It was on its way out anyway…would have lasted maybe another 20 years. For this, Lincoln harvested 750,000 lives. (The new figure, using modern techniques.)

  218. @Jonathan Mason

    Can you provide a link to your source for sexual behavior on plantations?

    His personal experience?

  219. @james wilson

    Many years ago on Opie & Anthony they did a bit called slave girl in which one of their former interns, who happened to be a black girl, pretended she was a slave. Louis CK and the late Patrice Oneal were also participants.

    I bring this up because the bit made clear that it was much more advantageous to be the house n-word rather than the field n-word, except since this was a number of years ago they used the actual word.

  220. Rob McX says:
    @anon

    Many Zulus who were killed on Shaka’s order were impaled, and many of them went to death loudly singing Shaka’s virtues, so strong was the brainwashing.

    There’s a good chance today’s white liberals will go out the same way.

    • Agree: Almost Missouri
  221. Anon[237] • Disclaimer says:
    @notsaying

    This is beyond awful but it is good to know what we are really dealing with. Slavery is a terrible thing. I am so sorry we ever had it here.

    No, you don’t now “know” what we are really dealing with. Any more than the video of George Floyd is an accurate portrayal of the treatment of blacks in today’s criminal justice system.

    A handful ambiguous anecdotes tells you as much about the antebellum United States as news stories today about child abuse tell you about the institution of the nuclear family.

  222. Seen in the birthplace of Mardi Gras– Mobile, Alabama:

    • LOL: SafeNow
    • Replies: @Lagertha
  223. @Ghost of Bull Moose

    Simple, but funny as hell. With your permission, I’d like to publish this, Ghost.

    • Replies: @Ghost of Bull Moose
  224. @scrivener3

    I don’t know. I’ve heard of men beating their horse, even though a horse was an expensive and valuable possession on a farm.

    Having some significant experience with horses, though no slave experience, I can state with authority that this anecdotal horse owner was a fool. Not to mention a cruel moron. I’m sure there was some deranged individual that took a sledge hammer to his tractor. But he was an extreme outlier.

    The ridiculous narrative of slave owners brutalizing slaves upon which their lives depended, is entirely consistent with the idea that Germans subjected captured labor in World War II to incomprehensibly absurd torture. It’s the same lie that absolutely contradicts the predictable patterns of human self interest. That pattern being opposed to the destruction of assets upon which their lives might have depended.

    • Agree: cronkitsche
  225. Anon[409] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon

    The slaves probably would have preferred to stay in Africa

    That is far from clear. They may have had a better life in Anglo civilization, than in Africa, even if they were so-called slaves. Recall the implications of Steve’s observation about their tremendous natural population increase.

    “Edmund Kirke, a northern businessman… could hardly believe the indulgence shown to slaves who did half as much work as northern free laborers. He snapped at a planter friend: ‘You waste enough in one day, to feed the whole North for a week. It’s a sin– the unpardonable sin– for you know better.’ His friend replied softly, ‘Well, it is wrong, but how can we help it? We can’t make the negroes anything but what they are– shiftless, and careless about everything but their own ease.’”

  226. Lagertha says:
    @Reg Cæsar

    hahahahaaa – but, I get the joke. Use your fame and monetary ability to redpill and do good for poorer Americans. Snide and jokes will be in death mode in 3 months. Do good. Be good.

    There is a rough road for spring until summer. Be a person that you are, as a leader. Lead. Be a lead for good.

  227. @International Jew

    All sex is rape. We are all descendants of thousands, if not tens, of rapists.

  228. Corvinus says:
    @Mike Tre

    “…was already a slave in Africa, bound to a rival tribe of Africans that almost certainly did not feed and shelter him to the extent that his new southern masters did. His masters in Africa would have likely tortured, raped, killed and eaten him (for they had no crops to harvest) and his wife, and his children, if he had any.”

    LOL, no. In sub-Saharan Africa, the slave relationships were often complex, with rights and freedoms given to individuals held in slavery and restrictions on sale and treatment by their masters, which is patently different than American slavery, where slaves were seen as property and a status symbol in perpetuity.

    • Troll: GeneralRipper
    • Replies: @Mike Tre
    , @nebulafox
  229. Corvinus says:
    @anon

    “American blacks in the antebellum period enjoyed a higher standard of living than the people of France.”

    Citations required.

    “They received food and shelter”.

    To work for someone else.

    “They had steady employment”.

    Not of their own volition.

    “They had cradle-to-grave social security”.

    Only if they labored.

    “They married and raised children.”

    Which could be sold at a moment’s notice as “punishment”.

    “The lived under the protective umbrella of White civilization and rule of law.”

    By being brutally seized for gimmedats and free stuff. Why didn’t whites grow their own damn cotton?

    “Heartless is the treatment the Jews are meting out to the Palestinians, and to the other Arabs who have tried to defend them. The bombing and killing. The ethnic cleansing, both sudden and gradual. The genocide.”

    You just described the enslavement of blacks by Europeans. Hoisted by your own petard.

    • Troll: GeneralRipper
    • Replies: @Jack D
  230. Corvinus says:
    @Almost Missouri

    “His point is that compared to other Atlantic trade destinations (Brazil, the Caribbean), US was relatively more humane, as the genomic history shows.”

    No. Chattel slavery in these three areas was brutal and cruel across the board. There was nothing “more humane” about southern slave owners, they fall into the same category as their other brethren. Mr. Sailer is tone deaf here.

    • Troll: GeneralRipper
  231. @Achmed E. Newman

    Okay but if they make a movie I get half.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  232. Jack D says:
    @Corvinus

    They had cradle-to-grave social security”.

    Only if they labored.

    That’s right. It’s well known that Southern planters would take older slaves who could no longer work and cast them out on ice floes to drift out to sea and die. No, wait that was Eskimos.

    Actually they would take them out behind the barn and shoot them to put them out of their misery. No, wait, that was horses. Murder of a slave, even by his own master, was legally a homicide, punishable by death, and not just on paper.

    Actually slave owners were responsible for taking care of elderly and disabled slaves. Some were better than others but the general rule was that the slave owner was obliged to take care of his slaves for life.

  233. @R.G. Camara

    No dummy, what I said was that it is mathematically impossible for the substantial European contribution to African American genetic structure to be the result of female hypergamy. Yes, women often due seek the courtship of high status males, and there’s no doubt this happened among the African slave population. However, there could not have been enough of these pairings to alter the African American ancestral pool to such a large degree. The rare African female who seduced the white master for “favorable work” (whatever that means) and had a kid by him couldn’t result in a 20-25% average European ancestry in modern 21st century blacks. Every black in the USA esentially has one white grandparent.

    I’m curious as to why you’re so bothered by the fact that it was mass rape? Is it because you are yet another troubled white female in the heavily male rightosphere, anxious to prove that white women are not the least attractive race of female on the planet?

    • Replies: @R.G. Camara
  234. prosa123 says:
    @Lagertha

    Slavery has been around 12,ooo+ years. Ask the “cultures” that built the pyramids that were supposed descendants of well, those, just robust, happy men who built those pyramids on every continent

    Slaves/captives did NOT build the pyramids of Egypt. The builders were paid laborers, often farmers who were picking up some extra pay when the Nile’s annual floods made farming impossible.

  235. prosa123 says:
    @Jack D

    Actually slave owners were responsible for taking care of elderly and disabled slaves. Some were better than others but the general rule was that the slave owner was obliged to take care of his slaves for life.

    In the United States, that is. In the Caribbean it was not at all uncommon for slave owners to shoot old or infirm slaves who could no longer work.

  236. @Jack D

    One must earn one’s keep, after all.

  237. @Jack D

    One must earn one’s keep, after all.

  238. Polistra says:

    Speaking of America’s “brutal racial history” here’s tonight’s installment (number 722,957 give or take) in “this isn’t how (TV) told me it would turn out.”

  239. Mike Tre says:
    @Corvinus

    Just say no to troll pong .

  240. danand says:
    @Yojimbo/Zatoichi

    “…we won’t suddenly start to see whites claiming to have DNA that can be traced to Wakanda?”

    Yojimbo/Zatoichi, this will all be moot, likely within the decade. The DNA, and lineage, for nearly every person living in the 1st world will be known.

    If for no other reason, and of course there are many others, than medical treatment efficacy. Treatment based off one’s DNA is rapidly advancing, so much so that it will be considered malpractice not to base treatment off/by it.

    Your “DNA signature” will also take the place of SS & License ID’s, Credit Cards, etc… those things relegated to the great dustbin.

    I’d wager your relative by relative linage going back to at least Christ will universally be known, and available, to anyone who cares to look you up.

    Makes me wonder how the myriad of legal implications with be dealt with, some form(s) of amnesty?

    • Replies: @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
  241. @Anon

    Especially since the DNA admixture doesn’t appear to bear this out. Few American whites have black DNA in their family trees, whereas if relations were so common back in the day, there would be considerably more black in whites’ DNA. And if few whites hooked up with black slave women back during the Antebellum Era, the one place where men and women of different races would have had the opportunity to do so (as opposed to the rest of the nation at the time), then historically, BW with WM simply has not been a large happening at all.

  242. @danand

    Uh, yes. But based on the DNA that is known, historically whites have not had very much direct contact with blacks as far as it being contained in their genetic family trees as a whole.

    And you didn’t directly comment upon my observation. If anything, your observances tend to bear out my larger point: that white’s DNA does not contain any significant black admixture. Largely, this is because the two races were very much physically apart for thousands of centuries, up until recently, say, about one thousand to twelve hundred yrs or so, give or take a couple centuries depending on how one defines the terms.

    And even during all this time, there still isn’t very much black DNA admixture in whites family trees as a whole. In fact, it’s very possible, if not probable, that for millions of whites around the world, their DNA’s contain 0% black admixture. Especially as among many US whites that have taken DNA tests, the average black admixture is less than one percent as it is. And the US has lead the world in largest percentage of blacks in their nation, outside of Africa, of course. And if the percentage of whites that have black genes in their DNA isn’t very large here, think how even smaller it is for the rest of the non-African world.

  243. @Jack D

    If it was all, then the US would be like Mexico where the most of the population is Indian in its female line and Spanish in the male line, resulting in a 50% European population (roughly).

    Assuming the small number of white men who owned or worked near slaves then murdered every other white person in Anglophone North America, after curtailing European immigration, and killed off the massive population of black male slaves, yes.

    Instead, they reproduced with those whites, and more Europeans migrated to the USA than African slaves. They also didn’t kill off their black male slaves, who greatly outnumbered the females. That’s why the USA isn’t a mulatto Mexico.

    Do I really have to explain this shit like you’re five?

    But in the US it’s more like 20% genes among blacks, indicating that most pairings were black/black.

    No, it indicates most pairings were black hybrid/black, since 20% is the equivalent contribution of 1 grandparent in the average African American. You don’t have a clue how blood quantum works. One thing is for sure, the rare sexual affairs involving white masters and black slaves could not have shifted the entire slave population to 20-25%, even if we assume that all of those women’s measely broods were 100% mulatto. All slave women would need to have at least 75% mulatto offspring. What do you think happened: that every black woman had an affair with the master for “favorable working conditions” (how many favorable conditions can one man create?) or that white men simply raped black women?

    C’mon boy, I know you’re a pussy, but don’t be a coward behind the keyboard. You can anonymously acknowledge the truth here without resorting to concocting your own fictional history.

    Note that black-white pairing did not end when slavery did,

    Yet evidently that has not altered the black or white gene pool in the way that slavery altered blacks’, judging by the suspicious absence of european mitochondrial DNA in African Americans, and also the absence of European X-chromosomal ancestry.

    nor even under slavery did all such pairings involve slaves or even black women – matches between white females and free blacks were not unknown.

    Not unknown, but statistically insignificant, so who cares?

    Why are you trying to avoid the topic of this discussion, which is the mass rape of black women by white men? Cat got your tongue or something? Man up and quit trying to shift the conversation in to 30 different directions to nowhere.

    • Replies: @Anon
  244. Polistra says:
    @Indiana Jack

    though they obviously occurred (Thomas Jefferson being the most famous example)

    Sigh. Not this again. Even here, the MSM propaganda reigns.

    • Agree: JMcG
    • Replies: @J.Ross
  245. @Almost Missouri

    Then you can look at the motives from the slavers themselves. There are videos of ISIS soldiers openly lusting over what kind of sex slave they will get. (Your surprise-o-meter should be at zero to learn they desire women with lighter skin, eyes and hair.)

    Bullshit, you can’t provide a single quote.

    If there were any record of a white slaver salivating over African lady flesh for its own sake, we’d be hearing about it 24/7, so it’s pretty safe to say that the African slave trade wasn’t driven by other races’ desire to oil-drill.

    Life makes sense when you write your own history. There was a stereotype of black female seductiveness. It’s called the Jezebel stereotype and applied mainly to mulatto women. Mulatto women were considered more attractive than white women, hence the need to create them with black women.

    White men today prefer Asian, half-Asian and Mestiza women, who all have darker hair, eye and skin color than the European norm.

  246. @Hamlet's Ghost

    That’s a good question. I think there are two ways to look at it. You can deplore the general phenomenon of rape, and that’s fine. Or you can claim victim status from one of your ancestral females having been raped by one of your ancestral males, which is absurd.

  247. J.Ross says:
    @prosa123

    Y’know what would be a really unkind thing to follow this up with would be to ask about the comparison of the stereotypical work ethic of those groups.

  248. Rob says:
    @Jack D

    I have read that is not quite true. The autosomal Y chromosomes were mostly European, and the mitochondrial DNA was mostly Indian, but the autosomal DNA wax like 70% European. That is a fascinating result. Or it would be, if people doing genetics had any interest in evolution. What happened was every generation (for a while) European men would immigrate and outcompete the men already there, first the Indian, and later the mestizo men, for women.

    To my eye that looks a lot like natural selection. I don’t know what traits selection was acting upon, but any trait that is different between Europeans and Indians is a possibility. Were the immigrants smarter? More gregarious? More resistant to disease? Taller? Held their liquor better? You might say that they were higher status, but why were they higher status? In North America immigrants were usually lower status than Americans/Canadians. Whatever trait(s) caused European immigrants to be higher status was likely real, as men compete, so non-existent advantages tend to become apparent. Like, if advertising made people think that Euros were taller, but they were in fact shorter, then women would have noticed, and the reputation all/stereotype advantage enjoyed by immigrants would evaporate.

    In North America, immigrants were usually poorer than Americans, was that different in Latin America?

    I would love to see a study of what alleles were under positive selection in Latin America.

    • Replies: @Jack D
  249. J.Ross says:
    @Polistra

    Johnson’s Law (popular ignorance regarding Russia is license to make up the most outlandish lies about Russia) actually attains universally. Eg, did you know that theoretical physicists are not allowed to use the number 8?

  250. @Anonymouse

    Its a heartless opinion if used to justify the slave trade itself. But from the slave’s point of view, it seems like a win to me. I’d take that deal, if I faced the life chances of a random Central African in 1750.

  251. Rob says:
    @JohnnyWalker123

    That is so sad. The heavy bureaucracy of France weighs down its economy, as does state economic intervention. Not to mention that the stupidity of their immigrants will be a heavy burden on the actual French, making cities unlivable, and causing real estate bubbles in places with ‘good schools’. The meritocracy was a counter to those headwinds.

    As America shows, limited affirmative action is impossible across a wide cognitive gap, South African AA for the Afrikaaners demonstrated that AA can be effective when used for a previously unsorted population that is not much dumber. A generation or two of AA levels the playing field. Then there is no more need. AA for American women largely followed this pattern, too. But for a significantly dumber population, AA can never end.

    Take American firefighters. Very few blacks with the cognitive ability to be firemen cannot get AAed into something better, like a corporate gig. So when blacks took the firemen exam, very few did well enough to be hired. So various places did AA. Once blacks got a foot in the door, their natural talents shone, and they rapidly rose through the ranks? Right. Nope. No black firemen could pass the test for advancement. The usual suspects threw fits, and their judges required AA for the next level. Rinse and repeat, and there are fire chiefs not nearly bright enough for the job. If people still smoked like they used to, dumber fire departments would be a really big problem.

    Seats in the ENS schools held for dumbs will lead to the dumbs being at the bottom of the class, then scoring at the bottom of exit exams. They will need AA at every step, and France’s elite will get less capable and more corrupt. I hope France can hold back some of AA’s inherent destruction of standards. Maybe they will set quotas and maximize within each group?

    Going by the map of newborns that need to be tested for sickle cell, France is declining very quickly, and AA is much more than five times as destructive when dumbs are 50% than when they are 10%. At 10%, the organization can set them on the sidelines writing diversity reports that no one ever reads or seriously considers the suggestions therein.

    I weep for France. While they were nasty about how Americans handled our negro problem, they had no idea what the reality was like. So they imported the problem. An own goal. But the vast majority of the population does not deserve what is coming. Indeed, it is baked in an unavoidable.

  252. What’s more, in the United States, European men contributed three times more to the modern-day gene pool of people of African descent than European women did. In the British Caribbean, they contributed 25 times more.

    White women are enthusiastically picking up the slack now.

  253. Anon[162] • Disclaimer says:
    @JohnPlywood

    Why are you trying to avoid the topic of this discussion, which is the mass rape of black women by white men? Cat got your tongue or something? Man up and quit trying to shift the conversation in to 30 different directions to nowhere.

    I swear, reading some of the fantastic claims in this thread of alleged widespread rape of black women by white men is enough to make one believe the Internet incel movement is real. Is the only way you fellas can imagine being able to have sex with a woman is by raping her? Major projection going on here onto White southerners.

    Let me tell you boys something. Women are attracted to status. They are attracted to talent. They are attracted to wealth. They are attracted to power, sadly. They are even attracted to smarts and good manners. Looks can factor, too, and men of British descent are consistently ranked by women as some of the most physically appealing in the world.

    Good old-fashioned sexual attraction can explain it all.

    • Replies: @JohnPlywood
  254. @Anon

    I swear, reading some of the fantastic claims in this thread of alleged widespread rape of black women by white men is enough to make one believe the Internet incel movement is real. Is the only way you fellas can imagine being able to have sex with a woman is by raping her? Major projection going on here onto White southerners.

    Except it’s not incels on the internet making “fantastic claims”; it’s geneticists citing scholars whose historical evidence supports their findings, in the recent study that is the topic of this discussion.

    Here, let me quote the study directly for you so you so you can freak out in your seat again:

    https://www.cell.com/ajhg/fulltext/S0002-9297(20)30200-7

    Despite more than 60% of enslaved people brought to each region of the Americas being men,5 comparisons of ancestry estimates for the X chromosome and autosomes, as well as the comparison of mitochondrial (maternal) and Y (paternal) haplogroups, revealed a bias toward African female contributions to gene pools across all of the Americas.64,65 However, this African female sex bias is more extreme in Latin America (between 4 and 17 African women for every African man contributing to the gene pool) than in British-colonized Americas (between 1.5 and 2 African women for every African man contributing to the gene pool; Table 1). An Americas-wide African female sex-bias can be attributed to known accounts of rape of enslaved African women by slave owners and other sexual exploitation.19,26,62,66

    And yeah, white men are hella hot. But white women look like curdled milk. Sexual attraction can explain the widespread rape, but it was motivated by white men attracted to black and mulatta women. Not the other way around. Just like nowadays it’s Asian and mixed race women who are the subject of white male desire. They always have been.

    Do you feel stupid enough to shut up now, little brat?

    • Replies: @Ghost of Bull Moose
  255. Thoughts says:
    @Anonymouse

    Yes that is exactly what we are saying.

    I’m a direct descendent of a prostitute in the most horrid factory town on earth. I’m sure her miserable life wasn’t much better than a slave. The house she lived in was the size of the slave quarters I’ve seen on plantations.

    And now look 120ish years later, her progeny comments on iSteve

    Does this make prostitution ok? No. But the goal is and was to make life better for the next generation…which is what society over the last 100+ years has done very well (or at least until real wages started going down)

    So winning.

  256. @JohnPlywood

    (Your surprise-o-meter should be at zero to learn they desire women with lighter skin, eyes and hair.)

    Bullshit, you can’t provide a single quote.

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/isis-fighters-barter-over-yazidi-girls-slave-market-day-shocking-video-9836589.html

    Well, that took about 15 seconds.

    • Replies: @JohnPlywood
  257. @JohnPlywood

    (Your surprise-o-meter should be at zero to learn they desire women with lighter skin, eyes and hair.)

    Bullshit, you can’t provide a single quote.

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/isis-fighters-barter-over-yazidi-girls-slave-market-day-shocking-video-9836589.html

    Well, that took about 15 seconds.

  258. @JohnPlywood

    (Your surprise-o-meter should be at zero to learn they desire women with lighter skin, eyes and hair.)

    Bullshit, you can’t provide a single quote.

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/isis-fighters-barter-over-yazidi-girls-slave-market-day-shocking-video-9836589.html

    Well, that took about 15 seconds.

  259. @Bill P

    Of course there was intermarriage. The ones who intermarried (lots of them) were simply absorbed into the wider Jewish community.

    Why “of course”? Is there any historical source that attests to this b4 the 1870s conversion? In addition to the barrier posed by the Jews not thinking they were Jewish, there was also the issue of the Church/State considering them Christian , hence prohibited from marrying Jews as well as conversion. I’m not saying no such marriage ever took place but if it ever happened it was a rare phenomenon. The Subbotnik assimilation that you reference, also didn’t happen in Russia where the same barriers to intermarriage as in Hungary existed . It took place in pre-state Ottoman Palestine where the new yishuv Jews were not very observant and the Turks had little interest in policing the boundaries of other communities.

    • Replies: @Bill P
  260. Curle says:
    @Corvinus

    The addition of ‘chattel’ to the word ‘slave’ provides no useful information. It is just a way of creating dramatic effect.

    • Disagree: Corvinus
  261. @Almost Missouri

    I do not see a single quote here indicating that ISIS fighters are prefer over women with lighter skin, hair, or eyes. Predictably.

    It would stimulate my surprise-o-meter since literally no one prefers white females.

  262. @prime noticer

    I dunno … your graphic clashes with Former Congress Critter Major Owens’ history of slave trade with North America.

  263. Graham says:
    @John Milton’s Ghost

    You may well be descended from Mark Antony if you have any southern European ancestry at all. He was quite a womaniser, and twenty centuries is a lot of generations.

  264. Corvinus says:
    @Anonymous

    “I’m not trying to make it better than it was, as much as ensuring it’s not portrayed as worse than it was either.”

    Actually, it was just as it was portrayed–horrific. The reality is that tens of millions of people were ripped from their homeland to serve the God of Mammon. You are trying to whitewash history here. The ex-slaves accounts indeed discuss “kind masters” and “good homes” because, compared to the majority of plantation owners, they conduct stood out. But every single slaveowner was equally sadistic in the long run for taking away one’s freedom out of pure greed. So whether trying to make “life easier” for their property, due to”Christian charity” or out of a “guilty conscious”, those actions do NOT exonerate their transgressions.

    Evil is evil, right? Or are you a liberal who makes excuses for immoral and illicit behavior?

    • Replies: @Clyde
  265. @Wilkey

    I am sure this is true. My patrilineal line members didn’t so much believe they had Indian ancestry as “hoped”. Because “Oklahoma”. My early tests (2002) and those later and better refined showed none. Elizabeth Warren, who had no historical reason to believe there was any connection got lucky with a “possible” 1oth generation ancestor. (So still not definitive (background noise).) Likely false positive if you will. This was kind of a tragedy for one of my cousins and her husband. They had taken in a tribal child as a foster daughter for several years. When the time came that under normal circumstances they could adopt, the compassionate nourishing tribal council took her away to give her a proper upbringing. Ha! Had we some of that magic blood they could have kept her.

  266. Aardvark says:
    @Anonymouse

    It seems the people of present day sub-Saharan Africa seek to rid themselves of their unpleasant state of existence by emigrating to Europe or the U.S. in droves. In general, blacks rarely leave the United States to return to their ancestral lands. Note this was tried en masse once back in the 1800’s when freed slaves went to what is now modern day Liberia. I’m afraid it hasn’t worked out as good for them as it would have if they had stayed in the U.S.

  267. BCB232 says:
    @Paperback Writer

    “American slavery protected female virtue more than Mother Nature herself.”

    Yes, it seems American Protestant Christianity reduced African female success at cuckholding their men. “You’re welcome” African men.

    Also, how much of the genetic skew in ancestry represents differential reproductive success for those with some European genetics?

  268. @Jon

    Yes, because they are cynical exploiters. I am talking about normal Latino people.

    Also, airheads like this Latina chick would go completely bonkers if she found se was 70% white.

  269. @Ghost of Bull Moose

    You’ll get a cameo, and you’ll be happy with that.

  270. @Chrisnonymous

    Really, Steve-o? I’m the first comment and sitting in moderation? F’ing BS moderation.

    Chris, I get the sentiment and I dunno how long you’ve been around and no offense intended, but how do you know* *I* didn’t post before YOU and I’m sitting in Mod ahead of you? And, ahead of us, 20 or 30 more, or 50? Why, you ask? Because Steve is flesh and blood. He has to sleep, eat, wife, golf and live, aside from here. When he gets back to the home office, THEN he starts moderating.

    No offense, Chris, how do you know you were first? I comment before any comments have been posted on articles all the time (ok, couple times a week), then I come up sometimes next day, #80. Steve has to get to other stuff before he gets back to placating his children here, heh

    Calling SailerMan! Do I have the process right? You could have 30 first-comments waiting in cue after an article before you release them from moderation, correct? I see guys bitching about this all the time. Understood about the other things, ya gotta live and golf between this and life. Balancing all the time, right?

    • Agree: JMcG
  271. Clyde says:

    Everyone who was working with their hands, backs and body was treated like shiite and died young back then (slavery days in the US) Slavery means you buy, sell and divide up black families 200 years ago. But 90% at least, of our US population worked just as hard on farms and in factories, died before 45 or 50, if they even made it out of childbirth, childhood and its diseases.

    Slavery meant and *still* means humiliation under a white master 170 years ago. Slavery has been gone since 1865 but blacks have been working the reparations racket since 1965 when the first riots lead to LBJs Great Society billions being laid on them so as not to riot any more. —– I must go now but the ordinary blacks where I live (many who don’t look like they have jobs) all drive spanking new Korean and Japanese iron. Mostly cross-over and SUV style. Undoubtedly on an 8 year credit plan. They know how to extract from whitey (in this case banks and credit agencies) to pay and pay and pay.

    Then you have the immigrant rackets where they never pay taxes, in fact get all kinds of tax refunds. Whitey you chumps! Don’t get me started!

  272. Clyde says:
    @Corvinus

    To our resident certified fool. You should be teleported back to the slave days era to see how everyone was brutally overworked. You need to be put on a Nebraska farm in 1860 and to be worked until you drop. This was the norm for white people. Blacks as slaves in the South worked as hard and their families were usually left intact. At least 90% of Americans worked on farms. An African here would not even know how to own farm property here, as demonstrated during Reconstruction

    As Mr. Anon rightfully says to you – “Idiot!”

    • Troll: Corvinus
  273. nebulafox says:
    @Corvinus

    If you were a zek in the gulag, you stood a much higher chance of surviving your ordeal than you did if you were a Jew shipped to Treblinka, made for the sole purpose of exterminating people. That doesn’t somehow make the gulag any less monstrous.

    Same dynamic here. You stood a much better chance of surviving your first years in the New World if you ended up in America and not in Brazil, for reasons ranging from lack of tropical diseases to the nature of the work to not being beholden to hardcore criminals. Pointing that out doesn’t imply that American slavery was somehow not brutal.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    , @Corvinus
  274. Jack D says:
    @Rob

    I thought about this further and in order for blacks to come in at circa 20% white there may have been only a moderate # of black-white pairings at an early time.

    Take the Hemings family situation (let’s put aside the question of whether Thomas or some other white guy was the father). Sally’s grandmother was fully African, her mother was 1/2 African, Sally was 1/4 African and her kids were 1/8th African (and “passed” as white when they moved north). After only 3 generations of “rape”, they were not 80% African, they were 12% African. If black-white pairings were ongoing for generation after generation (lots and lots of rapes by massa, generation after generation as blacks like to imagine – black women always overestimate their attractiveness), then the African genes would essentially have disappeared.

    But we know this didn’t happen. The (or at least one) way you get to 25% is that 1/2 of all black females couple once with a white man at an early time and thereafter this mixed/fully black group breed only with each other. Keep in mind that all 40 million ADOS blacks in America are descended from about 500,000 slaves imported from Africa of which say 250,000 were female so you are talking about 125,000 mothers of mixed race children (and keep in mind that like Hemings many slave women had many children by the same white father) or a few ten thousands of white fathers in one early generation. (In early times, the slaves were mixed in with white indentured servants, who basically had the same status as slaves but only for the # of years given in their contract. If you look at the early “runaway” ads, maybe half are for runaway slaves and half are for runaway indentured servants. Very early the VA legislature decided that offspring of black slave mothers and white fathers would also be slaves because they realized that otherwise they would run out of slaves real fast.) And even if there are never any more “rapes” you have a population that has 25% white genes.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    , @Rob
  275. nebulafox says:
    @prosa123

    In Brazil, it was cheaper to simply import new slaves than to keep your current ones alive and encourage them to breed.

    Part of this was because of how sugar cultivation worked. Sugar plantations were very labor intensive, much moreso than cotton or indigo or coffee: you needed to irrigate the sugar, harvest it, and process it precisely. (This often involved a lot of accidents, exacerbated by overwork. Slaves with maimed limbs were common sights on sugar plantations.) They required a lot of startup capital. But the profit you could make if you got off the ground was *ridiculous*: people were making crazy amounts of money off sugar in an age before refrigerators. So that meant large-scale plantations bootstrapped by banking houses back in France or Portugal. Again: there was a very good reason that Virginian slaves were terrified of the idea of being sold to a sugar plantation.

    Also, don’t underrate the role of disease. Africans were believed to be more immune to whites to stuff like malaria or yellow fever, but I’m not sure how true that was.

  276. Jack D says:
    @nebulafox

    Based on the slave accounts that have come down to us, the conditions for slaves in the US were not remotely as cruel as conditions in the gulag. Not even close. For one thing, slaves in the US were considered to be (were) valuable property so mistreating or killing them was contrary to the owners’ interests. Work in the gulag was driven only by fear – if you failed to perform, you would be shot. Slaves had no fear of execution, except for capital crimes. Corporal punishment was fairly common but then again they did this to school children also in those days. Generally most slave owners operated using some combination of the carrot and the stick, whereas the gulag was 100% stick and life had no value. You really can’t compare the two.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  277. nebulafox says:
    @Corvinus

    > In sub-Saharan Africa, the slave relationships were often complex, with rights and freedoms given to individuals held in slavery and restrictions on sale and treatment by their masters, which is patently different than American slavery, where slaves were seen as property and a status symbol in perpetuity.

    “Sub-Saharan Africa” was not some monolithic civilization, so naturally, social institutions differed from culture to culture. Some slaves were debtors from the local community whose status was (theoretically) temporary. But others were chattel-i.e, property-straight up purchased or captured in war. They could be manumitted… just like slaves in any other culture, including in the US. All in all, not too different from any other place or time in pre-modern world history.

    (Interestingly, it seems as though some African rulers also had the idea of slave-soldiers exclusively loyal to them. This was akin to the largely Turkic ghilman of the medieval Islamic World, to the point where they ended up dominating the militaries of the region similar to how the Germanic peoples dominated the late antique Roman military. Some ended up with their own dynasties.)

    Without the intimate relationship between African elites and European (and Muslim) traders, the flesh trade wouldn’t have been able to exist. It was profitable for all sides involved. And why not? It’s not as if the existence of the institution was ever seriously debated until relatively recently in human history. It was accepted to the point where wealthy freemen would themselves buy slaves if they had the means. Even the explicit racialization of slavery in the US couldn’t prevent over a quarter of the free blacks in antebellum New Orleans from owning slaves.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    , @Jack D
  278. @JohnPlywood

    First sentence of the fifth paragraph:

    The men discuss how much each slave is worth, with one fighter claiming that he will pay more for a girl with “blue eyes”

    As for your weeaboo chart, we’ve been over this before:

    https://www.unz.com/akarlin/bezmenov/#comment-3983237

    • Replies: @JohnPlywood
  279. @Jonathan Mason

    There is a sector of American women of the last 3 generations who measure success by the quantity, pleasure, and “meaningfulness” of experiences they achieved; orgasm quality and quantity ranks high in their evaluation. If and when they have one child some time in their 30’s or 40’s, often with a husband, they rank that experience, too, as valuable. They accept Darwinism as established truth. They reject it as their code of conduct. Why, then, do they vote Democratic?

  280. Jack D says:
    @nebulafox

    Even the explicit racialization of slavery in the US couldn’t prevent over a quarter of the free blacks in antebellum New Orleans from owning slaves.

    There was a small % of the Southern population that owned plantations with dozens of slaves. But in the 19th century, before the invention of labor saving household appliances (washing machines, vacuum cleaners, lawn mowers, etc.) it was almost impossible to run a middle class or above household without at least a couple of servants so most of these families owned a couple or three. In the North, these servants would often be Irish immigrants. In California they might be Chinese or Japanese. In the South they were black slaves. It’s not clear that the standard of living of the black household slaves was significantly worse than that of paid servants, especially in the early days when indentured servitude was little different than slavery.

    Sometimes I see websites run by (black or white) anti-Semites who think that it’s a “gotcha” that they can show that the (never very numerous) Jews of the South owned slaves. As you say, this was just normal for that time and place – it would have been strange for a middle class family of any race or religion NOT to own slaves in the South. How was your wife supposed to run the household without any help? You might not even be real keen on slavery but you really didn’t have much choice. It’s like middle class people today who are concerned with global warming but they are not about to give up their cars and do their grocery shopping on a bicycle. Not only is it inconvenient, but it would cause people to think of you as weird or to question your economic status. “Don’t mind this dust – I’m against slavery so I just clean the house as best as I can by myself.” There were a few abolitionists in the South, but they were mostly considered (sometimes actually were) nuts. Most people just accept the structure of the society that they live in as it is and aren’t going to act like 2021 SJW’s in 1850 New Orleans.

  281. Jack D says:
    @nebulafox

    “Sub-Saharan Africa” was not some monolithic civilization,

    Because most map projections make land masses closer to the poles appear bigger than they really are relative to equatorial lands and because Africa centers on the equator, most people don’t really how vast Africa really is, even for a continent. This map is helpful in understanding its vastness:

    From Tunis to Cape Town is about 5,000 miles as the crow flies or about twice the distance from NY to LA. Imagine if you got to LA and you were only halfway across America.

    • Replies: @Rob McX
  282. @Jack D

    Thanks for the update.

    Just to fuss over the numbers a little, I thought the number of Africans imported to the US was closer to 400,000 (or 388,000 plus some uncertain few thousands transferred privately from the Caribbean), and that the imported Africans skewed slightly (60%ish) male. So you would only have 160,000 original African females, so half would be only 80,000.

    If I had to guess, I would say it probably wasn’t even half of females, but rather closer to a quarter or so, with mulatto and quadroon children repeatedly back-ingressing (3/8-roons?) into the black population making up the difference. Also, to the extent the mixed race were the children of owners and overseers, they probably had better odds of successfully reproducing. So today’s 20%ish whiteness of US blacks could be the result of no more than, say, 30,000 original white-black pairings.

    If danand‘s prediction comes true, maybe we’ll know the answer in a few decades.

    And good point, that many early pairings may have been with fellow bondsmen (indentured servants) rather than with owners.

  283. nebulafox says:
    @Jack D

    Re, the gulag: I was comparing it to an extermination camp, not slavery. Obviously, nothing this side of the Mongols scores in the same league of nightmarishness as 20th Century totalitarian states. The point is that just because one had a bigger survival rate didn’t make a non-crime against humanity. It’s the same deal if you compare American slavery to a contemporary African slave destination with higher death tolls, like Brazil or Haiti. Mature people can accept that while still recognizing it for the horror it was, but America’s not really a mature society these days.

    In general, people don’t seem to appreciate how different pre-modern agrarian societies could be in terms of basic assumptions on ethics, particularly when it came to those at the bottom of the social ladder. Nobody wanted to be a slave, but until the 18th Century, it was seen as the worst of any number of “mean” conditions in life-it was precisely because things like indentured servitude were being erased that slavery stood out all the more, and the defenses and attacks against it became more passionate. But broadly speaking, it’s deeply silly to assume there was something inherently malignant-or, on the other hand, inherently benevolent-about one particular group or race of people. Compared to modern times, they all look pretty nasty: and compared to, say, the Bronze Age, classical antiquity, or medieval times, they look positively enlightened. I suppose part of the reason American slavery gets such press time, in addition to all the obvious modern political factors, is the fact that it was a visible counterpoint to a parallel society (one which pioneered abolitionism) that embodied the new, industralized age. Really, the outcome of the American Civil War proved the superiority of the new model, and the fate of states that didn’t catch up quickly, no less definitively than the Opium Wars did.

    • Replies: @Jack D
  284. @Anon

    To correct the other half of [zer] statement, there was a great deal of relocation in the 19th century. None of my Civil War ancestors died in the state they were born in. In some cases, there was a third state along the way.

    That may have been more true of the old country. Kant is said never to have ventured more than 60 miles from Königsberg in his 79 years. Yet his own maternal grandfather was from Nuremberg, over 500 miles away. Somebody moved.

    • Replies: @Jack D
  285. @Jack D

    Question: why do you have such an apparent problem conceding the fact that considering their small population, no matter what country they lived in, historically, Jews have been at the front front of dominating a nations economic system., even resorting to morally repugnant and questionable economic methods to do so. Slavery was no different. After all, that a group that is also known as a faith system would engage, actually take the lead in some corners of the would, in questionable economic practices (e.g. usury, for example) would have no qualms about enslaving other human beings under the “hey, nothing personal, it’s just business as usual”. And considering that Judaism the religion alleges a high ethical standard above all other faiths, the question remains as to why they would engage in, and continue to engage in, something that over time became a repugnant moral evil.

    And it was not Judaism per se that took the lead in the global Anti-slavery movement. It was another faith that did take the lead in paving the way for total abolition worldwide of the dreaded institution.

    Resorting to the “Well, it was never really a big deal. Historically, everyone participated in it.” That’s an evasion. Lots of reprehensible behaviors were engaged in worldwide without much peep or protest to the ethical aspects of it at first, including infanticide, child rape/pedophilia, etc. And perhaps not very surprisingly, Judaism was nowhere to be found in taking the lead in helping to eradicate these abhorrent practices either while another faith did help lead the way in the worlds perception towards the ethical aspects of such practices. From usury, slavery, to selling women in white slavery/prostitution (also known as human trafficking), this group of people, sometimes referred to as primarily a faith system, unfortunately historically hasn’t had a very good track record on recognizing the basic dignity of fellow human beings.

    To revert to the “Well, it’s good for business, nothing personal, and everyone did it” proves the point that there is a major difference between a group that never rises above the moral degeneracy and a group that is ahead of its time by stressing the common humanity (and thus such different peoples should be afforded respect and basic dignity) of all peoples.

    • Replies: @Jack D
  286. Jack D says:
    @Reg Cæsar

    Yet his own maternal grandfather was from Nuremberg, over 500 miles away. Somebody moved.

    In nature (and in human culture) this sort of “punctuated equilibrium” is very common. At some point certain nomadic tribes, pressured by other tribes coming from the east, migrate west thousands of miles across the steppes and then they find a good spot to settle in Europe, slaughter the local men and take the local women as their wives and there their descendants remain for hundreds of years until there is a world war or something that disrupts the equilibrium again, whereupon they might end up in a different continent. When something really big or bad happens, moving 60 miles is not going to cut it.

  287. Jack D says:
    @nebulafox

    As someone else pointed out, slavery was in the process of disappearing everywhere (had already been abolished in the British possessions) and could not have lasted more than maybe another 20 or 30 years at best, so all the massive losses and destruction of the Civil War were basically for nothing – the end result would have been the same anyway. How long could slavery have lasted? 1880? 1890? Once you have the mechanical cotton picker you don’t need all those slaves – they become a burden. Cotton production was shifting to Egypt and India anyway, where labor costs were even lower than the cost of American slaves.

    I don’t blame Lincoln for this – I blame the South. The natural response when you feel confronted by what you think are extremists is to take an equal and opposite extreme position. The counter position to “abortion on demand” is not some sensible compromise where abortion is only permitted up to X number of weeks or only in cases of rape or incest or where the health of the mother is threatened but rather to totally and completely ban abortion in all cases. The South had certain beefs with how the North was treating runaway slaves, etc. but instead of making some kind of deal (you can keep the blacks, let’s just set up a program that pays the former owner compensation for his lost property) they went for an absolutist solution and they got one, just not the one that they wanted. If your demands are “All or Nothing” then nothing is one of the possible outcomes.

  288. Bill P says:
    @kaganovitch

    …They buried their dead according to Jewish religious law far from the village and outwardly staged a Christian burial, the coffin filled with stones. They celebrated Jewish holidays in caves or other distant places to avoid provoking the neighbors’ suspicions. They tried to have their children work in Jewish homes, sometimes without a salary, so that they could learn about the Judaic precepts and their observance. They married other Sabbatarians. In a few cases, they agreed to have their daughters marry Jews, but only on condition that the groom’s family observed the Jewish precepts piously.

    In this way they were sometimes integrated into the greatest rabbinic dynasties of Transylvania. This fact remains a huge secret in some ultra-Orthodox families down to our time, but is open information on birth certificates and marriage licenses that are deposited in various archives in Hungary…

    https://www.haaretz.com/1.5184577

    There’s a lot more of this kind of stuff, plus plenty of evidence of Jews proselytizing throughout Europe (which provoked suppressions in various places).

    • Replies: @Jack D
  289. Jack D says:
    @Bill P

    It’s not that this NEVER happened, it just didn’t happen a lot. The norm in E. Europe prior to the Enlightenment (and the Enlightenment came later the further east you went) was that everyone stayed in their own silo. There were cases of Jews converting to Christianity or vice versa but these were the exceptions rather than the rule. When Lenin’s grandfather converted to Christianity it was such a rare (and therefore high profile) event that two prominent politicians acting as the godfather for the converts. Modern day authors (usually with some agenda to prove) go back and find these exceptional cases (which do in fact exist, but in small numbers) and make them seem as if they were the norm when they were far from that. Even in the case of Sharon in Israel, how many Israeli Jews have Subbotnik ancestry?

    We see a similar thing with the attempts to retcon blacks into European history. One of Pushkin’s great-grandfathers was indeed black – that’s absolutely true. But this makes Pushkin perhaps the ONLY Russian literary figure from that period with any black ancestry, it doesn’t mean that there were blacks all over the place in the royal courts of Europe.

    When my daughter did her Ancestry.com DNA test, at first the test came back 99% Ashkenazi, 1% E. European. (The reason she did it at all was that in my wife’s family there was a “family legend” that she had a Sephardic ancestor – this is the Ashkenazi equivalent of Americans who believe that they have American Indian ancestors. When my wife went to Spain, she saw a lot of women on the street who sorta looked like her so it didn’t seem far fetched. Ashkenazi/Sephardic marriages were always permitted under Jewish law although long ago the rabbis of the Syrian Sephardic community in NY ruled that they should only marry each other because they realized that if they allowed intermarriage with the much larger Ashkenazi community that their community would just disappear) Anyway, after a few months Ancestry emailed her and said that they had updated their databases and now they were classifying her DNA as 100% Ashkenazi Jewish. Similarly, most white Americans have 0% African ancestry or very close to it. In other countries (Latin America) the racial lines were not as strictly drawn. The gap between Jews and non-Jews in E. Europe was at one time not unlike the gap between blacks and whites in America in Jim Crow times.

    • Replies: @Bill P
  290. @Almost Missouri

    First sentence of the fifth paragraph:

    The men discuss how much each slave is worth, with one fighter claiming that he will pay more for a girl with “blue eyes”

    That is not the same thing as a quote indicating that ISIS fighters prefer women with lighter skin, hair or eye color. Quite the opposite, in fact, it’s just one dork saying he’ll pay more for a girl with blue eyes.

    Which makes sense, as blue eyes are less attractive on women than they are on men, and are genetically rarer in females.

    [MORE]

    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23601698/

    In recent years, several studies have greatly increased our understanding of the genetic basis underlying human eye colour variation. A large percentage of the eye colour diversity present in humans can already be genetically explained, so much so that different DNA-based eye colour prediction models, such as IrisPlex, have been recently developed for forensic purposes. Though these models are already highly accurate, they are by no means perfect, with many genotype-phenotype discrepancies still remaining unresolved. In this work we have genotyped six SNPs associated with eye colour (IrisPlex) in 535 individuals from Spain, a Mediterranean population. Aside from different SNP frequencies in Spain compared to Northern Europe, the results for eye colour prediction are quite similar to other studies. However, we have found an association between gender and eye colour prediction. When comparing similar eye colour genetic profiles, females tend, as a whole, to have darker eyes than males (and, conversely, males lighter than females). These results are also corroborated by the revision and meta-analysis of data from previously published eye colour genetic studies in several Caucasian populations, which significantly support the fact that males are more likely to have blue eyes than females, while females tend to show higher frequencies of green and brown eyes than males. This significant gender difference would suggest that there is an as yet unidentified gender-related factor contributing to human eye colour variation.

    Attractive, high estrogen female faces have darker eyes, skin, hair color:

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1560017/#__ffn_sectitle

    Figure 1 Composite faces of the (a) 10 women with highest and (b) 10 with lowest levels of late follicular oestrogen metabolite (oestrone-3-glucuronide, E1G).

    The construction of the composite faces of the women highest and lowest in oestrogen levels allowed a visualization of our correlational results. There appear to be multiple visual differences between the two face groups evident in the composites. The oestrogen female face was consistently rated as more attractive, feminine and healthy looking. Future studies should address the nature of facial cues related to hormone levels.

    As usual, you have made big claims and come up with nothing. There’s no evidence that ISIS fighters or men anywhere prefer women with blue eyes.

    Also, you addressed nothing about my “weeaboo” chart and resorted to the expected coping and conspiratorial thinking (“abdication of white women”) that we all expect from white trashionalists. Multiple studies dating from 2005-2020 that demonstrate that men prefer the looks of Asian and mixed-Asian women over white women, here’s a couple to touch your nerves:

    https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13506285.2018.1475437

    https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1068/p5191

    In experiment 1, Caucasian participants rated own-race composites as more attractive than other-race composites, but only for male faces

    Marriages between White men and Asian women are over twice as frequent as those between White women and Asian men. Recent research has proposed that this imbalance may be explained by the finding that, on average, White men are perceived as more attractive than Asian men, and Asian women are perceived as more attractive than White women, possibly because Asian faces are perceived as more feminine than White faces

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
  291. @International Jew

    It should be obvious to everyone that we’re all descended from a lot of rape. And yes, it’s written in our genes.

  292. Rob McX says:
    @Jack D

    People really need to see that map more often. People in Europe seem to have an idea that the Africans crossing the Mediterranean are fleeing a cramped and overcrowded continent. Britain has more than six times the population density of Africa.

  293. @Bill P

    A quick summary:
    1. Ashkenazi Jews are relatively genetically homogeneous for a European community (Ashkenazi Jews from England, Ukraine etc all look the same)
    2. They lived apart with very little intermarriage (see Pale of Settlement).
    3. The exception to #2, above, being two large mixing events – the first in Rome after the diaspora and the second in Central/Eastern Europe during the Middle Ages.
    4. Most people that have looked at Ashkenazi DNA agree that they’re very roughly 40% Eastern Mediterranean; 40% Southern European/Italian; and 20% Central/Eastern European.

    There’s a lot of disagreement on the details, and beyond the basic 4 points above I really don’t have a strong opinion or even care. For example, was the S Euro component actually from migrant Greeks? Was most of the E Med component from Anatolian converts? The basic science looks correct and wild conspiracies are just that. However, we’ll probably never be certain on the details.

    I believe in the early days 23andMe didn’t have a separate category for Ashkenazis and so Jews would get these weird results saying they’re part French and Lebanese or something like that. Now they just lump you in the Ashkenazi grouping and leave the details of what’s Ashkenazi to academic debate. Based on my own results and people I know, most A Jews get between 96-98% Ashkenazi but I’ve never seen over 99%. This is genetic taxonomy, not an exact science.

    • Replies: @Bill P
  294. vinteuil says:
    @james wilson

    A J Froude details in Bow of Ulysses the failure of Caribbean slavery to reproduce and the constant need for importing more slaves, a problem apparently not shared with American slavery.

    Are you, by any chance, a member of The Thomas Carlyle Club for Young Reactionaries?

  295. @JohnPlywood

    lmao.

    “So many black women couldn’t have thrown themselves at white men, it must’ve been rape!” is some flawless logic there, dummy.

    Gosh, its almost like you deny every stereotype—currently being reinforced daily, in real time, in social media and celebrity magazines—about black women being the sluttiest of females.

    I’m curious as to why you’re so bothered by the fact that it was mass black female hypergamy and sluttiness? Is it because you are so troubled that black women so willingly threw themselves at master?

  296. @prosa123

    Not in St. Kitts where I have read the contemporaneous reports of the slave owning years. There were government Ordinances (laws) specifying the conditions under which slaves could be held. Inter alia these provided free Sundays proper food and right to medical treatment when ill.
    Emancipation in the British Empire was not universally popular and slaves complained as free labour ers sometimes there was not employment available. And no pay

  297. @prosa123

    Not in St. Kitts where I have read the contemporaneous reports of the slave owning years. There were government Ordinances (laws) specifying the conditions under which slaves could be held. Inter alia these provided free Sundays proper food and right to medical treatment when ill.
    Emancipation in the British Empire was not universally popular and slaves complained as free labour ers sometimes there was not employment available. And no pay

  298. @Jonathan Mason

    Note how our paid troll offers no link to substantiation of his claims. Almost like he’s making them up…..

  299. That’s all fine and dandy, but it’s a thing of the past and it’s driven by ideological and political motivations.

    The million dollar question is what are the current trends? Which group of men is the most reproductively successful in 2020 in the US? I’ve found plenty of data on demographic statistics and trends, but none about this.
    And I guess there isn’t too much available because everyone suspects, but no one really wants to officially admit that the ones punching above their weight are black men.

  300. @JohnPlywood

    These charts are obviously false. As a white man, I have been hit on countless times by black women. The feeling was rarely mutual, but their interest was unmistakable.

    When I used to do the phone-dating services in the Bay Area in the 90s the site was absolutely clogged with lonely black women, perhaps due to the massive murder rates in Oakland of black men by other black men, but not just because of it.

    I also don’t know why you keep crying that white women are not attractive. That’s clearly also preposterous. Perhaps you are talking about the white women that are attracted to black men: most of them are clearly ugly, as elegantly parodied in one of those 90s black comedy films done by the Wayans.

    Finally, you screaming rape over and over in a crowded theater doesn’t make it so. 150 to 300 years ago sex between men and women (and even small animals and livestock) was looked at vastly differently than in the MeToo era.

    In fact just go back 25 years to see a vast difference. Please stop your squawking, disinformation, and hysteria. Cálmate, por favor.

    • Replies: @anon
    , @JohnPlywood
  301. @Lurker

    The most plausible scenario is indeed that it was the white indentured servants who labored alongside blacks in the early plantations who are the source of white ancestry in today’s African-Americans.

    In early colonial America, there was likely not so much racial division as in later times. In 1685 white servants and Africans fought together in what was known as Bacon’s Rebellion. Afterwards, the colonial authorities made efforts to keep the two races divided so no further rebellions would occur.

  302. @Corvinus

    Racist liar. You have no idea what you’re talking about, and your scholarly sources are blaxploitation flicks.

    • Troll: Corvinus
  303. “While the majority of enslaved people brought to the Americas were male, the study found enslaved women had a disproportionate impact on the gene pool of their descendants, evidence of the systematic rape and sexual exploitation of enslaved Black women.”

    Non sequitur alert!

    Historian of slavery, Eugene Genovese, determined that White masters had little interest in black slaves, and that miscegenation was largely the product of consensual liaisons between free black prostitutes and White Johns after manumission.

    My own, complementary theory is that a substantial proportion of people who think they are black are descended from rapes black men committed against White women.

    black supremacist fake journalist Ida B. Wells asserted, without any evidence, that no black man EVER raped a White woman. According to Wells, any time a White woman cried rape, it was simply because she had been caught in flagrante with a black man she had chosen to lie with.

    Nikole Hannah-Jones, who propagated the new york times’ 1619 hoax, uses “Ida Bae Wells” as one of her twitter handles (yes, she gets two). In other words, one racist journalistic fraud identifies with another. I believe that the Pulitzer that was posthumously awarded to Wells the same year that Jones got her official Pulitzer, was a stealth second Pulitzer for Jones.

    • Agree: AceDeuce
    • Replies: @Corvinus
  304. Jack D says:
    @Yojimbo/Zatoichi

    Question: why do you have such an apparent problem conceding the fact that considering their small population, no matter what country they lived in, historically, Jews have been at the front front of dominating a nations economic system., even resorting to morally repugnant and questionable economic methods to do so.

    Because it’s a lie.

    As far as morality goes, the Bible, authored by Jews, laid out an ethical system that is the basis for all Western religious and legal systems and is practiced to this day. They did this at a time when most Europeans were still painting themselves blue and practicing human sacrifice. While the Greeks and the Romans were more advanced mathematically and technologically, their ethical system stunk and their religion and civilization ultimately disappeared and were replaced by one that is biblically based.

    While Christians may have taken the lead in abolition, they also took the lead in ownership of slaves and support for the slave system. There were too few Jews in the American South to sustain a slave system. The slave system in the US existed because of Christians, not Jews.

    A guy you might know of once said, do not look at the mote in your neighbor’s eye but consider the beam in your own.

  305. anon[399] • Disclaimer says:
    @restless94110

    I also don’t know why you keep crying that white women are not attractive.

    Plywood is a troll with a fixation on east Asian women and/or hatred of white women.
    First, last and always a troll.

  306. @JohnPlywood

    All of that was already addressed last time we discussed this.

    I can’t decide if you are Tiny Duck’s effort poast account or just suffering from mental illness. Either way, good luck to you.

  307. @restless94110

    I also don’t know why you keep crying that white women are not attractive. That’s clearly also preposterous. Perhaps you are talking about the white women that are attracted to black men: most of them are clearly ugly, as elegantly parodied in one of those 90s black comedy films done by the Wayans.

    No, I’m referring to white women in general, who get less atrention than Asian or Latina women despite greatly outnumbering them in the USA.

    Just the facts, please. Do you have a factual source that claims white women are perceived as more attractive than East Asian women? I can’t find any for some reason. They all say the opposite.

  308. Bill P says:
    @Anonymous Jew

    A quick summary:
    1. Ashkenazi Jews are relatively genetically homogeneous for a European community (Ashkenazi Jews from England, Ukraine etc all look the same)
    2. They lived apart with very little intermarriage (see Pale of Settlement).

    The intermarriage rate was low, of course, but it varied over time and place, and even a low rate of a few percent leads to a lot of mixing over centuries.

    This doesn’t preclude a distinct Jewish people, but that’s not what I’m getting at. Jews can be largely European but still distinct, because they have a distinct lifestyle and philosophy, which does eventually manifest in distinct phenotypes.

    However, they are not a different race.

    3. The exception to #2, above, being two large mixing events – the first in Rome after the diaspora and the second in Central/Eastern Europe during the Middle Ages.
    4. Most people that have looked at Ashkenazi DNA agree that they’re very roughly 40% Eastern Mediterranean; 40% Southern European/Italian; and 20% Central/Eastern European.

    Sounds about right to me, with some regional variation. The Litvaks/Baltic Jews I’ve known, for example, looked more northern European than central European Jews.

    Also, I suspect that many of the converts were a bit different from most Europeans, too. It seems that Magyars were partial toward Judaism. Perhaps there were some other tribes who also found Judaism appealing because they didn’t quite fit in with the mainstream.

    But ultimately, the main distinction is philosophical. Palestinian Christians are descended from classical Jews who followed Jesus (who for some time after Christ were still considered Jews), and they are genetically more similar to classical Jews than Ashkenazim. Most everyone agrees that they are not Jews today, but the average Ashkenazi with some 40% Levantine ancestry is. To me, that makes it pretty clear that Judaism is primarily – if not entirely – a matter of conscience.

    Not to say that’s unimportant. Humans are rational beings, and the choices we make have a real, physical influence on us and our descendants. That, I think, is one of the special things about Jews (and Ashkenazi Jews in particular): more than the vast majority of other human beings, they have molded their people through their own conscious will. It’s a pretty extraordinary accomplishment when you think about it.

  309. @JohnPlywood

    Interesting how the male desirability curve according to age looks a lot like the desirability curve employers have for employees. For intellectual productivity, 35-50 is perceived as the sweet spot balancing vigor and experience. Though I read somewhere that most great intellectuals develop their best ideas when they’re young even if it takes them into their 40s 50s or even later to develop them and reap the rewards.

  310. @JohnPlywood

    White men used to rape black women a lot? Why did they stop?

  311. Charlotte says:
    @Federalist

    My understanding is that in pre-Civil War Louisiana, wealthy plantation owners sometimes kept free colored mistresses (in addition to any dalliances with slaves). These women were frequently more white than black by ancestry, and some of their children probably appeared to be white. Add in some education and perhaps a little money from dad, and it’s not hard to imagine that the occasional child might grow up to cross the color line.

    There are other factors present in Louisiana history as well, notably the Spanish and French influence. Neither culture was as intent on maintaining the color line as Anglo-America.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    , @Federalist
  312. Corvinus says:
    @nebulafox

    “You stood a much better chance of surviving your first years in the New World if you ended up in America and not in Brazil.”

    Citation required.

    • Replies: @nebulafox
  313. Corvinus says:
    @Jack D

    You are completely missing the point. Evil is evil in this specific situation. No amount of moralizing or posturing will change the fact that slavery is abject cruelty. Being considered as property, as being other than human, as being subject to the whip with the threat of execution or castration…the end result is that slavery, regardless if in the U.S., in the Caribbean, or in Brazil, was equally abominable. Why? The loss of one’s personal freedom.

    “Actually slave owners were responsible for taking care of elderly and disabled slaves. Some were better than others but the general rule was that the slave owner was obliged to take care of his slaves for life.”

    How noble of the southern “gentlemen”. Thank you, massa, fer letin me in my dyin days not to be in da kitchin or in the fields. Thank you, massa.

    Let us examine that type of care, shall we?

    https://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu/bitstream/10125/58499/1/391.pdf

    Some planters felt that such specific, “simple” jobs were particularly suited to bondspeople with physical or mental impairments (Postell, 1953). As Louisiana planter Haller Nutt complained in an 1843 journal entry, overseers sometimes erroneously assigned “hearty strong negros [sic]” to simple tasks “which could be done equally as well by some feeble hand or cripple” (Nutt, [1843-1850], p. 5). However, the simple jobs that disabled slaves often performed were not necessarily easy; for instance, New Hampshire native Emily Burke’s memoir (1991) of life in Georgia in the 1840s claims that “the task of the cook was the most laborious” of all house servant positions, since cooks had to rise early, prepare lots of meals, and perform strenuous tasks like grinding meal or meat and gathering firewood (p. 41). Burke also notes that some elderly women held the job of watching over plantation nurseries—which could include children from one week to five years old—and “it is no small task for two or three of these females, themselves in a second infancy, to rock the cradles and attend to the wants of twenty or thirty young children” (p. 91). Furthermore, old age or physical impairment did not automatically preclude a slave from being assigned to hard labor. On the Ball family’s Limerick plantation in South Carolina, an 1807 crew assigned “to work on the roads” included several “old hands past muster” like Old Billy, Old Handy, and Old July (Ball Family, 1807).

  314. @Charlotte

    In the later 19th Century in New Orleans, about a dozen mulatto musicians were sent to Paris to study the state of the art in composing music on their white dad’s dime.

    That did a lot for the sophistication of New Orleans music, with huge beneficial consequences in the 20th Century.

  315. @Jack D

    Actually, the “gotcha” doesn’t come from the fact that Jews owned slaves. It comes from them running the slave trade and all its vileness that so many feel need more attention. See Prof. Tony Martin’s work on the subject.

    • Replies: @Bill P
    , @Corvinus
  316. dvorak says:

    0.19% black

    Rumor has it that the ancestry DNA firms like to toss some pepper in the results. Every little corporate effort helps in the great initiative to queer the United States of America.

  317. Corvinus says:
    @Nicholas Stix

    “Historian of slavery, Eugene Genovese, determined that White masters had little interest in black slaves, and that miscegenation was largely the product of consensual liaisons between free black prostitutes and White Johns after manumission.”

    No, these “relationships” were based on the continued exploitation of the white slave master. On a plantation it was common for white men, despite being married, to take black females for concubinage, and plantation miscegenation generally occurred with single girls under circumstances that varied from seduction to rape. So I would like verification of his theory through citations.

    “My own, complementary theory is that a substantial proportion of people who think they are black are descended from rapes black men committed against White women.”

    In other words, you’re employing guesswork.

    • Replies: @Nicholas Stix
  318. JMcG says:
    @obwandiyag

    That’s the best thing you ever posted. Heartbreaking.

  319. Bill P says:
    @Jack D

    Eastern Europe was a veritable font of judaization from very early on, well before the Enlightenment.

    Was that just because some pernicious Jews had their way with the peasants’ daughters? That’s the clear implication if E. Euros have a lot of Jewish ancestry but Jews have very little E. Euro ancestry themselves (which would undermine the narrative that Jews were oppressed). In any event I don’t believe it.

    I give Jews enough credit to maintain that they actually believed in their religion, and that they propagated it.

    I think it’s pretty clear that the large amount of Ashkenazi lineage found in e.g. people of Polish and Hungarian ancestry is really an indication of a moderate trend toward conversion. If you take the DNA of 20th century Jews and call it “Ashkenazi,” you’re going to sweep up a lot of convert DNA, too. From that you can’t logically extrapolate pure Jewish ancestry, but that’s what these ancestry tests are doing. It’s a fraud.

    OK, so none of your daughter’s ancestors over the last century were gentiles. Fair enough. But if you really want to know whether she’ s 100% descended from, say, 11th century Ashkenazim, you’re going to have to dig up a lot of graves in old Jewish cemeteries from that time and, conveniently enough, that’s strictly verboten under Jewish law.

    I don’t really have an agenda here viz. Jews. My main issue is with Euro essentialists who posit that Jews have some kind of bad juju. I think Jews are a distinct people who did something remarkable in creating their own ethny almost from scratch, as it were, but they are not anything approaching a different species, and they are not imbued with evil powers. In fact, most of us Euro gentiles have fairly recent ancestors in common with them, and not because we are descended from the bastard children of depraved Jews, which is a silly and dishonorable conceit.

  320. Bill P says:
    @Hamlet's Ghost

    I’ve seen my family name featured prominently in an antebellum photograph of a slave broker business. The partner in the business was a Jew, but that doesn’t exactly exonerate my probable relative.

    The thing is that if the Jews are guilty for their ancestors’ misdeeds, then so am I. So are we all.

    I reject that, so I must reject Jewish (and Arab, and black) guilt for the slave trade.

    If there’s something in Judaism that condones slavery, then deal with that and let the Jews either defend it or amend the law. But the great, great, great grandchild of a slaving Jew bears no guilt or personal responsibility for it. Nor does anyone alive today.

    Today, the guilt is on the people who would punish innocents for the sins of dead men. Let’s hold them to account.

    • Replies: @Hamlet's Ghost
  321. Curle says:
    @JohnPlywood

    “ Do you have a factual source that claims white women are perceived as more attractive than East Asian women? I can’t find any for some reason. They all say the opposite.”

    Not sure what you are referring to but that chart only shows women who received the highest number of initial messages. You are the one drawing the inference that such data is a proxy for attractiveness. Could as easily be an proxy for obtainability.

    • Agree: restless94110
    • Replies: @JohnPlywood
  322. Curle says:
    @Jonathan Mason

    This is from Charles Dickens, notorious moral scold. If you imagine these condemnations differ qualitatively from his condemnation of the deprivations of capitalism in his own country, you’d be wrong.

  323. Curle says:
    @Sortahontas

    That’s because you’ve got a sense of proportion and dignity and likely an understanding of the tragic nature of life. Plus, contemplating a man hanging on a cross can help put things in their proper perspective.

  324. @Bill P

    Your approach is reasonable. Unfortunately, we are not dealing with reasonable people on the other side, such as BLM saying that “All lives matter” is really a racist slogan.

    Jews led the charge on the Civil Rights movement since the beginning. It was they who hammered the narrative of the evil whites who enslaved noble blacks and abused them up to the present day. They have completed their long march through all the institutions to the point where we have hysterical harpies vowing to destroy “whiteness” in all aspects of society.

    Even though Jews were prominent in the slave trade, I don’t see anyone talking about smashing “Jewishness” or lecturing us about “Jewish fragiity”.

    Ending the blame game just as the blamer gets blamed is a good indicator of who started it in the first place.

  325. @JohnPlywood

    Just stop with your silly credentialism and your nonsense charts and graphs, mate.

    Use your common sense and the obvious falsity of your claim about Asian women’s attractivenesss.

    You sound like an aging rice queen. Stop projecting.

    And by the way, 5 billion men of every race refute your claim that white women are not attractive.

    I know what you’re saying to yourself: it’s time for me go back into Adobe and make up another chart.

    Save your time and instead go cruising for an Asian. Be happy.

    • Replies: @JohnPlywood
  326. Rob says:
    @Jack D

    Most populations do not ‘thrive’ in slavery like American blacks did. This is not a moral knock on them, but it likely shows some personality distributions differences.

    Ever been to the zoo? They feed the animals every day, and the animals eat, easy-Peary. There are programs, many well-funded and years-long, to get animals to breed in captivity. Many won’t do it. I expect (most) humans are like the animals that are finicky about reproducing. My layman’s guess is that predators do not just need to get enough food, they need to be convinced that that hold enough, and productive enough, territory before they will breed. Big cats get fed everyday, but they do not understand that it’ll keep happening. Maybe if someone sat down and explained…(I kid). Probably having so many other predators so close by in zoos dissuades them from reproducing.

    As for people, just in the most basic terms, have to get some minimum amount and quality of food, and not be acutely ill to want sex. Women’s cycles shut down if they go hungry too long or get too much exercise. Exercise induced amenorrhea (EIA) is well-known to women who train for marathons. I would not bet a lot of money that EIA is always reversible if it goes on too long. I recall, because I was teenage in the nineties, that one long-term damage from anorexia is premature menopause.

    In the modern world, perhaps aggravated by the ease and availability of birth control, many women get signals from society that now is not the time to have a kid. Black women, despite lower socioeconomic status, more fluid relationships with less-reliable partners, etc. do not seem as susceptible to the ‘do not reproduce signals as white, and especially Asian, women.

    I am not sure if lots of men respond to environmental cues to reduce their fertility, but I would imagine there’s lots of variation within and between populations.

    I wonder if there were not more mulattoes in the south, but having more European personalities, bodies, and disease vulnerabilities, they did not reproduce as successfully as their more African coevals.

    Last note on antebellum interracial relationships, I recall reading that one piece of evidence scholars (or maybe just lowly evo psych profs) say points towards slave women in Rome being sex- or reproduction-slaves is the price differentials between various sorts of slaves. To wit, young women were more expensive than young men. But maybe the buyers just wanted to breed more slaves? Well, women with children were cheaper than ‘maidens’, indicating that buyers were concerned with a slave woman’s potential fertility rather than proven fertility.

    It would be interesting to know if slave prices in the antebellum south followed a similar pattern.

  327. Corvinus says:
    @Hamlet's Ghost

    “It comes from them running the slave trade and all its vileness that so many feel need more attention. See Prof. Tony Martin’s work on the subject.”

    LOL. Dr. Martin.

    https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1995/09/slavery-and-the-jews/376462/

    “Martin, in one of his endorsements, made a startling assertion concerning slave ownership by Jews: “Using the research of Jewish historians, the book suggests that based on the 1830 census, Jews actually had a higher per capita slave ownership than for the white population as a whole.” The Secret Relationship does in fact approach making that suggestion, and since the claim would appear to be a pivotal one, it is worth examining.

    In order to assess such a claim, one must resort to details. Martin’s purported actuality is wrong on its face if applied to the “white population” of the United States “as a whole,” because in 1830 only a handful of white northerners still owned slaves. Jews were concentrated in the North, and they constituted a very small minority there. Even if the statement is taken as applying only to the states in the American South that had not adopted gradual emancipation laws, it remains badly flawed. A careful and honest footnote in The Secret Relationship reveals that “Jewish scholars” had concluded that Jews in the South lived mostly in towns and cities. Neither this book nor Martin’s explains the significance of this fact.

    In actuality, slave ownership was much more common in southern urban areas than in the southern countryside. The relatively high proportion of Jewish slaveholding was a function of the concentration of Jews in cities and towns, not of their descent or religion. It is also the case that urban slaveholders of whatever background owned fewer slaves on average than rural slaveholders, including those on large plantations. Thus the proportion of slaveholders has never been an accurate measure of the social or economic importance of slaveholding, unless it is assessed on a broadly regional or state-by-state basis. In this instance, as in so many others, the statistical data do not stand up and cry out their own true significance.”

    Moreover, Professor Martin made this accusation –> Rhode Island Jewish merchants controlled between 60 and 90 percent of the American trade in African slaves.

    Indeed, from 1709-1807, there are 934 recorded voyages in which Rhode Island merchants were responsible for procuring 106,000 slaves. Now, Jews arrived in Newport as early as 1658. On the eve of the Revolution, they were estimated to be around thirty families. According to historical records used (e.g. naval office shipping lists, censuses, tax records) that identified merchants and planters as Jewish, there were 347 slave ships sent to Africa by Rhode Island slave traders from 1761-1774, with 21 being funded by Aaron Lopez, a Portuguese Jew. That means 326 voyages were underwritten by non-Jews during this time frame. Of course, Jews played a role in the peddling of human flesh. The extent in this particular case is nominal compared to other ethnic groups.

    Now, according to Bertram W. Korn’s research (Jews and Negro Slavery in the Old South, 1789-1865), census records and slave purchasing documents show that southern Jews:

    “who owned slaves were concentrated in cities, not in the plantation districts containing ninety percent of the enslaved population. For example, there were only four Jews – less than one-tenth of one percent – among the 11,000 Southerners who in 1830 owned fifty or more slaves….Another statistical indication of Jewish ownership of slaves, probably more accurate in terms of proportions than the census returns, are references to slaves in Jewish wills. Over the years, Professor Jacob R. Marcus has assembled at the American Jewish Archives, one hundred and twenty-nine wills of identifiable Southern Jews who died during the period of interest. Of these, 33 refer to the ownership and disposition of slaves. [That would mean 96 did NOT own slaves] This would mean, if it is a reliable index, that perhaps one-fourth of Southern Jewish adults were slave owners. [That would mean three-fourths Southern Jewish adults were NOT slave owners]. It is instructive that this matches the federal figures for the 1860 census, namely, that three-fourths of the white population of the South were not slave owners. Equally important, however, is the fact that only one-seventh of Southern Negroes were domiciled in towns and cities.”

    According to David Brion Davis, Professor of History Emeritus at Yale University, he writes:

    “To keep matters in perspective, we should note that in the American South, in 1830, there were only 120 Jews among the 45,000 slaveholders owning twenty or more slaves and only twenty Jews among the 12,000 slaveholders owning fifty or more slaves. Even if each member of this Jewish slaveholding elite had owned 714 slaves—a ridiculously high figure in the American South—the total number would only equal the 100,000 slaves owned by black and colored planters in St. Domingue in 1789, on the eve of the Haitian Revolution…Of course, some Jews were involved in the slave trade. Every European Western nation was. There were also some regions in which the slave trade was more accessible to Jews—Rhode Island, Newport, Holland, to name a few striking examples. The Dutch Jews weren’t persecuted, so there were quite a few who were involved.”

    • Replies: @Hamlet's Ghost
  328. @Curle

    Except multiple studies indicate that Asian women are biologically more attractive, and it’s already comon knowledge that response rate = desirability (as shown on the chart)

    https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13506285.2018.1475437

    Marriages between White men and Asian women are over twice as frequent as those between White women and Asian men. Recent research has proposed that this imbalance may be explained by the finding that, on average, White men are perceived as more attractive than Asian men, and Asian women are perceived as more attractive than White women, possibly because Asian faces are perceived as more feminine than White faces.

    Here, we explore whether Asian faces are perceived as more feminine than White faces. Thirty-five Malaysian Chinese (20 male) and 30 Australian White (12 male) participants manipulated 100 face photographs (50 Asian; 50 White; half male) on a masculinity/femininity axis to optimize attractive appearance. As predicted, White women’s faces were increased more in femininity than Asian women’s faces, and White men’s faces were feminized more than Asian men’s faces to optimize attractiveness. These findings suggest that White faces are perceived as more masculine than Asian faces.

    • Replies: @restless94110
  329. @restless94110

    And by the way, 5 billion men of every race refute your claim that white women are not attractive.

    LOL!

    How, exactly? There are not 5 billion men on this planet.

    I assure you the majority of men on planet Earth are repulsed by white “women”.

    Sounds to me like restless94110 is an aging (both physically and mentally) white female. The science says Asian women look best and are the most desired. Hence the rage of white women and their tendency to make up hilarious nonsense.

    • Replies: @restless94110
  330. Rapparee says:

    One may get the idea, from what I have said, that there was bitter feeling toward the white people on the part of my race, because of the fact that most of the white population was away fighting in a war which would result in keeping the Negro in slavery if the South was successful. In the case of the slaves on our place this was not true, and it was not true of any large portion of the slave population in the South where the Negro was treated with anything like decency. During the Civil War one of my young masters was killed, and two were severely wounded. I recall the feeling of sorrow which existed among the slaves when they heard of the death of “Mars’ Billy.” It was no sham sorrow, but real. Some of the slaves had nursed “Mars’ Billy”; others had played with him when he was a child. “Mars’ Billy” had begged for mercy in the case of others when the overseer or master was thrashing them. The sorrow in the slave quarter was only second to that in the “big house.” When the two young masters were brought home wounded, the sympathy of the slaves was shown in many ways… Some of the slaves would even beg for the privilege of sitting up at night to nurse their wounded masters… As a rule, not only did the members of my race entertain no feelings of bitterness against the whites before and during the war, but there are many instances of Negroes tenderly caring for their former masters and mistresses who for some reason have become poor and dependent since the war. I know of instances where the former masters of slaves have for years been supplied with money by their former slaves to keep them from suffering. I have known of still other cases in which the former slaves have assisted in the education of the descendants of their former owners. I know of a case on a large plantation in the South in which a young white man, the son of the former owner of the estate, has become so reduced in purse and self-control by reason of drink that he is a pitiable creature; and yet, notwithstanding the poverty of the coloured people themselves on this plantation, they have for years supplied this young white man with the necessities of life.

    Up From Slavery, Booker T. Washington

  331. @Charlotte

    Add in some education and perhaps a little money from dad, and it’s not hard to imagine that the occasional child might grow up to cross the color line.

    It may seem that way but that’s not how it really happened.

    The gens de couleur libres or free people of color could be simply free blacks but the term connotes mixed race people. This was a social class distinct from whites and from black slaves. It was very common for white men of means to have a mixed race mistress. Of course, the free people of color also married and had legitimate children with one another.

    So, a free mixed race woman may have had legitimate children with a free mixed race man or illegitimate children with a white man. What almost never happened is white women having children with any other than a white man.

    White women were giving birth only to children with white fathers. White men, on the other hand, were fathering children with both white and black/mixed race women.

    As the saying goes: “mother’s baby, daddy’s maybe.” Even if the child had very light skin, the identity of his or her mother was known. Anyone born to a non-white mother was not going to father children with a white woman. Even though race mixing was more common, the one-drop rule still applied.

    In New Orleans and certain areas of Southwest Louisiana where free mixed race people settled, you still see evidence of this today in very light skinned people who are still considered black or “creole”* but not white.

    *A book could be written on the meanings of the word “creole” in Louisiana. In this context, it means someone whose ancestors have been mixed race for generations and who is not considered white.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    , @Corvinus
  332. @Federalist

    When I was a kid in 1970, the drag racing hero of the San Fernando Valley was a Creole of Color named Don “The Snake” Prudhomme. Nobody seemed to notice or care that he was slightly but visibly black. He apparently didn’t feel like trying to explain Louisiana’s complex race/class system to his fellow Valley Dude gearheads, so it never seemed to come up, as far as I can tell.

  333. Corvinus says:
    @Hamlet's Ghost

    Not The Atlantic, but Winthrop Jordan, a historian whose piece was printed in that publication. But I get why you made that remark, as you got intellectually exposed and had no other alternative but offer a cuck response. Perhaps you will make an effort to salvage your dignity by offering a cogent rebuttal to Comment 338.

  334. Corvinus says:
    @Federalist

    Passing As White, Professor Wendy Ann Gaudin, History, Xavier University, New Orleans

    1) …You see, we was just raised that way. There was six of us sisters. We grew up during the segregation, and we was just raised to get around it. We watched our mama, our daddy, we watched our aunts going as white, so we didn’t think nothing of it. That’s what you had to do, you know? But, with my blond hair, my sister’s green eyes and freckles, what they gonna say? What made us colored? See, that’s what you got to know. Those signs didn’t mean nothing to us, and the white people didn’t even know that there were colored people who weren’t real black. If they knew, then they didn’t care. As long as we looked like them. And, we was as white as them. One time, our friend from school got a job serving at the lunch counter, and we saw her there. She didn’t say nothing; we didn’t speak to her. We just ate and then left. She didn’t give us up–she probably would have done it, too, if she could have! But, she couldn’t.

    2) …People found ways to get around the law. That wasn’t that hard back then. How did I come to be white? Well, my mama grew up in the country, out there in the bayou. They all fish out there, and they’re all mixed up. You can’t tell who’s who. She had aunts who lived in the city, so with every baby she had, she came to the city. She had those babies in the white section of the hospital, and they would put white on the birth certificates. As soon as she could, she would call on that man, and he would come and get her and take her back to the bayou. With her “white” babies! She did that with all of us! All of us got white on our birth certificates!

    3) …After my aunts got to be adults, they had social security cards with the number. Well, they put those social security cards away and got new ones, as white! So, they had two social security cards! One white and one colored! Then, they got driver’s licenses: [for] whites.

    4) …I heard another story in my family. On my daddy’s side, they all from Mississippi. But, they was from mixed types, too. They came to Louisiana with a little bit of money. They claimed that they lost their records when they moved here from up there. So, all their new records: white. Then, they put their kids in white schools, and that was it. I even heard they voted all those years when colored couldn’t. They did, my daddy and his brothers. They looked white. And, they had the papers to back it up. What difference did it make that they had some black blood? It wasn’t visible!

  335. @JohnPlywood

    I assure you the majority of men on planet Earth are repulsed by white “women”.

    How can you assure me of your personal preferences on Tinder?

    I assure you that the majority of men on Earth are lusting for white women. No one cares for your assurances. They are clearly false and only in your silly head.

    Dude. You like Asian women. It is a fetish on your part. But don’t put your personal fetish on the rest of us. Because no one believes that but you.

    The science says Asian women look best and are the most desired.

    The science????? What the fuck are you talking about, hoss? My science says you are a wanker for Orientals. Go with your fetish and leave the rest of us scients alone. UmKay? Ah-so. Crazy white person likes chinee girls. Tries to make his personal fetish part of the “science.”

    Confusius say: he that promotes Asians, has problem with prostate.

    Get help, dude. Try to get better. And stop with your fake charts. Thanks.

    • Replies: @JohnPlywood
  336. @JohnPlywood

    Multiple studies are obvious nonsense. You don’t study sexual attraction. It’s impossible. Stop with your idiotic credentialism, dude.

    You are a fool with your foolish “studies” that study nothing.

  337. @restless94110

    Hell hath no fury like a white woman scorned.

    https://kjonnsforskning.no/en/2015/09/blond-sexy-and-immigrant

    According to Lundström there is much focus on whiteness in Singapore. Ads for skin whitening products are common, and whiteness is the ideal. But the ideal of beauty is not a white, blond western woman.

    “Western women were ranked below the Chinese in the racial hierarchy. The western whiteness is not as posh as the Singaporean, Chinese whiteness,” says Lundström.

    Swedish women in the US were very preoccupied with American men, whereas the Swedish women in Singapore were not the least interested in Asian men. They focused on their Swedish husbands.

    Asian women, on the other hand, represented a possible rival, since Swedish men found Asian women attractive.

    “The Swedish women in Singapore were almost desexualised. They felt less feminine,” says Lundström.

    • Replies: @restless94110
  338. Hell hath no fury like a white woman scorned.

    So, why are you calling yourself John? You are clearly an Asian woman in Singapore whose skin whitening operation went seriously wrong.

    You are evidently an Asian woman who somehow believes that what some nutcase called Landstrom says is gospel truth in Budapest–or anywhere.

    Be happy, Mai Lee aka John Plywood Be happy believing men all over the world desire you. Let your delusion warm the cockles of your heart.

    Let your futile efforts to delude the rest of the world be instead spent on promoting new surgical techniques to Asian-ize the eyes of black, brown and white people. I am sure you will find success as so many want to be Asian, according to you–and your roommate, Landstrom.

  339. @JohnPlywood

    Hell hath no fury like a white woman scorned.

    So, why are you calling yourself John? You are clearly an Asian woman in Singapore whose skin whitening operation went seriously wrong.

    You are evidently an Asian woman who somehow believes that what some nutcase called Landstrom says is gospel truth in Budapest–or anywhere.

    Be happy, Mai Lee aka John Plywood Be happy believing men all over the world desire you. Let your delusion warm the cockles of your heart.

    Let your futile efforts to delude the rest of the world be instead spent on promoting new surgical techniques to Asian-ize the eyes of black, brown and white people. I am sure you will find success as so many want to be Asian, according to you–and your roommate, Landstrom.

  340. Wielgus says:
    @Redneck farmer

    Scott was widely read in the North as well. One Union cavalryman complained about his unit being issued lances – he wrote that they were suited to the romances of Walter Scott but not practical for warfare. Clearly he had some familiarity with his books.
    I would say the different reactions to Preston Brooks severely beating Charles Sumner with a cane on the floor of the Senate in 1856 were more defining. Southerners tended to applaud it and many sent Brooks replacement canes. Northerners considered Brooks a thug. As it happened, Sumner had linked slavery to rape, which infuriated Brooks.

  341. @Corvinus

    “On a plantation it was common for white men…”

    No, it wasn’t. Stop lying.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  342. nebulafox says:
    @Corvinus

    You know how Mark Twain learned how to tell stories from an old slave hand of his uncle’s? Well, the Brazilian Mark Twain would have been outta luck, because you didn’t really find a lot of old Africans down in Brazil. Matter of fact, not a lot of women or pure black slave kids, either, at least for most of the colonial era: the Portuguese exclusively wanted young, healthy men, for the most part, and for good reason. It wasn’t economically profitable to encourage your slaves to breed like in the US, for reasons I’ve already elaborated.

    https://www.jstor.org/stable/2652029?seq=1

    I mean, for Pete’s sake, it’s not hard to figure out why slave births exceeded deaths in Virginia and not in Bahia. That paper just reiterates what I’ve already said. In the latter, tropical diseases were rife. Working on sugar plantations was dirty, dangerous, and deadly: note that things began to change when the Brazilian economy began to diversify after independence. Sugar plantations were large-scale investments that required quantity. Portuguese slave owners found it more profitable to work slaves to death with minimal investment in their survival because of those factors.

    In addition to this, Brazil’s colonial slaveowners were uniformly young, male, and single. No families. Little in the way of general authority: the Portuguese government had no way to effective control their colonists like the UK did in the US. Many were violent misfits, even outright felons who were given a choice between death row or deportation, and those who weren’t often were explorer-of-fortune types. Who do you think is more likely to value human life, gentry or cons fresh from a cell block?

    Does this make American slave owners saints? No, hell no. It’s America’s Original Sin for a reason: that, and the fate of the natives. But there was an undeniable cultural difference in the precise degree of slave treatment stemming from this, nor does America’s history with slavery make 1619 propaganda any more historically accurate. What happened was awful enough without resorting to ahistorical fabrication.

    >Citation required.

    Your turn, Corvy. Enlighten me on how slavery in Africa differed from other civilizations in the whole sorry history of the business.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  343. Corvinus says:
    @Nicholas Stix

    No lying on my part. Just offering the historical record to show that, yes, it was common for white men on the plantation to have black slave women “at their disposal”. Trigger much?

    Plenty of the colored women have children by the white men. She know better than to not do what he say. Didn’t have much of that until the men from South Carolina come up here [North Carolina] and settle and bring slaves. Then they take them very same children what have they own blood and make slaves out of them. If the Missus find out she raise revolution. But she hardly find out. The white men not going to tell and the nigger women were always afraid to. So they jes go on hopin’ that thing[s] won’t be that way always.
    –W. L. BOST, enslaved in North Carolina, interviewed 1937 [WPA Slave Narrative Project]

    Let me explain to you very plain without prejudice one way or the other, I have had many opportunities, a chance to watch white men and women in my long career, colored women have many hard battles to fight to protect themselves from assault by employers, white male servants or by white men, many times not being able to protect [themselves], in fear of losing their positions. Then on the other hand they were subjected to many impositions by the women of the household through woman’s jealousy.
    –RICHARD MACKS, enslaved in Maryland, interviewed 1937 [WPA Slave Narrative Project]

    https://www.lincolncottage.org/the-loathsome-den-sexual-assault-on-the-plantation-metoo

    The particulars of a plantation and a movie studio are certainly different. Nonetheless, predatory behavior, whether in a field of cotton or at an afterhours party, retains an eerie echo across the eras. Perpetrators, then and now, have used economic coercion and physical force to subdue victims; they demonstrate a brazen entitlement to the bodies of others; and rely upon threats of retaliation and shame to silence victims.

    Also prevalent in both the modern era and the past, has been the knowledge of bad actors being met with a lack of acknowledgement from society. What we today term “open secrets” were described by white Southerner Mary Chesnut in 1861 as “the thing we cannot name.” Chesnut continued by noting the delusion needed to ignore sexual misconduct: “[E]very lady tells you who is the father of all the Mulatto children in everybody’s household, but those in her own, she seems to think drop from the clouds or pretends so to think.”

    Even elite white southern belles got into the action…

    http://www.inquiriesjournal.com/articles/1674/sexual-relations-between-elite-white-women-and-enslaved-men-in-the-antebellum-south-a-socio-historical-analysis

    There is ample evidence of sexual relations, from rapes to what appear to be relatively symbiotic romantic partnerships, between white slave masters and black women in the Antebellum South. Much rarer were sexual relations between white women and black slave men, yet they too occurred. Using an intersectional socio-historical analysis, this paper explores the factors that contributed or may have contributed to the incidence of sexual encounters between elite white women and slave men, the power dynamics embedded in them, and their implications in terms of sexual consent. The paper demonstrates how upper-class white women who engaged in these relationships used sex as an instrument of power, simultaneously perpetuating both white supremacy and patriarchy.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments are moderated by iSteve, at whim.


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS