• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Early human slavery was NECESSARY for human progress

Syed

Banned
Banned
Joined
Jan 20, 2004
Messages
1,357
Location
USA
Basic Beliefs
muslim
It looks to me like Syed's making a basic error here; he appears to be assuming that ancient cities were "built", i.e., that they were planned from the outset and built according to that plan, with thousands of workers required to get the whole city up at once.
i am only saying is that EARLY slavery started when money was not invented and one one work for other people
 

jonJ

Member
Joined
Apr 27, 2008
Messages
171
Location
Blaxland NSW
Basic Beliefs
Atheism
thats exactly i am saying, early human did not invented money nor anyone work for other people, so the only way to build city was slavery, today we build city by pay workers, back then no money no pay worker

Your omnipotent God can't build cities, then?

- - - Updated - - -

muslims ruled the world for 1000 years

That's going to come as a hell of a shock to the Chinese. Not to mention the Australian Aborigines and the Native Americans.
 

atrib

Veteran Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2006
Messages
2,017
Location
Columbia, SC
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
It looks to me like Syed's making a basic error here; he appears to be assuming that ancient cities were "built", i.e., that they were planned from the outset and built according to that plan, with thousands of workers required to get the whole city up at once.
i am only saying is that EARLY slavery started when money was not invented and one one work for other people

How do you know this? How do you know about any of the claims you have made in this thread? Pretty much every claim you have made has been refuted at this point. Stop ignoring what others are saying and show us a source for your assertions. We know you can understand English, so stop making up shit and start behaving like an adult.
 

none

Banned
Banned
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
3,331
Location
outside
Basic Beliefs
atheist/ignostic
yeah. maybe slavery existed but I don't think it can be said it was necessary; that would require proof, evidence...
 

C_Mucius_Scaevola

Veteran Member
Joined
May 2, 2005
Messages
1,766
Location
Zaandam, NL
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
It looks to me like Syed's making a basic error here; he appears to be assuming that ancient cities were "built", i.e., that they were planned from the outset and built according to that plan, with thousands of workers required to get the whole city up at once.
i am only saying is that EARLY slavery started when money was not invented and one one work for other people
In some places it was, in some places it wasn't. In Egypt, the Pyramids were built long before the invention of coinage, and without the use of slaves. In Mesopotamia, there was no real mass enslavement until the Assyrians came along, by which time the Sumerians had had a thriving civilisation for more than a millenium, without either coinage (money) or a slave economy.Their cities and their ziggurats would have been built by voluntary contributions of material and labour, like the cathedrals, like the mosques, like the temples. Slavery wasn't necessary for early human progress.
 

Syed

Banned
Banned
Joined
Jan 20, 2004
Messages
1,357
Location
USA
Basic Beliefs
muslim
It looks to me like Syed's making a basic error here; he appears to be assuming that ancient cities were "built", i.e., that they were planned from the outset and built according to that plan, with thousands of workers required to get the whole city up at once.
i am only saying is that EARLY slavery started when money was not invented and one one work for other people
In some places it was, in some places it wasn't. In Egypt, the Pyramids were built long before the invention of coinage, and without the use of slaves. .

pyramid build without money and without slaves?
 

Syed

Banned
Banned
Joined
Jan 20, 2004
Messages
1,357
Location
USA
Basic Beliefs
muslim
It looks to me like Syed's making a basic error here; he appears to be assuming that ancient cities were "built", i.e., that they were planned from the outset and built according to that plan, with thousands of workers required to get the whole city up at once.
i am only saying is that EARLY slavery started when money was not invented and one one work for other people

How do you know this? How do you know about any of the claims you have made in this thread? Pretty much every claim you have made has been refuted at this point. Stop ignoring what others are saying and show us a source for your assertions. We know you can understand English, so stop making up shit and start behaving like an adult.

lol
man take a vacation
 

Syed

Banned
Banned
Joined
Jan 20, 2004
Messages
1,357
Location
USA
Basic Beliefs
muslim
Your omnipotent God can't build cities, then?

- - - Updated - - -

muslims ruled the world for 1000 years

That's going to come as a hell of a shock to the Chinese. Not to mention the Australian Aborigines and the Native Americans.

i should have said known world
lol
 

none

Banned
Banned
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
3,331
Location
outside
Basic Beliefs
atheist/ignostic
Your omnipotent God can't build cities, then?

- - - Updated - - -

muslims ruled the world for 1000 years

That's going to come as a hell of a shock to the Chinese. Not to mention the Australian Aborigines and the Native Americans.

i should have said known world
lol
well, now you know about the Chinese, the Australian Aborigines, and the Native Americans.
so man up with your argument already.

- - - Updated - - -

syed said:
which begs the question "is slavery progress?"
human made progress because of slavery
back to your main idea that slavery was necessary, slavery could have been theorized it didn't have to be implemented; slavery isn't necessary for progress.

thats a good idea , just theorized economic that will create millions of jobs
it is a matter of conscience to pick any particular economic principle and implement it, you don't have to implement every principle.
just because you think of slavery doesn't mean it's implementation is necessary for "human progress"... whatever "human progress" means.
maybe a definition is in order for "human progress"..
take for instance the invention of the wheel, was slavery necessary for the invention of the wheel?
and you didn't answer this either...
 

Keith&Co.

Contributor
Joined
Apr 1, 2006
Messages
22,444
Location
Far Western Mass
Gender
Here.
Basic Beliefs
I'm here...
That's going to come as a hell of a shock to the Chinese. Not to mention the Australian Aborigines and the Native Americans.
i should have said known world
lol
LOL, you'd still be wrong. The Chinese knew they existed, as did the Aborigines, Cherokee, Aztecs, Olmecs. You know, all the people of the world?
 

Syed

Banned
Banned
Joined
Jan 20, 2004
Messages
1,357
Location
USA
Basic Beliefs
muslim

Mageth

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2001
Messages
849
Location
Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas!
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
That's going to come as a hell of a shock to the Chinese. Not to mention the Australian Aborigines and the Native Americans.
i should have said known world
lol
LOL, you'd still be wrong. The Chinese knew they existed, as did the Aborigines, Cherokee, Aztecs, Olmecs. You know, all the people of the world?

muslims did ruled some part of china

And they knew about the other parts, the parts that they didn't rule.

QED
 

jonJ

Member
Joined
Apr 27, 2008
Messages
171
Location
Blaxland NSW
Basic Beliefs
Atheism
i should have said known world
lol

So your assertion is that Muslims ruled that part of the world they actually knew about, except for those parts they didn't -- i.e. Western Europe and Southern and Western Africa? Or is it just that if it wasn't ruled by Muslims, it doesn't count as 'known'?
 

Stavian

New member
Joined
Nov 18, 2005
Messages
12
Location
South Pole
Basic Beliefs
Winter
Syed has given no evidence?

6 word questions are not evidence?

And why is he writing in broken english?
 

DrZoidberg

Contributor
Joined
Nov 29, 2007
Messages
10,247
Location
Copenhagen
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
It looks to me like Syed's making a basic error here; he appears to be assuming that ancient cities were "built", i.e., that they were planned from the outset and built according to that plan, with thousands of workers required to get the whole city up at once. This is, of course, just plain wrong. Ancient cities, with very few exceptions (Amarna is the only one that springs readily to mind) weren't built as such; they grew up organically from villages over decades and even centuries. No slaves were required in this process; houses were built by their future occupants, and great public works were mostly built by volunteer labour, as with the Xian cathedrals of the Middle Ages, or mosques.

And in some cases (many? most?), slavery actually hindered progress. Thus, for example, the Romans, who were familiar with the idea of the watermill, never bothered with this labour-saving device because they had slaves to do that work for them, and in a slave-based economy, it was easier to continue using them than to adopt labour-saving technology and have to find new uses for all the slaves who would have had nothing to do. We know that one technology can lead to another, so who knows what progress the Romans might have made had they not been dependent on their slaves to do the hard work?

Not only did they discover the watermill. They also discovered the steam engine, as well as making train tracks. They had all the components necessary to build steam powered trains. But it never went beyond toys. The most advanced usage of steam technology was their public steam baths.
 

DrZoidberg

Contributor
Joined
Nov 29, 2007
Messages
10,247
Location
Copenhagen
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
tell me WHEN and HOW did slavery started? i like to hear your theory

It's not my theory. We don't have to speculate. We have archaeologists and ethnographers who have studied this subject for centuries. We know the facts.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery

Historically, expansion of slave use leads to economic decline and the fall of empires. Generally speaking, the fewer slaves, the healthier economy. But most importantly, a slave economy requires an already healthy non-slave economy. So slavery is not required for civilisation. Civilisation is required for slavery. As far as human progress is concerned, slavery is a dead end. It's like saying that drugs is human progress because it makes us happy for a short while.

Wikipedia said:
Early history

Evidence of slavery predates written records, and has existed in many cultures.[7] Prehistoric graves from about 8000 BC in Lower Egypt suggest that a Libyan people enslaved a San-like tribe.[dubious – discuss][Capoid remains not found this far north][31] Slavery is rare among hunter-gatherer populations.[citation needed] Mass slavery also requires economic surpluses and a high population density to be viable. Due to these factors, the practice of slavery would have only proliferated after the invention of agriculture during the Neolithic Revolution about 11,000 years ago.[32]

In the earliest known records slavery is treated as an established institution. The Code of Hammurabi (ca. 1760 BC), for example, prescribed death for anyone who helped a slave to escape or who sheltered a fugitive.[33] The Bible mentions slavery as an established institution.[7]

Slavery was known in almost every ancient civilization, and society, including Sumer, Ancient Egypt, Ancient China, the Akkadian Empire, Assyria, Ancient India, Ancient Greece, the Roman Empire, the Islamic Caliphate, the Hebrew kingdoms in Palestine, and the pre-Columbian civilizations of the Americas.[7] Such institutions included debt-slavery, punishment for crime, the enslavement of prisoners of war, child abandonment, and the birth of slave children to slaves.[34]
Classical Antiquity
Main articles: Slavery in ancient Greece and Slavery in ancient Rome

The work of the Mercedarians was in ransoming Christian slaves held in Muslim hands (1637).

Records of slavery in Ancient Greece go as far back as Mycenaean Greece. It is certain that Classical Athens had the largest slave population, with as many as 80,000 in the 6th and 5th centuries BC;[35] two to four-fifths of the population were slaves.[36] As the Roman Republic expanded outward, entire populations were enslaved, thus creating an ample supply from all over Europe and the Mediterranean. Greeks, Illyrians, Berbers, Germans, Britons, Thracians, Gauls, Jews, Arabs, and many more were slaves used not only for labour, but also for amusement (e. g. gladiators and sex slaves). This oppression by an elite minority eventually led to slave revolts (see Roman Servile Wars); the Third Servile War led by Spartacus being the most famous and severe.

By the late Republican era, slavery had become a vital economic pillar in the wealth of Rome, as well as a very significant part of Roman society.[37] At the least, some 25% of the population of Ancient Rome was enslaved.[38] According to some scholars, slaves represented 35% or more of Italy's population.[39] In the city of Rome alone, under the Roman Empire, there were about 400,000 slaves.[40] During the millennium from the emergence of the Roman Empire to its eventual decline, at least 100 million people were captured or sold as slaves throughout the Mediterranean and its hinterlands.
 

DBT

Contributor
Joined
May 2, 2003
Messages
13,129
Location
ɹǝpunuʍop puɐן
definition of primitive is they lives in cave, huts not in city


Are you saying that it took nothing more than slavery to lift us out of our primitive condition of living in caves and into building cites? That slavery is the only means of advancement for primitive (cave dwelling) people?

thats exactly i am saying, early human did not invented money nor anyone work for other people, so the only way to build city was slavery, today we build city by pay workers, back then no money no pay worker

The idea of a ''city'' evolved over time, but to build a city takes knowledge, planning and the drive to build cities. Slaves provide none of these things. Slaves merely provide cheap labour.
 

DrZoidberg

Contributor
Joined
Nov 29, 2007
Messages
10,247
Location
Copenhagen
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
It looks to me like Syed's making a basic error here; he appears to be assuming that ancient cities were "built", i.e., that they were planned from the outset and built according to that plan, with thousands of workers required to get the whole city up at once.
i am only saying is that EARLY slavery started when money was not invented and one one work for other people
In some places it was, in some places it wasn't. In Egypt, the Pyramids were built long before the invention of coinage, and without the use of slaves. .

pyramid build without money and without slaves?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egyptian_pyramid_construction_techniques

It was a tax system. The free farmers had to work a part of the year on great works as tax. If you want to be cynical about it, the Egyptian tradition of building huge buildings was about keeping the population busy during the time of year that the Nile is flooded. Ie, they couldn't work their field. All they could do was wait for the Nile to recede. Just like every ruler, the Egyptian rulers, quickly learned that idle workers became restless and dangerous and started demanding reforms. So it was imperative to keep them occupied. Therefore Pyramids.

It's a similar logic behind the European building of churches, castles and cathedrals. Same goes for all the great works of the Roman Empire. They were primarily built by the Roman army in peace time, to keep them from raping the locals. I don't know of other similar systems in detail, but I would be surprised if this wasn't a global pattern of all great works. Bottom line, this is not the type of thing slaves historically have been used for.
 

Syed

Banned
Banned
Joined
Jan 20, 2004
Messages
1,357
Location
USA
Basic Beliefs
muslim
definition of primitive is they lives in cave, huts not in city


Are you saying that it took nothing more than slavery to lift us out of our primitive condition of living in caves and into building cites? That slavery is the only means of advancement for primitive (cave dwelling) people?

thats exactly i am saying, early human did not invented money nor anyone work for other people, so the only way to build city was slavery, today we build city by pay workers, back then no money no pay worker

The idea of a ''city'' evolved over time, but to build a city takes knowledge, planning and the drive to build cities. Slaves provide none of these things. Slaves merely provide cheap labour.

i didnt say slave were engineer
 

Syed

Banned
Banned
Joined
Jan 20, 2004
Messages
1,357
Location
USA
Basic Beliefs
muslim
It looks to me like Syed's making a basic error here; he appears to be assuming that ancient cities were "built", i.e., that they were planned from the outset and built according to that plan, with thousands of workers required to get the whole city up at once.
i am only saying is that EARLY slavery started when money was not invented and one one work for other people
In some places it was, in some places it wasn't. In Egypt, the Pyramids were built long before the invention of coinage, and without the use of slaves. .

pyramid build without money and without slaves?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egyptian_pyramid_construction_techniques

It was a tax system. The free farmers had to work a part of the year on great works as tax. If you want to be cynical about it, the Egyptian tradition of building huge buildings was about keeping the population busy during the time of year that the Nile is flooded. Ie, they couldn't work their field. All they could do was wait for the Nile to recede. Just like every ruler, the Egyptian rulers, quickly learned that idle workers became restless and dangerous and started demanding reforms. So it was imperative to keep them occupied. Therefore Pyramids.

It's a similar logic behind the European building of churches, castles and cathedrals. Same goes for all the great works of the Roman Empire. They were primarily built by the Roman army in peace time, to keep them from raping the locals. I don't know of other similar systems in detail, but I would be surprised if this wasn't a global pattern of all great works. Bottom line, this is not the type of thing slaves historically have been used for.

white american enslave black for tax?
 

Syed

Banned
Banned
Joined
Jan 20, 2004
Messages
1,357
Location
USA
Basic Beliefs
muslim
i should have said known world
lol

So your assertion is that Muslims ruled that part of the world they actually knew about, except for those parts they didn't -- i.e. Western Europe and Southern and Western Africa? Or is it just that if it wasn't ruled by Muslims, it doesn't count as 'known'?
is it spain and italy in western europe or not?
 

DBT

Contributor
Joined
May 2, 2003
Messages
13,129
Location
ɹǝpunuʍop puɐן
i didnt say slave were engineer

You didn't say it, but you did say that slavery was necessary for human progress. That without slavery human progress couldn't have happened. So, that slavery merely provided the labour but not the ideas, planning and drive to build, it wasn't slavery itself that was necessary for progress because slaves merely did what they were ordered to do. The ideas, planning and drive developed because there was a perceived need to build towns and cities for the mutual benefit of their inhabitants.
 

C_Mucius_Scaevola

Veteran Member
Joined
May 2, 2005
Messages
1,766
Location
Zaandam, NL
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egyptian_pyramid_construction_techniques

It was a tax system. The free farmers had to work a part of the year on great works as tax. If you want to be cynical about it, the Egyptian tradition of building huge buildings was about keeping the population busy during the time of year that the Nile is flooded. Ie, they couldn't work their field. All they could do was wait for the Nile to recede. Just like every ruler, the Egyptian rulers, quickly learned that idle workers became restless and dangerous and started demanding reforms. So it was imperative to keep them occupied. Therefore Pyramids.

It's a similar logic behind the European building of churches, castles and cathedrals. Same goes for all the great works of the Roman Empire. They were primarily built by the Roman army in peace time, to keep them from raping the locals. I don't know of other similar systems in detail, but I would be surprised if this wasn't a global pattern of all great works. Bottom line, this is not the type of thing slaves historically have been used for.

I'd call it more of a corvee system, but otherwise this is exactly how I would have expanded on the point I made. Thanks for saving me the trouble.
 

C_Mucius_Scaevola

Veteran Member
Joined
May 2, 2005
Messages
1,766
Location
Zaandam, NL
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
i should have said known world
lol

So your assertion is that Muslims ruled that part of the world they actually knew about, except for those parts they didn't -- i.e. Western Europe and Southern and Western Africa? Or is it just that if it wasn't ruled by Muslims, it doesn't count as 'known'?
is it spain and italy in western europe or not?

Spain and Italy are considered part of Southern Europe more than Western. In any case, Italy was never completely ruled by muslims; only Sicily and a few coastal towns like Bari were ever under muslim rule.
 

jonJ

Member
Joined
Apr 27, 2008
Messages
171
Location
Blaxland NSW
Basic Beliefs
Atheism
i should have said known world
lol

So your assertion is that Muslims ruled that part of the world they actually knew about, except for those parts they didn't -- i.e. Western Europe and Southern and Western Africa? Or is it just that if it wasn't ruled by Muslims, it doesn't count as 'known'?
is it spain and italy in western europe or not?

Yes. So are Britain, Ireland, France, Germany, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Belgium, The Netherlands, Austria, Switzerland and Austria. And among the Eastern European states never under Muslim control are the Czech Republic, Slovakia, and Poland. Next question?
 

C_Mucius_Scaevola

Veteran Member
Joined
May 2, 2005
Messages
1,766
Location
Zaandam, NL
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
white american enslave black for tax?

How is that even relevant to anything being discussed in this thread? It's about "early human slavery", per the thread title, not about American slavery. OTOH, if you want to widen the topic to include other periods of slavery, we could discuss the enslavement of Africans by muslims, which was on a scale much larger than American slavery, or we could talk about the slavery in muslim countries which continues to this day. Or we could stick to the subject at hand ...
 

Syed

Banned
Banned
Joined
Jan 20, 2004
Messages
1,357
Location
USA
Basic Beliefs
muslim
white american enslave black for tax?

How is that even relevant to anything being discussed in this thread? It's about "early human slavery", per the thread title, not about American slavery. OTOH, if you want to widen the topic to include other periods of slavery, we could discuss the enslavement of Africans by muslims, which was on a scale much larger than American slavery, or we could talk about the slavery in muslim countries which continues to this day. Or we could stick to the subject at hand ...

it is relevant to know did white american benefit from slave or they just having fun with slave

if american did benefited from slave then why egyptian and roman didnt have slaves according atheists?
 

dystopian

Veteran Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2006
Messages
2,065
Location
Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
i should have said known world
lol

So your assertion is that Muslims ruled that part of the world they actually knew about, except for those parts they didn't -- i.e. Western Europe and Southern and Western Africa? Or is it just that if it wasn't ruled by Muslims, it doesn't count as 'known'?
is it spain and italy in western europe or not?

Yes. So are Britain, Ireland, France, Germany, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Belgium, The Netherlands, Austria, Switzerland and Austria. And among the Eastern European states never under Muslim control are the Czech Republic, Slovakia, and Poland. Next question?

Not to derail, but many of the countries you mentioned are *not* in Western Europe. Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania are in Northern Europe. Spain and Italy are Southern Europe. The UK and Ireland are commonly considered to be part of Western Europe including by the EU, but is considered to be Northern Europe according to the UN. European countries that belong to the 'Western' group of nations and cultures do NOT automatically fall under Western Europe.
 

C_Mucius_Scaevola

Veteran Member
Joined
May 2, 2005
Messages
1,766
Location
Zaandam, NL
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
white american enslave black for tax?

How is that even relevant to anything being discussed in this thread? It's about "early human slavery", per the thread title, not about American slavery. OTOH, if you want to widen the topic to include other periods of slavery, we could discuss the enslavement of Africans by muslims, which was on a scale much larger than American slavery, or we could talk about the slavery in muslim countries which continues to this day. Or we could stick to the subject at hand ...

it is relevant to know did white american benefit from slave or they just having fun with slave

if american did benefited from slave then why egyptian and roman didnt have slaves according atheists?

Nobody, as far as I can tell, has said the Egyptians and Romans didn't have slaves. What we've said is that slave labour wasn't necessary for them to build their cities and, by extesion, their civilisations.

I and others have also pointed out that technological progress in the Roman Empire was actually hindered by the presence of slaves. This addresses your original topic, whereas American slavery does not.
 

dystopian

Veteran Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2006
Messages
2,065
Location
Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
if american did benefited from slave then why egyptian and roman didnt have slaves according atheists?

First of all, nobody said the romans didn't have slaves; they said that Roman civilization and its cities would have existed with or *without* slaves.

Secondly, you can not compare the use of slaves in the new world to the use of slaves in the old world; the two are very different scenarios. The reason slave labor was widely used in the Americas is because the colonial powers lacked the ability to import large numbers of its own population to work on the plantations. The European population of the new world was low; and they couldn't increase it fast enough to draw the profits they wanted. Western Africans were only too eager to sell slaves for a price the Europeans considered cheap.

European merchants and companies would sail for Western Africa with cheap cargo, which would be exchanged for slaves. They'd then sail to the colonies in the new world to sell the slaves at a massive profit. They would then load up on the valuable goods produced in the colonies such as sugar, and sold them at an even bigger profit back in Europe; at which point the whole thing would start again. This is the famous Atlantic Triangular Trade. The profitability of this route had a snowball effect on the number of slaves shipped west, which would eventually lead to a dependence on slavery when the European population of the New World became large enough to sustain the profits without the use of slavery: why use a European laborer who'll ask a wage when you can just keep breeding the slaves you've kept for generations?

So, did the Americans benefit from slavery? Well, not as much as the Colonial powers did, to be sure. But it doesn't matter whether they did or not, since the unique circumstances of the time make it impossible to compare it to the slavery of the ancient world.
 

Keith&Co.

Contributor
Joined
Apr 1, 2006
Messages
22,444
Location
Far Western Mass
Gender
Here.
Basic Beliefs
I'm here...
LOL, you'd still be wrong. The Chinese knew they existed, as did the Aborigines, Cherokee, Aztecs, Olmecs. You know, all the people of the world?

muslims did ruled some part of china
So..were they unaware of the world beyond their borders, Syed? To conquer the KNOWN world without conquering the WHOLE world would require a certain amount of ignorance, right?
or maybe they were just stupid?
 

bleubird

Veteran Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2002
Messages
1,330
Location
Alaska
Basic Beliefs
none
Do not want to call Shed juvenile,but his logic is very simple and childish.Seems to be part and parcel with Islam.
 

atrib

Veteran Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2006
Messages
2,017
Location
Columbia, SC
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Do not want to call Shed juvenile,but his logic is very simple and childish.Seems to be part and parcel with Islam.

Juvenile is an understatement. I know 8 year old children who can formulate their arguments much better than Syed can. I don't think it has much to do with Islam (although Islam does it's share of mindfucking amongst the ignorant and weak minded of the world), more with the fact that he has received virtually no formal schooling, has lived most of his life in Pakistan or India and has no interest in learning anything new in his old age (by his own words).
 

DrZoidberg

Contributor
Joined
Nov 29, 2007
Messages
10,247
Location
Copenhagen
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
It looks to me like Syed's making a basic error here; he appears to be assuming that ancient cities were "built", i.e., that they were planned from the outset and built according to that plan, with thousands of workers required to get the whole city up at once.
i am only saying is that EARLY slavery started when money was not invented and one one work for other people
In some places it was, in some places it wasn't. In Egypt, the Pyramids were built long before the invention of coinage, and without the use of slaves. .

pyramid build without money and without slaves?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egyptian_pyramid_construction_techniques

It was a tax system. The free farmers had to work a part of the year on great works as tax. If you want to be cynical about it, the Egyptian tradition of building huge buildings was about keeping the population busy during the time of year that the Nile is flooded. Ie, they couldn't work their field. All they could do was wait for the Nile to recede. Just like every ruler, the Egyptian rulers, quickly learned that idle workers became restless and dangerous and started demanding reforms. So it was imperative to keep them occupied. Therefore Pyramids.

It's a similar logic behind the European building of churches, castles and cathedrals. Same goes for all the great works of the Roman Empire. They were primarily built by the Roman army in peace time, to keep them from raping the locals. I don't know of other similar systems in detail, but I would be surprised if this wasn't a global pattern of all great works. Bottom line, this is not the type of thing slaves historically have been used for.

white american enslave black for tax?

I'm not saying Egyptians and Romans didn't have slavery. But the slavery didn't help produce anything of value to these cultures. Certainly nothing they became known and famous for.

The American slavery does serve as a valuable example. The South stayed economically and socially backward. The North was more advanced, both economically and socially. In the civil war it had an industrial capacity the South was not even close to. In spite of having all that free labour available. If your theory would hold the South would have been more effective in their civil war. That war was very much a competition of economic systems, ie which system had the best economic output.
 

none

Banned
Banned
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
3,331
Location
outside
Basic Beliefs
atheist/ignostic
so tell me why did roman have slaves labors ?
why don't you tell us, make your case.
you tell us, you are the one who brought slavery up and then say it is necessary, don't you have enough facts to back your story up?
 

DrZoidberg

Contributor
Joined
Nov 29, 2007
Messages
10,247
Location
Copenhagen
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
First of all, nobody said the romans didn't have slaves;
so tell me why did roman have slaves labors ?


They had it because they could. Not because it was in any way economically beneficial. They had it for the same reason we eat cake or do drugs. Same reason husbands beat their wives. It gives the slave owner a little boost of their ego. A power trip high.
 

Infinite Monkey

New member
Joined
Aug 15, 2011
Messages
35
Location
Ontario
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
so tell me why did roman have slaves labors ?

The Romans who actually owned the slaves were not concerned with the benefits or lack of benefits to their civilization at large, just to themselves. As has been explained, the only benefit to slavery is extremely cheap manual labour at simple jobs. This does not offer tremendous benefits to a slave owning society as a whole, but it's very beneficial to individuals and small groups that actually own the slaves. Essentially, all the wealth earned by a slave owner AND his slaves goes to the slave owner, but there's not really a total benefit on a large scale, only local inequality of wealth. Not to mention a tremendous amount of human misery.
 

C_Mucius_Scaevola

Veteran Member
Joined
May 2, 2005
Messages
1,766
Location
Zaandam, NL
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
if american did benefited from slave then why egyptian and roman didnt have slaves according atheists?

First of all, nobody said the romans didn't have slaves;
so tell me why did roman have slaves labors ?

It was either that or the wholesale slaughter of the populations they conquered.

Kill all the prisoners of war or enslave them? Sounds insane, but in the circumstances, enslavement was the more humane option.
 

Jimmy Higgins

Contributor
Joined
Feb 1, 2001
Messages
36,351
Basic Beliefs
Calvinistic Atheist

Stavian

New member
Joined
Nov 18, 2005
Messages
12
Location
South Pole
Basic Beliefs
Winter
My WIFE is from a part of Eastern Europe which was under Ottoman rule for ~500 years.

She says people in her home country FEEL that living under Ottoman/Muslim rule was "like Hitler/Stalin or WORSE".

The country eventually rebelled, recently (in the past few hundred years) and are now orthodox christian after throwing the ottomans out.



Hearing a Muslim say that RACISM and SLAVERY is a GOOD thing is F#CKED UP.
 
Top Bottom