Blacks sold their own kind into slavery

A collection of similar views from the Internet.

Blacks sold their own kind into slavery is a claim used to justify slavery or absolve slave owners, specifically in regard to the Atlantic slave trade. This page is my criticism and counter-argument to the claim.

The structure of the argument

Most people who use this argument haven't tried to give it structure, they just make the claim and assume the person hearing it will view it as a valid point. However, it can be expanded into a proper argument by writing out the unspoken premises and conclusions:

• P1: Africans sold their own kind into slavery.
• P2: Anyone who sells their own kind into slavery is barbaric.
• C1: Since the slavers are barbaric, and the slaves are their own kind, the slaves must also be barbaric.
• P3: Enslaving barbaric people is okay.
• C2: It was okay for Americans to enslave Africans because they were barbaric.

Below are my refutations to the premises and conclusions.

P1: Africans sold their own kind into slavery

Africans did not sell their own "kind" because not all black people are the same kind. Modern Americans tend to combine all black people into a single group because the slave trade destroyed nearly all of their cultural origins by criminalizing their native languages, religions, and even their own names. But Africa is an extremely large and diverse continent with thousands of different ethnic groups. There is not, nor has there ever been, a monolithic black culture anywhere in the world, and there will probably never be one. To make an analogy with white people, if Germans sold Polish people into slavery, it would be as if someone argued that, since they're both white, the Germans "sold their own kind" into slavery. But only someone ignorant to European history would think Germans and Poles are the "same kind," likewise, only someone ignorant to African history would think that all black people are the "same kind."

When you think about it, the idea that a person is the same as someone else because they are from the same continent is pretty ridiculous indeed. Canadians and Mexican are both from North America, but, other than both being human, are they the same kind? Who we are and what we believe can be influenced by our geography to some degree, but there will still be major differences among our beliefs. A king and a pauper may live in the same city, but are they the same class? A Christian, Hindu, and Taoist can be neighbors, but are they the same religion? Even living under the same roof there can be families consisting of liberals and conservatives, do they have the same politics?

P2: Anyone who sells their own kind into slavery is barbaric

This is a generally valid point, however, it doesn't go far enough. By leaving it open it allows someone to conclude that people who sell those of a different kind into slavery are not barbaric. And what about the people who buy slaves or who don't buy or sell, but facilitate the process? I would expand this point to be, "anyone who participates in the slave trade in any capacity is immoral."

C1: Since the slavers are barbaric, and the slaves are their own kind, the slaves must also be barbaric

This conclusion would follow from the first two premises, but, since the first premise is clearly wrong, it fails.

P3: Enslaving barbaric people is okay

In order for this argument as a whole to serve as a justification of slavery, it must imply that it's acceptable to enslave people who are bad, or, at the very least, less-wrong than enslaving good people. However, slavery isn't immoral because it injures good people, it's immoral because it injures people, period. If someone believes that all people have the right to personal freedom, then they can't also make an argument which begins, "slavery is acceptable when..."

C2: It was okay for Americans to enslave Africans because they were barbaric

This is the ultimate conclusion of the argument. Today, only some still conclude that slavery was "justified" by Africans selling their own kind, but they still feel some level of absolution for Americans by thinking slavery wasn't nearly as immoral as people say it was since the people Americans enslaved were barbaric, or that half of the blame should be put on African people with Americans only accepting half the guilt.

However, this is little more than victim blaming. This argument dehumanizes the slavers, but, in doing so, whether inadvertently or purposely, also dehumanizes the slaves. The reality is, it doesn't matter who does the selling or buying, if you believe that slavery is immoral, then anyone who takes part in the slave trade is immoral.