Did Black People Own Slaves?

Henry Louis Gates Jr., The Root, March 4, 2013

One of the most vexing questions in African-American history is whether free African Americans themselves owned slaves. The short answer to this question, as you might suspect, is yes, of course; some free black people in this country bought and sold other black people, and did so at least since 1654, continuing to do so right through the Civil War. For me, the really fascinating questions about black slave-owning are how many black “masters” were involved, how many slaves did they own and why did they own slaves?

The answers to these questions are complex, and historians have been arguing for some time over whether free blacks purchased family members as slaves in order to protect them—motivated, on the one hand, by benevolence and philanthropy, as historian Carter G. Woodson put it, or whether, on the other hand, they purchased other black people “as an act of exploitation,” primarily to exploit their free labor for profit, just as white slave owners did. The evidence shows that, unfortunately, both things are true. {snip}

In a fascinating essay reviewing this controversy, R. Halliburton shows that free black people have owned slaves “in each of the thirteen original states and later in every state that countenanced slavery,” at least since Anthony Johnson and his wife Mary went to court in Virginia in 1654 to obtain the services of their indentured servant, a black man, John Castor, for life.

And for a time, free black people could even “own” the services of white indentured servants in Virginia as well. Free blacks owned slaves in Boston by 1724 and in Connecticut by 1783; by 1790, 48 black people in Maryland owned 143 slaves. One particularly notorious black Maryland farmer named Nat Butler “regularly purchased and sold Negroes for the Southern trade,” Halliburton wrote.

Perhaps the most insidious or desperate attempt to defend the right of black people to own slaves was the statement made on the eve of the Civil War by a group of free people of color in New Orleans, offering their services to the Confederacy, in part because they were fearful for their own enslavement: “The free colored population [native] of Louisiana … own slaves, and they are dearly attached to their native land … and they are ready to shed their blood for her defense. They have no sympathy for abolitionism; no love for the North, but they have plenty for Louisiana … They will fight for her in 1861 as they fought [to defend New Orleans from the British] in 1814-1815.”

These guys were, to put it bluntly, opportunists par excellence: As Noah Andre Trudeau and James G. Hollandsworth Jr. explain, once the war broke out, some of these same black men formed 14 companies of a militia composed of 440 men and were organized by the governor in May 1861 into “the Native Guards, Louisiana,” swearing to fight to defend the Confederacy. Although given no combat role, the Guards—reaching a peak of 1,000 volunteers—became the first Civil War unit to appoint black officers.

When New Orleans fell in late April 1862 to the Union, about 10 percent of these men, not missing a beat, now formed the Native Guard/Corps d’Afrique to defend the Union. {snip}


So what do the actual numbers of black slave owners and their slaves tell us? In 1830, the year most carefully studied by Carter G. Woodson, about 13.7 percent (319,599) of the black population was free. Of these, 3,776 free Negroes owned 12,907 slaves, out of a total of 2,009,043 slaves owned in the entire United States, so the numbers of slaves owned by black people over all was quite small by comparison with the number owned by white people. {snip}

{snip} So why did these free black people own these slaves?

It is reasonable to assume that the 42 percent of the free black slave owners who owned just one slave probably owned a family member to protect that person, as did many of the other black slave owners who owned only slightly larger numbers of slaves. {snip}


{snip} Halliburton concludes, after examining the evidence, that “it would be a serious mistake to automatically assume that free blacks owned their spouse or children only for benevolent purposes.” {snip} In other words, most black slave owners probably owned family members to protect them, but far too many turned to slavery to exploit the labor of other black people for profit.


If we were compiling a “Rogues Gallery of Black History,” the following free black slaveholders would be in it:

John Carruthers Stanly—born a slave in Craven County, N.C., the son of an Igbo mother and her master, John Wright Stanly—became an extraordinarily successful barber and speculator in real estate in New Bern. As Loren Schweninger points out in Black Property Owners in the South, 1790-1915, by the early 1820s, Stanly owned three plantations and 163 slaves, and even hired three white overseers to manage his property! He fathered six children with a slave woman named Kitty, and he eventually freed them. Stanly lost his estate when a loan for $14,962 he had co-signed with his white half brother, John, came due. After his brother’s stroke, the loan was Stanly’s sole responsibility, and he was unable to pay it.


Antoine Dubuclet and his wife Claire Pollard owned more than 70 slaves in Iberville Parish when they married. According to Thomas Clarkin, by 1864, in the midst of the Civil War, they owned 100 slaves, worth $94,700. During Reconstruction, he became the state’s first black treasurer, serving between 1868 and 1878.

Andrew Durnford was a sugar planter and a physician who owned the St. Rosalie plantation, 33 miles south of New Orleans. In the late 1820s, David O. Whitten tells us, he paid $7,000 for seven male slaves, five females and two children. He traveled all the way to Virginia in the 1830s and purchased 24 more. Eventually, he would own 77 slaves. When a fellow Creole slave owner liberated 85 of his slaves and shipped them off to Liberia, Durnford commented that he couldn’t do that, because “self interest is too strongly rooted in the bosom of all that breathes the American atmosphere.”


Most of us will find the news that some black people bought and sold other black people for profit quite distressing, as well we should. But given the long history of class divisions in the black community, which Martin R. Delany as early as the 1850s described as “a nation within a nation,” and given the role of African elites in the long history of the Trans-Atlantic slave trade, perhaps we should not be surprised that we can find examples throughout black history of just about every sort of human behavior, from the most noble to the most heinous, that we find in any other people’s history.

The good news, scholars agree, is that by 1860 the number of free blacks owning slaves had markedly decreased from 1830. In fact, Loren Schweninger concludes that by the eve of the Civil War, “the phenomenon of free blacks owning slaves had nearly disappeared” in the Upper South, even if it had not in places such as Louisiana in the Lower South. {snip}


Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • Owning a black slave is useless. It took three of them to do the work of one person. The biggest mistake in world history: bringing Africans to the western hempishere.

    • AutomaticSlim


      And we’ve been paying for that mistake it ever since.
      Like an albatross around our necks.

      • Jedi Mind Tricks

        And to think the only thing they’d know is the jungle if the White man, and the Arab never took them out of it.

        • YngveKlezmer

          Exactly. Cannibalism is practiced to this very day in the Congo. We will never take the jungle out of them. As Jared Taylor so candidly observed after Hurricane Katrina, the jungle returns very quickly in our absence.

        • MarkLuger

          According to Professor Tony Martin of Boston College; Jews ran the black slave trade.

          • Luca

            Participated would be a better word. Where there is money to be made, you will find them.

          • Formerly_Known_as_Whiteplight

            Uh no; some Jews took part, naturally, as they were the most involved ethnic group in merchandizing in Western Europe since Roman times. They sure taught the Dutch how to do it, and it was the Dutch that brought the first slaves to the American Colonies when New York was still New Amsterdam. The Dutch were the first and first most successful non-Jewish international traders, founding and settling South Africa because it was on their route to India and points East. But the funniest thing about this article is the idea that we ought to be surprised that blacks sold blacks. Whites have sold whites, Chinese sold Chinese, etc. This idea of projecting PC attitude retrospectively is about as nonobjective and unscholarly possible.

          • MarkLuger

            I have a list of 15 slave ships owned by Jews. I also have a dvd of Professor Tony Martin explaining how Dutch jews ran the slave trade. Before they got involved with black slaves; jews kidnapped white girls from Europe and sold them to the Middle East. What is the obsession with black slaves? The slaves lived longer than the orphans yanks placed in coal mines and textile mills until 1900; and the slaves were better off than people in Africa are right now. Thanks for the email; have you seen David duke’s website? How about http://www.theneworder.org

          • Katherine McChesney

            According to my brother-in-law from Holland, the Dutch originated the black slave trade.

          • MarkLuger

            According to professor Tony Martin from Boston college Dutch Jews ran the black slave trade. Did you know there are over 300,000 girls used as sex slaves in America right now. The sex slave industry starts in Hollywood and Las Vegas and operates in the biggest cities in Amercia. I have alist of 15 slave ships owned by jews, would you like to see it?

          • Formerly_Known_as_Whiteplight

            I have a list of even more white Europeans who not only had slave ships, but in earlier days sold other white Europeans to North Africans; it’s called “well known history,” opposed to your cadre of David Duke’s mythologizing obsession with Jews and Israel.

          • MarkLuger

            David Duke did not bankrupt this nation; DD did not run Hollywood for the last 50 years like your heroes the smoes; Adolf Hitler did more for this world than all the smoes in the last 2000 combined.

          • Daisy

            You have an obsession with mythologizing jews and Israel.

          • HamletsGhost

            Dutch Jews.

          • Formerly_Known_as_Whiteplight

            I have Dutch friends, too. They said the Jews were only financiers at first because only Jews had the money because Christians were forbidden to handle money early on and the Jews had always been traders. These David Duke guys manufacture phoney data without missing a beat. I have several books on the history of slave trade that tell the story, quite different from David Duke and his minions.

          • HamletsGhost

            I’m not a minion of David Duke, but if he speaks the truth, you should pay more attention to him than to your Dutch friends.

            Is it phoney to note that the first synagogue in the United States was founded not in New York, but in Newport, R.I., a major port for the trianglular slave-sugar-rum trade?

            The fact that so many people reflexively jump to the Jews’ defense even without hearing the charge evokes the same reactions of people who vehemently insist that Jews don’t control Hollywood, although spending 5 minutes watching the credits roll after every flick should make that question a no-brainer.

            In the 90s, a British journalist by the name of Cash noted exactly that, and the flurry of threats disguised as criticism wrought an apology and an admission from him that yes, the Emperor’s new clothes are indeed magnificent.

          • Le Gaulois

            You’re absolutely correct and Duke’s data is actually well documented and backed up by Jewish sources in most cases. Incidentally, he has easily exposed the well known FACT that the Jews indeed control Hollywood by simply quoting Joel Stein who bragged all about it in his L.A Times column:

            How Jewish is Hollywood? (by Joel Stein, December 19, 2008)

            If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, looks like a duck, guess what ?

          • Daisy

            Try reading An Empire of Their Own; How the Jews Invented Hollywood if you’re interested in the history of it.

          • A Gentile

            While there are Jews involved, they are NOT at the top of the pyramid, so to speak.

            Jews back in Jesus’ time said “We have no king but Caesar.” Today it’s “we have no king but the pope.” Seriously.

            The Vatican has long had a policy of anti-Semitism (even HITLER admitted this). Jews are just a front. Sadly so many are willing to sell out. Why do you think the Rothschilds are known as the pope’s bankers?

            What better way to stir up fury against the Jews (thus setting the stage for the Great Tribulation, known as JACOB’S Trouble) than to make them your scapegoats?

          • HamletsGhost

            Seriously? What Jews proclaim they have “no king but the pope”. Can you even name one?

            Seriously you need to put away the Jeeboo juice. Seriously.

          • saxonsun

            Ah, and it’s also the other way around: Many condemn the Jews because they hate them for being Jews.

          • HamletsGhost

            Spoken like a true gliberal. I suppose you condemn blacks because you hate them for being black.

          • Daisy

            The jews, the Lobby, and their minions manufacture phoney data without missing a beat. Neither side of the conflict you’re commenting on is innocent of this.

          • robinbishop34
          • Joseph

            “According to my brother-in-law from Holland, the Dutch originated the black slave trade.”

            If that verifiable or is that just the prevailing white self-hatred confession taught in the schools there from early childhood?

          • saxonsun

            The first slave ship to come here was a Dutch slaver in 1619; that’s been my understanding.

          • Dyrewulf

            That is not true. The blacks in Africa that captured and sold other blacks were muslims.

        • josh

          Dont forget the jews

      • YngveKlezmer

        The lyrics of the song “Jet to Jet”, by the 80’s metal band Alcatrazz, express it best: “Black man’s burden is well on his shoulders, keeps him well in his place. 200 pounds worth of N*&^*r weight, it smacks him in the face. There’s no way he should stand for this”–Graham Bonnett, an Englishman, was the lyricist, telling the truth about Black-White race relations in this great song. We have been laboring under the burden of their laziness, ineptitude, and sociopathy for far too long, and we Whites are the ones bearing an albatross.

      • guest

        We could fix this mistake if we ever make up our minds to do it.

      • MikeS

        More like a shock collar on each of our necks that is activated by a button issued by the NAACP to all blacks upon birth.

      • StillModerated

        Africans: the cement overshoes of civilization.

    • fakeemail

      Again, the cheap labor.

      • saxonsun

        Cheap labor? They don’t work that much.

    • MBlanc46

      The work of Robert Fogel at least puts your claim in serious doubt.

      • Sherman_McCoy

        “Time on the Cross” was an interesting book, though I don’t see why if it’s claims that blacks were as valuable chattel relatively well treated and worked less than did Northern industrial workers are violently objected to, should be seen as more believable than his widely accepted claim of black productivity.

        In any case, it appears that blacks WERE obviously more useful as slaves than they are as welfare parasites and murderous, rapacious thugs.

        • josh

          A Univ of Chicago economist,with a Nobel in his pants, GaryBecker,claims that the back slaves ate a better diet than the white immigrants up North.The slaves were well treated. The Latin American slaves,OTOH,OY VEY!!!!!

        • MBlanc46

          Also, “Without Consent or Contract”, c. 1990, which is a smoother read than “TotC”.

    • YngveKlezmer

      Biggest mistake indeed. Slackin’ is what they do best. Our type of work ethic is just not in their temperament. Even the well educated ones have the same desire to slack off as much as possible. Take a White supervisor out of the equation, especially, and next to nothing is accomplished, regardless of the task at hand.

    • LastBastionOfHope

      I always wonder what the reaction of our forefathers would be if they could see that blacks now hold whites hostage in their own country. They would probably be absolutely shocked and reinstate slavery.

    • josh

      As everyone here knows by now,slaves were often easily procured by offering payment in desired goods to the African chiefs,who would gladly sell off their own subjects. I think something similar is happening RIGHT NOW. I call it The Grand Bargain. Its simple. The black leadership knows immigration is a disaster fior blacks.Yet they happily-even slavishly,heh heh– go along. Obama is crazy for immigration. He knows damn well that a huge segment of the black populace is literally finished. their is no place for them. NONE. They will live in EBT depravity forever,devolving into a nation of Shitaviouses. Yet blacks go along and say NOTHING,as long as they get theirs.

      • saxonsun

        This is why we keep black males in prison as long as possible. Can you imagine the nightmare if they were on our streets?

    • refocus

      Was it not the King of England and those support that institution who forced the slaves into the new world?

      Did the Founders; Washington, Jefferson, Franklin, try to get rid of slavery but could not as the monied interests would not support manumission and repatriation along with the revolution?

    • Northerner

      Whether or not that’s actually true, the more important part to slave owners was that they didn’t have to pay them.

    • slaves were never needed

      That is exactly why African slavery was such a major misguided mistake from the gitgo in the newly opened western hemisphere and total economic insanity not to mention the massive costs and upkeep that bankrupted 50% of large plantations. Hired help paid wages and sharecropping was by far a more eco superior system. Obviously slavery was also a white labor force killer and a major reason non-elite whites lived in such rural poverty in the south as opposed to the north where industrialization jobs were plentiful

      It was a bad system and never needed. The major blame goes on the African tribal chiefs who not only cashed in off slavery to the west but killed 2 birds with one stones by cleansing their rejects and undesirables.

      • saxonsun

        And no one speaks about the poor white problem in this country and how released slaves greatly contributed to it.

  • jay11

    You’ll NEVER see this information taught in a class on ‘Afro-American Studies’.

    • MBlanc46

      It’s in many of the standard works on slavery, e.g., Stampp and Genovese. The only people don’t know it are those who don’t look for it.

  • panjoomby

    blacks must’ve been better behaved back then – b/c who on god’s green earth would want to own one today? yuck.

    • YngveKlezmer

      I doubt it. On those farms where a White family only had several Blacks on hand as slaves, the same thing happened as happens now. When one, or just a few Blacks are amongst a large number of Whites, and we vastly outnumber them, the strength of our European culture positively influences them, and their behavior improves.
      It is like when you have one or two Blacks in a room with 10 Whites. Those Blacks start to act a lot more White because our culture is the dominant force. Remove 8 of those Whites, though, and replace them with 8 Blacks in the same room, and those Blacks that had acted so nicely around us beginning acting like the other Blacks, and Black culture prevails. The Whites end up leaving the room by choice, and primitve Black culture returns.

      • Tom Iron

        Everything with them is an imitation. When, as you say, they’re acting right, it’s only because they’re outnumbered, not because of any in depth concept of proper behavior.

  • Jss

    Well what makes blacks owning slaves less terrible then Whites owning slaves is blacks at least weren’t racist against there slaves. It’s like when blacks rape and murder Whites. It’s not as bad as what happened to Tanya Brawley and Traybon because at least when Blacks are killing and raping us it isn’t racist.

    • pcmustgo

      Blacks always break out this apples and oranges argument when I mention islamic enslavement of blacks…. “Well, at least the muslims didn’t force them to lose their culture…” Really?

      Whatever, Jss, the point is don’t blame us all when 99% of us aren’t descended from slave owners.

      Maybe you could spend some time learning about different European cultures- Germans, French, Italians, Spaniards, Norwegians, Russians, Polish…

      We’re not just “white”.

      I won’t hold my breath

      • JDInSanDiego

        The muslims castrated them. How’s that for preserving their culture?

    • ladyL

      I don’t know what your race/ethnicity is, but as a Descendant of African American Slaves I say that this is not true. If anyone of a race commits a crime against someone of another race and their motives are based on that person being different it is racism. For a Black person to treat a White person ( or one that “appears” to be so) with ignorance and disrespect it is NO different when it is done to them. This a lie that is bought and sold and adds to “the white man owes me all he has and ever will have simply because my people were brought here on a ship, made to work 16 hour days in the hot sun for free, beaten and hung…….” This is not correct behavior. I nor my husband were raised to act this way and nor will my children. I apologize if you were treated badly by people of my race.

  • Tom Iron

    Well, slavery had its day. But that day is long over. What would anyone want a black for a slave for nowadays? They can’t do any productive work in this society that exists today. They’re just here hanging out and carrying on until we finally get tired of putting up with their antics and finally get rid of them, one way or another.

    • Luca

      Actually, slavery is alive and well in that wonderful continent of Africa. They like to tout that Africa is known as the birthplace of Man, but it seems it’s the birthplace of slavery too. They always forget to mention that.

      • Nathanwartooth

        It’s also still useful there because they aren’t out of the stone age yet.

        The more advanced the civilization the less use they have for slaves.

      • Katherine McChesney

        NOT out of Africa. Don’t fall for their story that ‘Yacov’ separated us from the blacks because we were ‘crazy’. This ‘Out of Africa’ lie/myth promotes all their believes that they are the superior race. Their grandiosity knows no bounds.

      • TeutonicKnight67

        …and the birthplace of AIDS.

        • StillModerated

          And ebola virus.

      • ultimate penal colony

        Africa was the birthplace of slavery not man but there are plenty of dead ape skulls that evolutionist atheists refer to as early first humans that is total BS unless they were from the original single human race who washed down there from Mesopotamia during the great flood 4500 yrs ago according to the ancient jew Book. Africa was nothing more than the original ultimate penal colony for wild animals and the wild Ham race similar to penal colonies in Australia where the worse criminals were dropped off permanently by the British Empire. Maybe they got the idea from the Torah.

        The US military uses Guantanamo Naval base in south Cuba as its proxy penal colony for muslim nutbags but needs to begin sending its own convicted urban criminal murdering thugs there to save billions who would quickly become meek lmice plus cure any fag activity or risk beheadment using sharp objects. If they thought bringing back the death penalty would help prevent capital crime in America they never tried Gitgo.

    • Katherine McChesney

      I think blacks are just like children, immature, lazy by nature, like to play, demanding, attracted to junk, excitable, mean-spirited when they don’t get their way, manipulative, insecure…well, you get the picture. They’re stuck in a permanent childhood.

      • Torshammar

        Yes. They lack control of their own emotions. They act on impulse. They are like children. And we keep paying for them. Let’s stop doing that permanently and live together as Whites. As one without the other.

      • joegoofinoff

        Yes, I’m reading a book published in 1901 written by a black guy entitled, “The American Negro,” authors name, William Hannibal Thomas. If he lived today, he’d be right there with Mr. Taylor. His condemnation of black behavior is total. There was never a Klansman who ever said anything more harsh than this black man about black people. Also, he condemns to the high heavens those Whites (liberals of his time) who think they were helping blacks but in reality are hurting them worse than the worst racist.

  • So CAL Snowman

    Adam Smith said it best when it comes to slavery :

    “From the experience of all ages and nations, I believe, that the work done by free men comes cheaper in the end than the work performed by slaves. Whatever work he does, beyond what is sufficient to purchase his own maintenance, can be squeezed out of him by violence only, and not by any interest of his own.”

    • MBlanc46

      That’s probably not the case when the work is cotton culture on the gang system.

      • MBlanc46

        Or sugar production in Louisiana.

    • Nathanwartooth

      Why have slaves when you can import millions of non natives to drive down the labor costs? Oh the people here wont work for 2 dollars an hour? Time to offshore or import people.

  • Luca

    A surprisingly honest piece from Prof Gates, who was most famously dishonest and wrong when dealing with the Cambridge police in 2009. Of course it became much more dishonest when the Idiot in Chief announced that the Cambridge police “acted stupidly”.

    In this piece Gates asserts that some blacks bought family members as an at of benevolence to free them and this is true; some did. But what would have been nice and a bit more balanced is if he also had stated that far more white abolishionists and religious organizations, did this and on a far greater scale.

    Most of the blacks who owned slaves, especially in Louisiana, were not altogether black per se but mulatto, quadroon or further miscegenated. African Americans are very conscious of skin tone and percentage of white blood and the lighter ones have frequently felt superior to their darker brethren. Turns out blacks are racist toward other (darker) blacks too.

    • AutomaticSlim

      Not so sure I would refer to him as a professor.
      I wouldn’t give much credit to anyone whose field of “expertise” ends in the word “studies”.

      • MBlanc46

        His PhD is in English literature from Cambridge.

        • AutomaticSlim

          Perhaps, but his wikipedia page states that he was a lecturer in “afro-american studies” at Yale and Duke prior to joining Harvard as a “professor of English”. And then if you scroll down to the books he has written, you will notice that none of them have anything to do with English Literature, but rather are the typical black-studies kind of garbage you would expect from a guy like this. Books with titles such as “Thirteen Ways of Looking at a Black Man”.

          • Katherine McChesney

            and he probably promotes Afrocentrism.

          • MBlanc46

            His earlier books were lit crit, focusing on Afro-American literature. He’s become something of a public figure and television celebrity and his more recent work has been directed at the more general audience. His PhD is a real one (his first book is basically his dissertation), he’s a real scholar, and not an Afro-Centrist.

          • AutomaticSlim

            All of the titles I saw had something to do with blacks, in one way or another.
            He even had a book with the word “monkey” in the title.

        • Is he an actual PhD, or like so many “Professors”, Black and White, “Ph.D. (cand)?” To me, the title “Professor” refers to a professor who does not have a doctorate.

        • fred

          He be studyin’ dat ole willy shakespeare? To be oh not to be,dass da question!!

      • Sherman_McCoy

        To be fair, he doesn’t look to be much more than a quarter black. though the victim mentality is obviously strong in him.

        • Luca

          I had to deal with a fool like him at work who accused me of not dealing fairly with blacks. This guy looked Egyptian but had an English name, he must have been 1/16th black; he was probably Creole.. I told him I didn’t even know he was black. I guess I neglected to give him special treatment. You know that ol’ one drop rule, they’ll wear that race card out even if they can only claim 1/16th of it.

          • torshammar

            I’ve experienced the same on numerous occasions. Let’s put an end to it.

      • Luca

        He should have studied law. That Cambridge cop was right to call him outside and he was wrong to rant and rave. No one ever mentions this, but if a cop thinks someone broke into your home and you are the homeowner, you could have a perp hiding in the closet or somewhere else, so it’s wise to ask the homeowner to come outside while the cops search the home. Someone should have mentioned this to him and the Kenyan, but then it would have shattered the narrative the media was trying to portray.

        • And I am still promulgating the theory that Gates planned this in advance because he wanted an incident with a cop. That’s because he wanted the publicity, as he was becoming yesterday’s news in the universe of black studies talking heads. He just never expected actually to be arrested.

          • AutomaticSlim

            That’s a very reasonable theory given all the hoaxes these “black studies” types undertake on college campuses.

          • Also reasonable considering that blacks have a world class reputation for engaging in cheap stunts and theater in order to get people to pay attention to them.

          • Luca

            Al except Rev. Al Sharptongue, he is a true man of principle and morals. (gag)

          • Daisy

            From the start I thought that it was intentional but I never considered ‘planned.’ I assumed the Obama presidency profoundly disconcerted africanistas; no longer could they exploit black victimology. Plus, it was so displacing in terms of attention, glory, power and so I sensed, given the timing particularly, intent to provoke. If he planned it, though, he would have needed to get arrested to actually make news.

          • I don’t think he necessarily needed to be arrested, but he wanted and in fact needed to be accosted. From then, open trap, and there would come running the Boston media and soon after the national media.

    • pcmustgo

      ditto in caribbean, mulatto elite

    • YngveKlezmer

      Because they know that White genes mean better intellect and behavior, and this is why Black men who are climbing the socioeconomic ladder love to miscegenate with White women. We Whites should all be repulsed by this, as the White party involved in miscegenation is literally throwing their heritage in the garbage. The result will not only not be in the likeness of the White parent, but will surely have an inferior intellect to what would be possible with a racially pure White child. Even if the White parent is not the sharpest tool in the shed, the roll of the dice of genetics means that the odds are against the Mulatto having a stronger intellect. This is why miscegenation used to be against the law, and still should be.

    • Nathanwartooth

      Well to be fair the subtext of the article was that many Blacks bought slaves to help people but Whites did not.

      You can’t hide the past but you can change how it is presented.

      • Daisy

        Gates says it would be ‘fair to assume’ that 43% of the black slaveholders bought family members as that was the percentage of black owners having one or just a few slaves. I don’t know that asserting that all of that 43% were benevolent is justified; many whites owned just one or a couple slaves. “If you love someone, set them free.” If these black owners really loved their slaves they wouldn’t have ‘owned’ them but would have simply freed them. He also makes another sketchy conclusion, asserting that it was an act of progress that fewer blacks owned slaves over time, but it seems obvious this may have been due to whites increasingly refusing to sell to them as the Civil War loomed.

  • sbuffalonative

    This article is why Mr. Gates is persona non-grata in the black community. Sometimes he tells the truth and blacks appreciate only the truths that fit their black-and-white agenda.

    In other words, most black slave owners probably owned family members to protect them, but far too many turned to slavery to exploit the labor of other black people for profit.
    So blacks exploited black labor for their own benefit. This isn’t shocking. What’s surprising is how blacks have managed to keep this quiet for this long.
    Blacks have been enslaving blacks for centuries. They’re still doing it today. In some black nations, it’s not even questioned.

    • YngveKlezmer

      Mr. Gates is either lying, or expressing self-serving bias with this. I am inclined to believe that he is engaging in the former. Blacks do not have the same reverence for the truth that we do, and education does not change this in them.

      • sbuffalonative

        When it comes to black history which places blacks an unfavorable light, blacks turn to the idea of ‘nuanced’ history.
        It works like this:
        While whites are evil incarnate, blacks can be forgiven and excused for their past sins because their are always reasons for their actions. Blacks are, by nature, good and kind people who have been forced to do bad things because ‘the (blue eyed) devil made them do it’.
        This is nothing more than Mr. Gates’ attempt to blunt an historical fact that portrays blacks in a bad light

        • anarchyst

          “Nuanced” history also applies to those of the “tribe” that STILL make excuses for their “invention”–communism. They still state that communism is viable “if properly applied”. Communism eventually “turned” on its “inventors . . .

    • StillModerated

      Whenever I talk philosophy with a “freed slave” I always get Marx and Engels. A clever black man is usually a college indoctrinated parrot.

  • Pelagian

    This proves that slavery has/had nothing to do with racism?

    Next argument, please ….

    • shawnmer

      What it “proves” is that it wasn’t an exclusively white sin, even here at ground zero for supposed white evil, pre-Civil War America. You know, you’d almost think that, to your mind, the “racism” you want to morally preen over was a greater misdeed than the slavery itself.

      • MBlanc46

        “What it “proves” is that it wasn’t an exclusively white sin”.

        Well said.

    • Jss

      You are taking a simplistic view of slavery. While black on black slavery was unfortunate it was less relevant in the historical context because only White on black slavery was racist and White racism is the only thing past or present that is wrong in the world. Do you think what happened to Shannon Newsom was as bad as what happened to Crystal whatever from the duke lacrosse case? If you do you are a racist, white supremacist, neo nazi Klansman.

      You see if you stop looking through the post neo colonial, social pan optical, social dialectic of patriarchal economic matrix’s you will see that anytime blacks do something wrong its just a construct of White oppression. So in the name of racial justice and healing we racist Whites need to pay all blacks on the planet reparations for black on black slavery.

      • pcmustgo

        Yeah, I hate the flowery uber-white liberal/politically correct freshman year sociology class language too.

        I swear hear in Brooklyn, we attract a lot of these sociologist types who move into black neighborhoods and then whine about other whites moving in and gentrifying them.

        Many whites have a “Dancing with Wolves”, “I’m here to Rescue the Blacks/Oppressed Non-White People martyr complex”.

      • YngveKlezmer

        If we pay them back for slavery, than we are paying them back for former injustices committed. If we pay them back for injustices, the right and just thing would be for them to pay us back for the injustices committed against us. This would mean that they owe millions of us for having worked harder than we need to at our jobs while Black co-workers slack off and are not punished due to their race, and they owe millions of us for bullying us just for being White in school, and for acting of savage violence committed against us just because we are White.
        A prime example is the present conditions in South Africa. Whites are the victims of a genocide campaign. Should not every BLack who has hurt a killed a White in that country be required to pay reparations to that WHite, or to their family??

  • libertarian 1234

    These people live, breath, sleep and eat slavery and racism 24/7 to the exclusion, ALMOST, of everything else. And everything they do wrong, everything they fail in, every pathology within their group, is blamed on these two things…..perpetrated by whitey of course.

    They do as they do, because they’re basically arrogant and have a delusionally inflated image of themselves, so they need to blame their failures on something besides their own incompetence.

    The only other alternative they have is to admit they can’t cut it in a first world society, and they’re not about to admit that. Besides the perks they get from the radicals on the left and their status as privileged subjects of the empire are too good to give up.

    Notice that this Gates, or Farrakhan, or Jesse or Al, or Tavist Smiley, or Cornel West or Michael Dyson, et al, never mention that blacks in other societies outside of the US, whose ancestors were never slaves, don’t do any better than US blacks.

    I’m wondering what kind of excuses they would give in response to that? It would be interesting to hear, if for no other reason than to get a good laugh.

    • These people live, breathe, sleep and eat slavery and racism 24/7 to the exclusion, ALMOST, of everything else.
      Me to NAACP executive: “Look at this. I have a time machine. I’m going to get into it, go back in time, and totally stop black slavery.”
      NAACP to me: “Noooooooo! Don’t do that! I’m making too good of a living!” As he takes a baseball bat to my flex capacitor.

    • pcmustgo

      They’re also (dangerously) dumb enough to believe all their afro-centrist and left-wing fairy tales.

      • Luis

        Even the Bantus playing professional sports and getting paid millions of dollars to do it, never lose that “slave” and ‘plantation” mentality. Never.

        Case in point: During the last NBA lockout, Commissioner David Stern was accused of acting like he was holding Bantus down on the plantation.

        • Such simple people getting paid at the very least hundreds of thousands of dollars if not millions, when there is absolutely nothing else that they could be doing which gives them a minimum salary which puts them clearly in the Top 1% of income earners (and usually more)…then the big bad commissioner locks them out…what else are they to think? Don’t expect their wee little brains to grok first world nuances about organized labor disputes.

    • YngveKlezmer

      Actually, Blacks in their native Africa have a far worse standard of living than they do in our country. Even Blacks in Detroit or Gary are far better off than they would be in Africa. Gates, Tavis Smiley, Farrakhan, Obama, and all of the rest of the high profile Blacks who play these race games know this. They are race hustlers, and are willful in what they are doing. Their intent is to steal as much as they can from our European societies,

      • Ross Kardon

        Muhammed Ali said this about American slavery “I’m glad my ancestors were on that boat!”

    • KevinPhillipsBong

      “I’m wondering what kind of excuses they would give in response to that? It would be interesting to hear, if for no other reason than to get a good laugh.”

      I can tell you what they’d say. They’d say its because Africans cannot repay the billions in loans made to them by Western nations, therefore modern Africans are living in a sort of continental debtor’s prison. How can the poor starving sub-Saharans attain first world status when they start out so far in debt? In other words, they’d say its whitey’s fault.

  • guest

    This info will never make it in the “revisioned” history books. Those who try to distort history aim to keep it anti-white, and they won’t want this info about black slave-owners come to light. They want us to be blind and deceived into believing what they want us to see as factual and to never question them.

    • pcmustgo

      This is why I want CONTROL OF THE HISTORY BOOKS ARE CHILDREN ARE TAUGHT WITH as number one priority for Tea Party people and people concerned about the plight of Euro-Americans. This is the number one issue to seize on. We have millions of people being brainwashed to hate whites.

      • AutomaticSlim

        I do not mind so much that they hate me.
        My problem is that way too many of my kind do not accept the reality of the situation.

    • MBlanc46

      I don’t know whether Stampp and Genovese count as “revisioned” but you’ll find it there.

  • Paleoconn

    White countries were the first ones to abolish slavery. Only 2% of Whites owned slaves in the USA. Many Whites were indentured servants or slaves or serfs through history. See Jim Goad’s Redneck Manifesto and another book he references They Were White And They Were Slaves.

    The Cherokee also owned black slaves.

    Also, 95% of trans-Atlantic slave trade was not for the USA. And finally black slaves traders pleaded with England to not abolish slavery in the early 1800s.

    But keep believing what they teach in school that all Whites owned all the blacks as slaves, and no blacks were slave-owners and no Whites were slaves.

    • eduard

      They were white and they were slaves – written by Michael Hoffman II, and well worth reading.

    • pcmustgo

      That’s why I want our number cause and goal to be to create a movement to get textbook writers and teachers to embrace and teach what you just said. You forgot the 1,000 year muslim slave trade part though…And the african tribal slavers enslaving other tribes. And that it still exists there.

      • Paleoconn

        Agreed, and the fact that slavery among these peoples go on to this very day, but do-gooder liberals like to moralize on White man’s past transgressions rather than focus on the evil present in the here and now. It is why we will continue to hear about how bad Apartheid was (even though millions of black Africans moved there under the Apartheid regime), but we won’t hear a peep about the shithole the country is degenerating to each day under bantu rule.

      • HamletsGhost

        And don’t forget the Jewish role in the transatlantic slave trade.

  • The first slave owner in American history was a black tobacco farmer named Anthony Johnson.

    See here:


  • shawnmer

    Anyone else stunned that “Skip” Gates let intellectual honesty win out over his notorious racial solidarity long enough to write this?

    • pcmustgo

      Again, like I mentioned, attempting to save face after his anti-white, racist personal attack against that innocent white cop.

  • The__Bobster

    Freed slaves had a great rate of slave ownership than did Whites.

    And the lead rabble rouser on the Amistad, Cinque, became a slave trader himself.

  • Snowhitey

    And Henry Louis Gates has also admitted on “The Root” website that it was only 378,000 Africans that were brought to what is now the United States as slaves. Liberals refuse to believe this and state it was anywhere from several million to as many as 20 million over several centuries. I believe South America received more than North American, far more. You see, the figure 378,000, which turned into about 42,000,000 today, just doesn’t seem as horrific so they change it without any consequences.

    Our history is not distorted by the revisionists, it is completely and totally changed.

    • pcmustgo

      Gates has been writing these articles almost as an apology to white folk after the gates-gate incident where he falsely accused a cop of racism. Throwing us a bone, atoning, at least to save public face.

      He wrote another great article a bit after that about how the myth blacks push about “africans not knowing how cruel the slave trade was to their fellow africans” as joke given that the children of African chiefs would ride aboard these ships to get an education in europe. And not in the cargo section, like the rest of the slaves. And they had to have seen the poor treatment.

      Gates does this as if to say, “I’m not a Black Racist after all!”

      But I guess whites have to be happy anytime Blacks “throw us a bone”. They’re never very fair minded to the rest of the time.

    • MBlanc46

      I don’t know which liberals you’re talking about, but c. 400,000 is the generally accepted figure in the literature on the subject.

      • Snowhitey

        No one mentioned literature although I am quite confident there are thousands of books that distort the actual figures. Here’s a good place to start. The liberal website “The Stranger.”


        This person’s education probably occurred in a government school.

        Comment #203:

        “During the period of slavery the slave population in the slave states was around 25%. According to shipping records in London over 12 million slaves passed through London on their way to america until slavery was outlawed in
        England in 1810. London was only one of several major ports of “export”. France outlawed it earlier in 1789, the USA not until after the Civil War, free labor was good for business. The total number of slaves imported into the US has been reliably estimated as being around 20 to 30 million during the approximate 300 years we had slavery.”

        The way blacks breed, we’d have about 300,000,000 of them in this country alone. Although it often seems there are that many.

        The Internet is filled with comments like this one. Time to take off the paper bag.

        • MBlanc46

          I tend to read real books rather than Internet sites. The information is very much better. I’m talking about the major researchers researchers of the last fifty years such as Stampp, Fogel, and Genovese. You mention “thousands of books that distort the actual figure”, but you don’t give a single citation.

        • MikeofAges

          The United States banned the importation of slaves in 1808. Maybe 60,000 were imported illegally between then and 1860. Maybe about 250,000 imported during the first 20 years under the constitution. About 400,000 between 1600 and the 1787.

          The rest went elsewhere in the Americas, to the Spanish and Portuguese colonies primarily.

    • sbuffalonative

      This is why Gates is hated by blacks.

      While he tries to frame historical issues in terms of black suffering, he does try to stick with factual data; ie. the true number of blacks slaves was lower than blacks want to believe and blacks did own slaves.

      He was vilified by blacks for his PBS series, Wonders of the African world
      http://www.pbs.org/wonders/ because he interviewed African descendants involved in the slave trade. He tried to get them to apologies but they wouldn’t.

      He gave a lecture that was broadcast on c-span and after he was almost lynched by the angry black mob.

  • YngveKlezmer

    Of course they owned other Blacks as slaves, and of course their motivations were not altruistic, as Sharpton, Jackson, and Farrakhan would love for us White follks to believe. The primary reason Blacks became slaves was that Africa was, and still is, in a constant state of tribal warfare. When the European ships first arrived in the African ports, Europeans were offered African slaves for sale. These slaves had been held in bondage by rival African tribes in interior areas, and had been treated far worse by their fellow Africans than they would be by their White purchasers.
    In comparison, in fact, White Southerners were downright humane in their treatment of their slaves when compared to treatment at the hands of their fellow Africans. In keeping with their European cultural heritage, White Southerners, by and large, treated Blacks as people, fed them well and made sure they had good living quarters, and only expected what was reasonable, that their slaves would be good workers.
    Interviews of former Black slaves, done around 1900, in fact, reflected that at least 70% of then former slaves had nothing but good memories of their White masters. They had been fed and clothed well, and treated with respect and kindness. Many, in fact, chose not to leave the White families they had worked for after the Emancipation Proclamation freed them, because they had had a good life in slave days, and obviously feared having to make their own way in the world.
    How much better a testimony could one ask for to the benevolence of European Americans?? We racial realists who have been around Blacks know their temperament, and how difficult they are. My suspicion is that, most often, the White slave master was far too kind to his Black slaves, and that the slaves tended to slack off as much as possible, and were actually a burden on the farming operation. When slaves were beaten, most likely it was the case of a good man who lost his temper, and for good reason. Work simply had not been done despite a first rate meal, massive amounts of food or goods had been stolen, a Wife or Daughter had been harassed or even sexually violated, etc.
    In the case of the Black slave masters mentioned in this article, my suspicion is that true slavery was probably the rule with their slavery, with daily beatings, a rudimentary diet, sexual slavery of the young women, etc. After all, this has always been, and always will be the way society operates in Africa. In Liberia, where most former American slaves lived upon resettlement in Africa after Emancipation Proclamation, slavery was shamefully brutal, not even comparable to the good old American South.

  • Athling

    One can imagine the fun had blacks been in a position to own whites as slaves.

    • Bill Dietyl

      Somehow I dont think Whites would have been treated very well. The women would have been sexual toys and the men used for target practise.

  • Northerner

    Blacks may have had black slaves, and African leaders may have been involved in the slave trade sending blacks to America… but at the end of the day, the degree / magnitude of interracial slavery by white slave owners of blacks is the only thing people care about. The kicker is that this isn’t ancient history; It happened in a time when clear records were kept and is close enough to the present that people still remember.

  • Here a link to a video clip of Henry Louis Gates discussing black-owned slaves


  • slavery was an uneeded scam

    When England merchant banker Rothchilde came up with the idea to finance slavery he knew it was not needed and a terrible economic idea and a death knell to the entire western hemisphere but saw an opportunity to scam elite landowners looking for cheap labor while charging as high as 50,000 in todays prices for each slave from Africa. Noone knows what tribal chiefs sold them off for who were usually their captives in warfare or rejects of the tribes, but it was probably very little. Clearly there was a mass sales market over 250 yrs that European nations bought these rejects off the chieftains involving tens of millions as tribal leaders purged and cleansed their African continent of their undesirables and hocked them off to plague the western nations creating a boondoggle of immense size that has only gotten worse and allowed the introduction of the scavenger Marx and his peasant tool Lincoln who never attended a day of school or college in his life and posed as a fake lawyer only after being discharged from the Mex American war by US Military Academy grads Gen Robert E Lee and Gen Jefferson Davis after only a few months going AWOL in cowardly fashion in 1848. Lincoln then went to Springfield IL to try his hand at politics since politics and religion are the last refuge of the scoundrel. America was doomed.

  • Thor Bonham

    So they actually should be paying themselves reparations, eh ?

  • 5Sardonicus

    Of course, blacks owned slaves in the ante-bellum South. Blacks were complicit in the slave trade in Africa, which couldn’t exist without their cooperation. I suspect that slavery is still practiced in some African backwaters. Whites are foolish to feel guilty for historical slavery. Particularly, as it was universally practiced and was eliminated by Europeans before most other countries.

    • Daisy

      Whites don’t feel internal guilt so much as they are shamed by the powers-that-be for not feeling it.

  • bigone4u

    I doubt that even one in a hundred college students knows that blacks owned and still own slaves. Spread this info around and cite the source of the original article, which appears to be a pro-black website. If you cite Amren as the source, you will be dismissed by many liberals.

    • sbuffalonative

      Yes, always use original source material. In this case, The Roots article by [black] academic Henry Louis Gates Jr.

      If you cite AR, they’ll dismiss your arguments as racist. If you cite a black author, then they have to debate you.

  • donkey butt arrogant Gates

    Gates is a jackass arrogant pos who thinks he is above the law and should have been arrested and thrown in jail by the cops for disorderly conduct and impersonating a human being. Their biggest problem is arrogance and cockiness these days. What a joke they are.
    Of course they owned slaves. They are lying hypocrites if they say otherwise. Indians were big time slave owners too especially the Cherokee tribes.

  • the real root

    Did black people own slaves by Root? The real “root” was white slave traders bought tens of millions of black slaves off African tribal chiefs. Where did Gates mention that? And thank G-d for white slave traders as otherwise there would not be a single black in the west had it not been for them and the slave owning chiefs selling their rejects.

  • josh

    I wonder,do black pimps own white hookers to “exploit” them or to protect them?

    • Katherine McChesney

      To disgrace them.

    • Daisy

      Good point.

  • Free Travel For blacks


    We need to do the right thing.

    We need to offer EVERY black who feels mistreated in America a FREE one way ticket back to Africa along with $25,000 cash money.

    All they need to do to qualify is Renounce Their U.S. Citizenship which they do not seem to appriciate and sign documents that they will never return to the USA, with very serious consequences if they do, not free housing, health care and welfare like we give our “South of The Border invaders (sic) but serious time on a Chain Gang before Deportation.

    At $25,000 each we will be coming our billions of dollars ahead.

    Few people know it costs $50,000 a year to keep a black incarcerated in prison.

    • Dede Anderson

      You Do Realize That You are also Not native to America. Hence the Word Native Americans or The Indigenous People of America. Just as Africans were brought here, So were Europeans although most came. Which would mean Technically You do not OWN or have any rights to America, only the Native/Indigenous People that were here way before Columbus So Called Discovered it, Would have the so Called rights to America. So if your giving out tickets to Africa, Give yourself one as well and head back to Europe.

  • HamletsGhost

    This information will remain buried like all other instances of blacks’ true nature, because it doesn’t fit the bill of “Blacks good, whites bad” that young people have drummed into their heads daily.

    I read about blacks’ ownership of slaves a long time ago and also heard the excuse that they did it to “protect” their family members from whites. But on closer inspection, it doesn’t really hold up. If slaves were freed legally, they could enjoy the same legal protection that their equally free family members already enjoyed. What law worked for one would also protect the other.

    More likely is the fact that by owning their family, blacks could more easily control them. Looking at black family dynamics today, there seems to be a surfeit of controlling behavior, jealousy, and physical abuse. What better way for a black man to keep his woman from leaving him and his children obedient than to legally own them and have the right to whip them or sell them if they got too “uppity”.

    • MikeofAges

      Au contraire. Everybody knows that blacks owned slave prior to the Civil War.

  • Formerly_Known_as_Whiteplight

    There was a book published on this subject in the early 1990s, before it became so political, or at least as tainted as the subject is now called “Black Masters.” I kick myself for not getting a copy back then.

  • MarkLuger

    Who cares if black guys had to work and live with black women 100’s of years ago/? My race dropped napalm on Dresden for no reason, does anyone cry about that?? All we hear is waaaa, I’s had to work and libs wif a black woman, waaaa.

    • What has your comment got to do with the article above?

  • dj2

    My feeling is that the whole history of slavery is one that is very problematic to understand or right about.

    Think about it this way…100 years from now, if there are still people around to document our times, they will no doubt see that many black people were in prison. And they will wonder…those people were so racist, so evil, so cruel, so barbaric as to have these enormous prisons, and people kept in them! And they will have museums where people will go and you and the kids can take a picture where you are “behind bars” or something like that.

    But of course, from our perspective, we know the truth. We lock up rapists and murderers and drug dealers! And black people happen to be those things!

    It’s like when you hear about lynchings, and everybody today, in our “enlightened” age thinks it was horrific and those poor blacks and those evil southerners, etc. But many of those lynchings were for criminal, violent activity! The townspeople were actually just protecting themselves, keeping themselves safe.

    It’s sort of the same with slavery. No doubt many aspects of it were bad. But, also, alot of those blacks had it much better than they would have had it belonging to some tribe in Africa.

  • Ross Kardon

    Why did free blacks own slaves? To work in their fields, plantations, mines, factories, workshops, and other purposes, just like any white slave owner.

    How would the public, both blacks and whites, react if a mainstream movie, or prime time TV mini-series about American slavery were made, in which the “massa” himself is a free black man? For example, I remember back in 1977, the release of the TV mini-series “Roots” caused serious racial problems. It was not until recently, I learned that “Roots” was plagiarized by Alex Haley from the Harold Courtlander novel “The African”.

    Of course, most people do not study history on their own like I do for a hobby, and are very prone to believing about history what they have learned in school, see in movies, and on TV dramas, which is often historically inaccurate.

    It was black Africans themselves who originated the black slave trade. Simply put, one tribe would raid the village of an enemy tribe and sell the people they caught to white merchant ship captains off the coast of Africa. After 1808, slave trading from the United States was technically illegal, but there were still slave smuggling ships from the United States up until the Civil War, because of the money to be made.

    Unfortunately, slavery is still going on today, Now it is called, human trafficking. Organizations like Free the Slaves, and other human rights groups, are modern-day abolitionists who are now fighting it. But this makes me wonder, what if a benefit fundraiser to fight human trafficking was held at the Apollo Theater in Harlem, NYC?

  • slavery a bad economic system

    Africans were the original slave owners. Sneaky tribal chief con artists sold tens of millions of their rejects most who were captives or inferiors in the tribe. Otherwise they would have been cannibalized. Foolish white slaves trader merchants sucked into the gimmick shipped them west and of course the western elite were gullible to fall for this trick when slaves were needed like a hole in the head and the worst of economy systems. These white Shem race Europeans could have enslaved the migrant Asian mongoloid Japheth race who had crossed over the Bering ice bridge 1000 yrs earlier but were tricked into going to Africa and buying the Ham servant race as they were called in the Torah’s Genesis. It was a heb Rothchilde trick.
    Since his parents were missionarys to Japan where he got hooked on the yellow mongoloid pagans Amren’s Taylor was obviously a rebel like all offspring of these types. The preachers daughter or son was always the wild child when unchained. This is why he rejects any white man religion controvery discussion and protects so called hebs who have a disconnect with WMR although missionary’s all have a superiority complex when it comes to their belief system.. In the end slavery was the worst eco system and opened the door to Marx and his tool Lincoln. The rest is bloody history and inferior genetics.

  • G. Carter Woodson is such a BSer on this point. To “own” someone as a matter of “benevolence” toward your kinfolk. Pure crap! If one were “benevolent” one would buy and then immediately release and free forever (“emancipate”) one’s family member. The fact that the kept them as slaves long enough to have them listed on a decennial census puts the lie to that. Black americans bought and sold slaves for the same reasons black africans always have: to make money! Black in Haiti keep slaves to this very day for the same reason: they are cheap exploitable labor. Google “restavek”.

  • Sherman_McCoy

    If blacks were treated as they deserve, in terms of criminal prosecutions, television depictions, report of their inferior IQ’s, the real reasons they cannot keep up with whites in school, then I would not hate them nearly as much as I do. The denial of reality is what turns people into extremists, not fair treatment.

    • ladyL

      I am interested to know examples of the treatment blacks deserve. I am also interested as to why. Thank you!

  • gates is a pos

    Gates is one useless lying arrogant pos who unquestionably came from one of the worst rejected inferior lines in Africa who were the first to be sold and board the western bound ship by tribal chiefs snickering and trying to hold back their laughter while signing a big relief to have his kind purged completely. Clearly Gates was the original Kunte Kinte but not the Hollywood fiction and only a wimpy runt bed wetter.

  • guest

    Did blacks own black slaves 150+ years ago? YES.

    Do blacks own black slaves in the United States, right now, today? ALSO YES!

    From a very quick google search:



  • The Ice Queen

    When visiting Louisiana years ago I took a tour of an old plantation and was surprised to find out that the slave owner was a brown skinned woman. She was Creole, which is a mixture of African, Indian, and European, in some cases. If you ask ten Louisianans what a Creole is, you will get ten different answers. In either case, Laura looks Indian. Some of the family members are of French descent, so apparently they were not against intermarriage between the races.


  • Mariner33

    I’ll be darned. Black people exploiting other Buh-lacks. Hey, wait a minute.
    Aren’t 99% of pimps and heroin dealers in and to the Schwartz menschen Black?
    Oh, honky Whitey made me do it, somehow connected with slavery and past

  • Patrick Boyle

    Slavery of course was a universal economic strategy. It is not just restricted to humans much less just whites. Social insects also raid other colonies and steal slaves. Human slavery began probably with the neolithic revolution. Hunter-gatherers can’t take slaves out on hunting parties but slaves are valuable as soon as you invent agriculture.
    So the black activist Gates chooses to state that blacks owned slaves in the US, implying that they only did so because they were imbeded in a white slave culture. But blacks also had slavery back in Africa. They probably got slavery later than Europeans because they got agriculture later.
    Gates wants to associate whiteness with slave owning but it is more true to say that whiteness is associated with ending slavery. Gates is a bigot.

  • Pelagian

    Is there a good history of slavery going back to biblical times that offers a defense of 19th century American slavery? Or at least a good contextualization of it? I want to read-up. Thanks.

  • slavery was a bad mistake

    Slavery was a catastrophic mistake and needed like a hole in the head. Did the slave traders and slave buyers really and truly think this whole thing out before they jumped into it head first getting suckered by the tribal chiefs getting rid of their rejects conning them off on the white man who paid as much as 50,000 in todays dollars for every single slave to do incredibly easy soft labor 8-12 months out of the year picking cotten or cleaning house while getting everything paid for and the biggest part getting out of that god awful wretched hellhole jungle 3rd world existence?

    Clearly they were happy to get away from the stench of the jungle otherwise they would have all returned to that wretched hellhole Africa in 1821 with Liberia or in 1865 or other times.

    Blacks in America need to get on ther hands and knees and kiss the feet of the white elite for taking out of hellish African savage misery and bringing them into the light and same for the Europeans who colonized the African jungles and upgraded their lives.

    No wonder the free slaves in 1865 showed their affection and eternal appreciation keeping the last names of their former owners and even gong to work for them for wages. They certainly never returned to Africa where they were not wanted.

    Dont believe all the revisionist lies about abuse of slaves as they were treated with respect and dignity otherwise not a single reparation lawsuit was ever filed by an ex-slave and they still carry the surnames of their master to this day in 2013. Why do they give the tribal chiefs a free pass who sold them off and of course they owned slaves.

    Ever heard of white slavery? White slaves built and maintained Europe for thousands of years. That should have never ended. Whites never needed black slaves for anything. It was the worst of the worst economic systems and opened the door for satanic Marx. Had blacks remained in Africa they would be happy. Ignorance is bliss.

    • MikeofAges

      Nobody want to remember that human beings once lived in the real world. You ate what you grew, raised, gathered or hunted. Or didn’t eat at all. Anything you had that was made was made by someone you could see with your own eyes, or at someone like the people you could see in your daily world. People want to believe things that are not real because they want to live in a mental world which is not real, but want to believe that it is real. If you want to believe in a false present and false future, then you need a false past to go with it. If people wanted to live in the real world, they’d be yelling for job, any reasonable job, and a paycheck at the end of the week. Then, again, in the world today, maybe it makes more sense to yell for a bigger handout. Worldwide, the economic system seems incapable of creating jobs.

  • Johnwharl

    I’ll like to own a few white people.

  • Ella

    You never hear about slavery of White Europeans along the Barbary Coast (North Africa). Sex slave trade for White women does not leave enough shock to these PC scholars. White males were shipped off to the quarries if captured through raids. So-called scholars claim it’s not racism since Whites only have the power to oppress non-Whites. They must assume that all Europeans were rich from stolen wealth.

    • saxonsun

      Yes, the Arabs took about a million whites into slavery–they devastated many parts of Europe. You never hear about it. Also, whites were considered stupid by the Arabs and less valuable. Talk about racism.

  • candidhandle

    Forgive me, but here are the facts: afroids, negroid sub saharan africans by any name, were,
    pay attention, LIVE STOCK, not members of civilized society. negroes sold negroes, and played on the morality of whites to create a parasite on the body social, the afroid negro.
    Lincoln wanted to send them back to africa, but the militant blackoids murdered him,
    and now the beastial negro is polluting the body politic. may obama and his ilk reap what they sow. the gated communties will be happy hunting grounds for the underclass that voted the demons in office. ha, the last laugh will be so sweet. 7 shots for a drunk affirmative action hire means 8 shots missed and the elite will have their asses in a bind. have to use pencils to fight with. ha.

  • American Patriot

    Lets not forget that the vast bulk of the slave catchers & sellers in Africa were African……and that slavery when finally stamped out in Africa by the Brits returned full force after 1960 once the White Man put his burden of civilizing the uncivilisable down. BTW, slavery has never left the areas ruled by moslems.

  • gates tells the truth for once

    Shhh .. keep it quiet ok? Tribal chiefs who sold off all the slaves to the white man owned a billion slaves too and still do …

  • Joseph

    If these benevolent black slave owners kept black slaves “to protect that person”, what would prevent them from emancipating them voluntarily even if they stayed with the family.

    This is the usual noise from the left; “If we do it it is not the same”.

  • Alexandra

    Isn’t this the guy that had the beer summit with Obama?

  • Fed Up

    I would like to recommend a few good books for AmRen people to read: >”48 Liberal Lies about American History” by Larry Schweikart. “The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Civil War” by H. W. Crocker III. Also “Death By Liberalism”, by J. R. Dunn. These books, as a number of others in this genre will certainly open your mind and refocus your thinking.

    (No, I am not selling them, nor have a financial interest — I am just tired of the liberal lying we get from all directions in today’s politically correct [NOT] world!)

  • Fed Up

    What neither liberals nor Blacks will admit: Slavery would have ended by the beginning of the 20th Century. If only for the simple reason slavery stacked the deck against Whites who did not own slaves of their own. Because a White worker could not compete effectively wage-wise against a slave doing the same job.

  • saxonsun

    He had an article–can’t remember where–that castigated blacks for refusing to see the truth about their precious ancestors selling them.

  • JD

    Read the book , the politically incorrect guide to the south and why it will rise again, The author makes a lot of good points on slavery. Such as, the first person to ever legally own a slave in America was a black man named Anthony Johnson, some of the largest slave owners were blacks, whites did not mistreat their slaves, just like they dont mistreat there property today. They were only whipped or hung if they had commited a crime, just like they do still today, in Africa.

  • lugnut

    Freed black slaves mostly in La and the north had to pay to buy their relatives and others from white slave owners. Many people mistakenly assume black people owned slaves, because they found their names on bills of sale. Just because their names of people whose freedom they purchased were found on bills of sale, doesn’t mean they were slave owners, or they treated them as slaves.. Where do you think all these “black slave owners” would live anyway? There were only 135 free black people in the entire south at different times and they were mostly the offspring of their owners, their white fathers. Most were freed by their white fathers leading up to the civil war. Many wills would states, if they died, their mixed children would be freed. Blacks couldn’t own anything in the south during slavery. It wasn’t until after around 1880 before blacks could have the land left to them by their white fathers. I may be among the few who actually spent many hours talking to a former slave and i learned through her the real truth. She was one of them.

  • lugnut

    Oh, this is a kluxer confederate revisionist article. Your forefathers brought slaves here, because there couldn’t do the jobs themselves. Everything you have, even today, slaves did that, slaves built the foundation of this country and without my ancestors, you’d still be dirt poor. And the fact is, your ancestors were child molesters. When i did my DNA and African American research, nearly all of the little black girls were around the age of 13 when they gave birth to the owner’s babies. That means, the owners started messing with them earlier than 13. The average age of bed wenches ( just an excuse to get a small child in their beds) was from 8 to 13 years old. By the end of the civil war, most of what was the black slaves, had white in them. Some southern heritage huh?

  • jtrose

    As a slave owner once said,’ I got more out of my ex slave paying him, then I did when I own him”