Arab slave trade determined history
- From: M Winther <mlwi@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 12:52:49 -0400
Psychological authors are these days discussing notions of ethnic
psychology. Donald R Atkinson focuses on counseling ethnic and racial
minorities and identifies characteristics unique to each group. Joseph
Henderson, advanced the notion of a "cultural unconscious". Michael V.
Adams discusses unconscious racial and ethnic factors (collective
attitudes and behaviors that are really ethnic factors). Literature is
growing. I have, for my part, argued that a culture is very much
determined by, and dependent on the constitutional collective
character of its population ("An Intrusion of Matriarchal
Consciousness" http://home7.swipnet.se/~w-73784/matriarchal.htm ).
I express my concern that the ongoing mix of ethnic groups in the
West forebodes a cultural regression. A striking historical example of
this is what underwent in the Arab world.
Arab civilization made great advances in learning and culture up to a
certain point in the middle ages. Then it ran out of steam and lost
its vitality, an occurrence which allowed room for the European
expansion. Historians have been puzzled by this reversal. Recently,
genetic research has revealed that sub-Saharan Africans have
contributed greatly to the genome of today's Arab population.
The Arabs imported enormous numbers of African female slaves, a trade
that ended only at the end of the 19th century. Contrary to America,
Arab countries imported foremostly women slaves. Estimates by
historians suggest the extent of the Arab slave trade to between 11 to
25 million black Africans, and from thousands to in excess of one
million Europeans (Wikipedia). The female slaves were exploited
sexually. But, unlike in America, there are no direct descendants of
the slaves in the Arab world. This is because Arabs, as a whole, are
descendants of African slaves. The African genome was swallowed up by
the Arab population.
The mixing of the two races that occurred rapidly during medieval
times could, I suggest, explain the mysterious cultural reversal that
took place in the Arab world. The Arabic population had at a point
inherited so much of sub-Saharan African traits that it affected the
vitality of a whole civilization. The genetic shift took place very
rapidly. A thousand years ago the Arabs had no African markers in
their genome. In medieval times the genome changed rapidly. Why could
not such a rapid change have affected culture?
We balk at notions of racial purity, especially in light of the
overblown pseudo-scientific ideas from the thirties. Nevertheless, it
might be necessary to tackle this problem, whilst keeping it within
the limits of the sane.
Today, research has shown that there is a genetic signal of
Neanderthals in all the non-African genomes.
This could explain the larger brain of the non-African races.
Neanderthals had a significantly larger brain than Sapiens (it could
have been as much as 20% larger).
A recent study bolsters this idea:
"Could our big brains come from Neanderthals?
Study: Gene could only be passed by interbreeding with humans"
Satoshi Kanazawa, an evolutionary psychologist, has published research
which concludes that low IQ levels, rather than poverty and disease,
are the reason why African life expectancy is low and infant mortality
high. His paper, published in the British Journal of Health
Psychology, compares IQ scores with indicators of ill health in 126
countries and claims that nations at the top of the ill health league
also have the lowest intelligence ratings.
We are bound to discuss to what extent our advanced Western
civilization depends on our inherited genetic makeup, and the
consequences of an African/Arabic immigration, whether there can occur
a devitalization on lines of the Arabic reversal. The Mongol invasion
is part of the explanation for the decline in economics and culture
(libraries were burnt), but it cannot explain the change in collective
psychology. After all, Europe also suffered Mongol invasions. Arabic
culture lost all vitality and the Arabs became a backward people. It
is a very surprising turn of events. Normally, a high culture would
keep up its resolve and be fixed on rebuilding itself. In a sense, an
invasion can strengthen a high culture while individuals are
determined to do self-sacrifice for an ideal. The massive introduction
of African genes could have played a greater role than the Mongol