Third worldism, which was Stalin’s invention, ended up becoming — and is still today — one of the greatest sources of the authority of the revolutionary spirit, instilling in the soul of Western civilization an inextinguishable guilt complex and obtaining all sorts of moral profits from it, political and financial. Underwritten by international organizations, fed by billionaire foundations and several dozen governments, trumpeted by tireless chatters like Noam Chomsky and Edward Said, enthroned as official doctrine by all the mainstream media in Europe and the USA, this ideology all made of opportunistic begging ended up by permeating itself so deeply in public opinion that any attempt to contest it, even in a neutral and academic tone, is today worthy of unmistakable proof of “racism”.
One of its main tenets is precisely the accusation of racism, thrown generically in the face of the whole of Christendom by countless armies of activist intellectuals and, in recent decades, by all spokesmen for Islamic radicalism. Imbued with the belief in the congenital inferiority of blacks, the European white man would have been, according to this doctrine, the slaver par excellence, decimating the African population and financing, with the disgrace of the black continent, the Industrial Revolution that enriched the West.
Everything, in this theory, is a lie. Starting with the inversion of the chronology. Europeans did not arrive in Africa until the middle of the 15th century. Long before that, racist contempt for blacks was common sense among Arabs, as can be seen in the words of some of their most distinguished intellectuals. I extract these examples from Bernard Lugan’s book, Afrique, l’Histoire à l’Endroit (Paris, Perrin, 1989):
Ibn Khaldun, the Tunisian historian (1332–1406), asserts that, if Sudanese are characterized by “levity and inconstancy” , in the southern regions “we only find men closer to animals than to an intelligent being. They live in wild places and caves, eat herbs and raw grains and sometimes eat each other. We cannot consider them human beings”.
Egyptian writer Al-Abshihi (1388–1446) asks: “What can be more vile, more bad than black slaves? As for mulattos, be nice to them every day of your life and in all possible ways, and they will not have the least gratitude to you: it will be as if you have done nothing for them. The better you treat them, the more they will be insolent; but if you mistreat them, they will show humility and submission.”
Iyad Al-Sabti (1083–1149) writes that blacks are “of all men, the most corrupt and most prone to procreation. Their life is like that of animals. They are not interested in any subject in the world, except food and women. Other than that, nothing deserves their attention.”
Ibn Butlan, recognizing that black women have a sense of the rhythm and resistance to do heavy work, observes: “But you cannot get any pleasure from them, such it is the odor of their armpits and the harshness of their body”
On the other hand, theories that affirmed the racial inferiority of blacks did not spread in cultured Europe until the eighteenth century (cf. Eric Voegelin, The History of the Race Idea. From Ray to Carus, vol. III of the Collected Works, Baton Rouge , Louisiana State University Press, 1998). In other words: the literate Europeans became racist almost at the same time as the traffic was declining and the abolitionist movements were breaking out, of which there is no equivalent in the Arab world, since slavery is permitted by the Islamic religion and no one would dare to challenge a Koranic commandment.
Anti-black racism is pure Arab creation and, in Europe, did nothing to promote the slave trade
A characteristic inversion of historical time is the stereotype, universally accepted, of the European colonialist invading Africa with a crucifix in his hand, determined to impose on helpless people the religion of the white man. Christianity was a religion of blacks long before it was a religion of white Europeans. There were churches in Ethiopia at a time when the English were still pagan barbarians. More than a thousand years before the great navigations, Africa was home to the oldest Christian kingdoms in the world, some of them quite cultured and prosperous. It was the Arabs who destroyed them, in the wake of Islamizing by force. Much of the region from Morocco, Libya, Algeria and Egypt to Sudan and Ethiopia was Christian until Muslims arrived, burned churches and sold Christians as slaves. Fourfifths of the prestige of third-world legends rests in hiding that fact.
To the inversion of chronology is added, as it invariably happens in revolutionary discourse, that of moral responsibility. It is not even necessary to say that the verbal fury of Arabs today against the “Christian slavery civilization” is pure projected guilt: if Europeans brought something between twelve and fifteen million slaves to the Americas, Arab merchants took them to Islamic countries approximately as much, with three differences: (1) they were the ones who imprisoned them — something that Europeans never did, except in Angola and for a short time — ; (2) castrated at least ten percent of them, a custom unknown among European traffickers; (3) they continued to practice the slave trade until the 20th century. Arab slavery has been banned for a long time, but the taboo can be considered broken since the publisher Gallimard, the most prestigious in France, consented to publish the excellent study by African author Tidiane N’Diaye, Le Genocide Voilé (2008).
But it is not just the Arabs who have guilt to hide behind an indignant accusation speech. Slavery was a general rule in Africa long before their arrival, and today it is known that most of the captured slaves were sold on the domestic market, only a smaller portion being taken abroad. When apologists for African civilization extolled the great black kingdoms of yore, they often fail to mention that these states (especially Benin, Dahomey, Ashanti and Oyo) owed their prosperity to the slave trade, on which their economy depended entirely. Especially the kingdom of Oyo, writes Lugan,
“has developed a remarkable military imperialism since the end of the 17th century, seeking to reach the ocean to establish direct contacts with whites. Even before that, Oyo’s warrior force, especially her cavalry, allowed an abundant harvest of slaves that she imprisoned to the south, between the Yoruba, and in the north between the Bariba and the Nupe. Traditionally, the numerous captives became slaves within the society of the victors. With the appearance of European trafficking, a part — but only a part — was sent to the coast.”
The white Christian, European or American, was the last people to enter the slave trade, the first to leave it and the only one who fought to extinguish it. In comparison with Asians, Africans and Arabs, he was the least slaver of the peoples and the only decidedly anti-slavery. Throwing the guilt of universal slavery upon him, precisely on him, giving his most voracious and cruel competitors the appearance of slaves and victims, is such a monstrous forgery and an immeasurable injustice, that no rational pretext can justify it: it is born out of the purest and most ostentatious racial hatred, which today makes its target the only people, throughout human history, whose extinction can be preached openly in the chairs and pulpits without any consequences for the preacher, much less risk of judicial punishment.
An indispensable read for BLM worshipers is Jonathan Derrick's "Africa's Slaves Today". Although published in 1975 (New York, Schoken Books) and therefore necessarily outdated, the book suffices to show that, instead of pure innocent victims of European slavers (who only entered this business after 1500), Africans were — and they are still — one of the peoples longest dedicated to the exploitation of slaves.
[Translated from here]