Western Civilisation was and is superior to anything Islam has developed. Islam has not aided in the development of the modern world; in fact civilisation has only been created in spite of Islam. Raising the alarm about the fascism called Submission since 2000.
The Muslim takeover of North Africa during the 7th and early 8th centuries, destroyed Jewish-Christian and Berber civilization which was far in advance, of anything that the Muslim Arabs could have imagined. Over time, and through many mutations, the Muslim domains morphed into piratical and slave trading emporiums. It is a signal fact, which is rarely discussed, and almost never broached in the fields of academia and politics. Over a mere 300 year period, from 1550 to 1850 at least 2 million White European slaves, were taken by Muslim corsairs and jihadists.
It needs to be emphasized that the pillage of European human capital was not limited to the Barbary. The scale and scope, and the profoundly jihadic impetus to the raiding of Christian Europe by Muslims who were looking for booty, slaves and gold, cannot be denied – not even by the Islam-is-Peace cult, or Muslimophiles. Both Western and Eastern Europe were raped by Muslims. Islam retarded, contracted and depreciated European development by generations thanks to its 1000 year jihad which commenced in 700 AD and found its deranged and psychotic apogee during the hey-day of Muslim corsairs and slave traders during the 17th century.
Davis' study which is extremely well researched, sourced and written; is mandatory for anyone who wants to get a feel for the depravity of Islamic jihad and the lust that Muslim theology has for slaves. Slavery is not only allowed in the Koran, it is adjured if the infidels do not convert to Islam. At best you might get a system of 'dhimmitude' where Jews and Christians lose all their private property, and pay huge taxes to remain 'separate' and 'protected' as second class citizens. At worse, you are carried off into slavery, to work in a galley; a mine; or a field; usually to die of over-work, disease, neglect or poor nutrition.
The result of Davis' analysis of the White slaves trade is this: between 1530 and 1780, there were about 2 million White European slaves taken by the Muslims of the Barbary coast.
“Putting all these forms of slave decline together yields a combined attrition rate of 24-25 per cent: that portion of the slave population in Barbary that would have had to be replaced each year if levels were to remain stable....given the average captive population of around 35,000 during these years, would translate into roughly 8,500 new slaves needed annually....if we consider the entire 250 years over which corsair slaving....the total number of slaves soon exceeds a million.” [p.23]
In fact the total exceeds 2 million. 8.500 slaves a year over 250 years computes to 2.1 million in total. Given that Algiers had over 30.000 slaves on average per annum, the attrition rate just in Algiers alone, means that the city was resupplied with some 8.000 slaves annually. Davis' assertion based on the best available evidence possible, is most likely an under-estimation. If Algiers by itself, consumed per annum, some 8.000 White slaves, than the entire Barbary area must have required 10.000 or more per year, or some 2.5 million White slaves over 250 years.
But you will never hear a discussion of the disappearance, and destruction of 2-3 million Christian lives as Muslim slaves, over this early modern period. Is it any wonder that the US and France finally had to invade the Barbary coast in the early and mid 19th century respectively, to end this menace ? For much of the era between 1530 and 1780, the Muslims and Turks had overpowering naval strength which manifested itself in almost unopposed raiding over the Western Mediterranean littoral. As Davis relates, at times the combined Turkish-Muslim piratical forces totalled more than 10,000 soldiers and sailors in over 100 large galleys. They could attack at will throughout the Mediterranean since the Christian states were either internally disunited, or focused on conflicts with other European states, and could do little to stop Muslim depredations and jihad. [p. 28] In their yearly predations, the Muslim pirates possessed larger resources; and the potency of fear and speed, to terrorise their Christian victim-states.
The jihadic aspect of the slave trade is quite apparent in the brutality of the Muslim incursions along the European coasts. Whole towns, regions and coastal areas were denuded. Much of littoral Italy was left seriously under- or even de-populated as people moved to the highlands and into walled cities. Raids taking whole villages and thousands of slaves at one time were almost annual events. The Muslim raiders also used terror along the coasts, destroying shrines, churches, monasteries and any imagery or structures that had a religious importance. Booty, gold, art and any worthwhile artifact which might help pay for the expedition was also taken. [p. 41]
The Muslim obsession with White slavery was also fuelled by the need to have slaves man their galleys. The Christians also impressed Muslim slaves to man their ships – at least up until 1600 when Christians began using the sailing ship in place of the manned-galley. The Christian enslavement of Muslims was very small when compared to the slave-trading of Whites into Islam: “Among Christian states, however, the practice was never as pervasive or as massive as in Barbary and died out sooner, as most European nations switched from galleys to sail and from slaves to convicts in those galleys that did remain.” [p.9]
According to Davis even as late as 1640, when all Western navies had converted to sailing ships and were using either conscripts or convicts to man their ships; the Muslims never innovative, were still using slaves to row flat bottomed galley ships: “In the 1640s the galleys of the Muslim corsairs would have required some 15,000 Christian slaves to man.” [p. 75] The inability of Islam to adopt new technology – in this case new forms of shipbuilding, hull and sail design – created a need for slavery. This is just another example of Islamic backwardness which dominates its entire history.
Hard labor was also the destiny of many of these slaves most of whom were men since female slaves made up less than 5 % of the total [p. 36]. Heavy tasks such as mining salt; digging, mixing and carrying mortar; were also imposed on thousands each year [p. 76]. The death rate from such work would have been very high – probably higher even than those sitting chained to oars in galleys, defecating where they sat and eating little more than some bread and water. For the Muslims slaves were cheap and easily carried off of the many thousands of ships plying the Mediterranean and Atlantic coastal areas. They were thus easy to replenish and the cost of the average slave was less than that of a horse. [p. 102]
The scope of this Muslim lust for White slaves is simply astounding. The Islamic corsairs ranged all over Western Europe. Thus Davis tells the reader that:
-Corsairs took between 1628 and 1641 some 131 English ships and 2500 slaves.
-Algerians took no fewer than 353 British ships between 1672 and 1682 which means they were picking up about 300-400 new British slaves each year.
-The British Royal Navy admitted to losing 466 English and Scottish ships to Algerians between 1606 and 1609.
-The Muslims carried off 7000 captives from Naples in 1544.
-400 slaves were taken from Iceland in 1639; 4000 from Calabria in 1644; and 60 from Penzance England in 1641.
The abduction of Whites by Muslims, into the Barbary, was a European-wide terror.
Davis relates that the great French historian – and one of my favourites - Fernand Braudel had concluded that the 'figures were not spectacular', in regards to the Whites taken into slavery along the North African coast. This myopia coloured academic and political discourse for generations. Davis' research reveals the opposite as being true. Just along the Barbary coast, at least 2 million Whites were taken, over a period of 250 years, into slavery by Muslims. It was a mixture of jihad; military necessity and backwardness; and a lack of Islamic innovation, cultural development and societal barbarity which mandated what can only be called a racial-genocide against Christians.
Studying Islamic savagery and White slave trading does not dispense with; nor overshadow the transshipment across the Atlantic, by Whites, of some 10 million Blacks. White Christian Europe and America, for a mixture of reasons both moral and geo-political, did however expunge this nefarious and evil practice. Islam on the other hand, has never fought against slavery, nor has there been any theological revolution within Islam denouncing it. White civilization, progressing in morality, technology and wealth made the immorality of slavery an anachronism. Islam, which is still a pre-modern, largely illiterate and mystical enterprise, has never possessed the political-economy to even imagine a world without slaves. Indeed, slave trading and slave-owning, still goes on today in Islam.
Davis' study is required reading for those who want to know more about how and why Whites were slave-traded within Islam. His book is a vital antidote for those who tire of listening to really smart people intone that Islam is peace and merriment and created the modern world. Islam is a death cult; and part of that culture of death is an obsession with slavery.