Why Did the Dutch Abolish Slavery So Late?
Vložit
- čas přidán 16. 12. 2022
- Why did the Dutch abolished slave trade not until 1863. The Dutch West India Company (WIC) was important in Dutch history. The WIC transported many African slaves across the Atlantic Ocean in the so-called transatlantic slave trade. In the history of the Netherlands the Golden Age is a vital time for the rise of the Dutch Republic in the 17th century. The Dutch Golden Age (Gouden Eeuw) commensed when the Dutch provinces led by Holland were revolting against Spain in the so-called Dutch Revolt. In the Dutch history this revolt is also know as the Eighty Years' War (Tachtigjarige Oorlog) and took place in the Low Countries. In 1588 the Dutch Republic (Republiek der Zeven Verenigde Nederlanden) was established. In 1621 the Dutch West India Company (WIC - West-Indische Compagnie) was established and brought great wealth to the Dutch Republic. Yet, many people suffered. An estimated 600,000 enslaved Africans were transported across the Atlantic Ocean on Dutch ships. Only in 1863 the Dutch abolished slavery, long after Spain, Great-Britain and France did. Why was this?
SUPPORT ME ON PATREON ► / historyhustler
SUPPORT ME ON PAYPAL ► www.paypal.com/paypalme/Histo...
SUBSCRIBE ► / @historyhustle
INSTAGRAM ► / historyhustle
FACEBOOK ► / historyhustler
TWITTER ► / hustlehistory
SOURCES
- Geschiedenis van de Nederlandse slavenhandel (P.C. Emmer).
- Geschiedenis van Suriname. Van stam tot staat (Eveline Bakker, e.a.).
- Geschiedenis van Suriname (Hans Buddingh').
- • Het slavernijverleden ... (02-12-2022).
IMAGES
Images from commons.wikimedia.org.
MUSIC
"Asian Drums" Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License
creativecommons.org/licenses/b...
SOUNDS
Freesound.org.
E-MAIL
historyhustle[at]gmail.com
Learn about the Dutch Golden Age:
czcams.com/video/RdLjM_sBV08/video.html
✅
What about slavery in indonesia? You should read up on the finding of reggie baay. He revealed that slavery began in the "east" and at one point even outnumbered the amount of slaves that were in the "west". Also many indonesian aristocrats were exiled or enslaved to various countries. Hence the big numbers of indonesian descendants in places such as south africa.
@@Jblah perhaps a topic for the future.
@@HistoryHustle nah nobody cares about history lol. But when you tell it it should be within context. We need that full panorama view :)
@@HistoryHustleslavery is affecting god's dark and biblical beings. There will be a riot , Free Nicki Minaj 🇯🇲🔑🇹🇹
A very similar process also ocurred in Brazil. Here we are taught that we had a very late slave abollition, 1891 (I had no idea that the netherlands were also late). The idea behind both were almost identical: start with a slave trade regulation (imposed by the british crown) then the beneficting law (freeing up the elders slaves), laws that caused a downfall of the slave trade. And the last thing was the abollition itself, with the Lei Áurea (or Golden Law) that set the slaves “free” (with nowere to go or work). In Rio de Janeiro they would start grouping up in comunities that would later become favelas.
Very nice vídeo, Thanks for sharing.
Also in Brasil you had similar slave ressistence in the interior with the Quilombos. Black comunities made of fugitive slaves that conducted raides at the colonits farms. Nice to think that both Surinamese slaves and brazilians used that same strategy for ressistance.
The run-away slaves (Maroons; Marooni...) were everywhere since the beginning!... In Central America, Eastern & Western coasts of Mexico.... But their best success was in Jamaica!...
Late? Yemen and Saudi Arabia banned the slave trade in 1962, Saleh 1960. Mauritania in 1980. There are many more, including African tribes
@@mauritsvanoranje6725 yes funny to see that Brazilian historiography wants to aligns itself to european history, rather than oriental . (Thats probably to due obsession of brazilian scholars to europeancentrism)
@@Thiago.Acquati Bom te ver por aqui! Obrigado! ヽ(͡◕ ͜ʖ ͡◕)ﾉ 🍀 🇧🇷
A disturbing stage in history, but better late than never. Seems unthinkable now that people were treated like this. Sadly there is plenty of modern day slavery taking place.
Slavery has been around from the begining of the human experience and will continue for many more years.The west`s corporate culture will see to that.
Exactly, 27 million slaves are in the world today, more then the trans-Atlantic slave trade has transported. 6000 slaves died in Qatar to build the infrastructure for the Word Championship.
@@mardiffv.8775
In fact, > 40 000 000 slaves are now in the World! Tjey are everywhere in the World (Most countries on Earth, even "advanced", democratic, free Western countries contain thousands of them!...).
that's the worst. in 2022 there is still slavery in the netherlands, it's just not very obvious, hard to discover yet no less evil.
klopt me moeder zei nog dat mensen verplicht werden om naar Suriname te gaan voor werk in 1930 dus denk maar niet dat het op papier te zetten dat het weg is.
I know nowadays putting context to the subject of slavery is not acceptable, polarizing the discussion is in fashion. But as a historian, I cannot help myself. In the video, I missed some context.
Firstly: The Dutch were only late compared to other Europeans, and there were only the British, Danes and French. All relatively small slaveholders compared to the USA and Brazil. In 1863 there were almost 4 million enslaved people in the US and 1.5 million in Brazil. The 13th amendment ending slavery in the US is from January 1865, in Brazil the last slaves were freed on May 13, 1888. So, it seems a bit Eurocentric to compare European countries, while the vast majority of enslaved were freed years later than in the European colonies, in Brazil even a generation later.
Secondly: Dutch slavery was not as black-and-white as suggested, even by the Dutch government. Already in the 17th century, most of the personnel of the WIC on Curaçao consisted of foreigners and free Africans. In Paramaribo, the capital of Suriname, 65% of the “people of colour” were free, artisans and not poor. Some of them even had slaves. And when the Dutch finally abolished slavery in 1863, this group was almost as big as the group of enslaved people. A similar development was seen in Brazil, although there were large regional differences.
Thirdly: Slavery did not start in European (former)colonies and didn’t end there. The North African country of Mauretania formally abolished slavery only in 1981, Saudi Arabia in 1962 and in China it existed until 1949, just to mention a few.
Slavery is a despicable institution and was part of most cultures throughout history. In 2023 we still must fight slavery and cultures that approve of it. We can only do that if we look at our history with an open mind, without activism or political agendas.
This ''dissertation' of yours could also be seen as a bit of whitewashing our Nations roll in the transatlantic slave trade.
The video did a good job there was no need for your comment.
I think 65% of poc people not being a slave is an incredibly small amount. I didn't even know there could have ever been higher percentages than that. You are making a fantastic point, though. We love to view slavery as a problem from the far past, but it might not be that simple
Most of those poc as you call them were offspring of the slave-owners. The latter were not always inclined to sell/treat their own children as slaves.
With the exception of a woman of African descent who married her master none if them owned a plantation. They may have had slaves to clean the house or cook. But again nothing as grandiose as the white plantation owners.
It's not as if these "poc" left Africa to find fortune in the Americas based on other people's free and forced labour.
I thought All Muslim countries still have slavery.
Surprised Dubai gave that up.
Well I mean they did replace it with modern day slavery.
I personally had the pleasure of working with a man who's parents were indonesian slaves. His story's were quite eye opening , he is still filled with alot of resentment for the Dutch till today.
I always find the conversation about the Dutch abolishment of slavery quite simplistic and overly focused on the West Indies. As the Dutch outlawed/abolished slavery 2 times (and a bunch of times if you include a lot of small places within the colonies or includes mass liberation of slaves and if you do the abolition becomes as late as 1914).
The first time was with the founding of the Netherlands where it was outlawed to own slaves in the Netherlands proper, though to be fair there were eventually laws put in place for people owning slaves to come to the Netherlands and not have them freed the moment they arrive in an effort to maintain trade (up to 3 months if I remember correctly) and any run-away slaves could request to be freed (though again the practical case is still kinda weird considering it rarely happened and includes ones a run-away slave that did so was rejected for "stealing himself").
The second time was 1863.
The abolition of slavery isn't as clean cut as in the US, which tend to dominate the english speaking media on the topic (and even a decent level of non-english speaking media). But also that for the vast majority of Dutch people it wasn't anything local, the average Dutchman that never went out of the country proper would have likely never seen slaves, let alone Dutch owned slaves. Which I suspect was also a big part of the reason why it toke so long to abolish, for the majority of the population it was a far of rather abstract thing.
Correct! My father’s side of the family were Pirates and landed on the Island of Saba which was uninhibited at the time. My Ancestors were Scottish, English, and Dutch. They eventually became powerful politicians and my Ancestors were granted Ownership of the Island of Saba and they had many obstacles in front of them due to the geography of the island. However, they succeeded. They built up a wonderful civilization, culture, and were very happy. And yes, some of my Ancestors on Saba owned Sugarcane plantations and owned over 800 slaves. Back then, slavery was a way of life for not only my family in the Caribbean, but all over the world! I’m NOT one of these white, Christian Americans who have this “white guilt” about my family’s history with wealth, land/ island ownership which we still own that Island to this day. I’m actually incredibly PROUD of my ancestors who were strong, and beat the odds of civilizing & Colonizing the Entire Island of Saba, they not only became very successful businessmen who made great investments of buying slaves to help them gain their wealth, but my ancestors were also extremely successful in politics in the West Indies. I’m NOT ashamed of of my ancestors history of owning plantations and being smart and owning many slaves to increase the family wealth and keep the crops growing, and picked. My Ancestors were incredibly brave, intelligent, and successful! That is exactly why my family has owned the Island of Saba since the 1600’s up until today! Even I myself own partial land there that was passed down to be after my father passed. And look, I’m just a true Southern, 100% European, 10 th generation American woman who is 110% unapologetic about my Family’s history of securing wealth and land to pass down us ( their families) for generations now, and I’m incredibly grateful & PROUD of those very Ancestors who did so much hard work to achieve building up that Island, governing it, colonizing it, and bc of them, it’s still amazing today and we still own it today! I’m also very proud of my ancestors who were smart businessmen ( the Johnson’s, Every’s, Hassles, and Winfield’s ) whom owned a ton of slaves to help them grow their businesses in the crop industry. If anyone doesn’t like that, I’m sorry but not sorry bc Slavery was LEGAL back then when my family owned them, and only very wealthy, smart businessmen owned them like my proud family. Not to mention that after the abolishment of the slaves in the Caribbean, my family did just as well if not better on their own than when they had their slaves which is a testament to how incredibly hard working my ancestors were and were determined to leave that Island and everything they successfully accomplished by themselves to provide their future generations of families with ownership of the Island, wealth, and, PRIDE in what our families accomplished with little to nothing when they first discovered and landed on Saba. So the slaves were helpful for the time they were owned by my family as they should’ve been bc my ancestors paid for them, but they did unskilled labor & work like picking crops. They didn’t even build anything! My ancestors did that bc they were much better at everything else and were harder workers than those slaves they owned so getting rid of them, didn’t make a huge difference in the long run. We still Own Saba, and will forever own it as us descendants of our ancestors have passed the land down for centuries and we are to do the same only through bloodlines, and not just marriage. It’s to go to the direct, blood descendants of our ancestors, which means no spouses can ever own land there if their other spouse passes nor stepchildren. ONLY blood children! So if this offends y’all, I don’t care, bc I know it only offends y’all bc you’re very Envious of us whites who owned yalls ancestors and mainly without the help of them, our European ancestors worked hard to accomplish the wealth and land they earned to pass down to us their descendants. Sorry your African ancestors didn’t do anything for their descendants except sell y’all off to us Europeans, and all over the world. But it’s history so get over it!!!
Very good explained , thx a lot
👍👍
Thanx for the information, Steve!
Thanks.
dank u wel voor de informatie
Dank voor je reactie.
You are a greater history teacher than any of my history teachers throughout my 12 years of school
Thanks for your reply.
Coming to terms with the legacy of slavery remains a challenge here in the states . It still impacts daily life and it's shadow was codified in laws as late as my lifetime . What happened in small towns , like where I currently live in texas ; is simply missing from the historical record . Good history is the only remedy . Sometimes we forget that our history did not happen in a vacuum . We are still far from being able to bury our collective ballast . Thanks for this opportunity and your critical spirit !
Can’t live in the past dude
@@azzking9305 that's the whole point of studying it .
@@toriidawdy8456 great study it but dont pretend anyone living today was a perpetrator or victim of it
@@azzking9305 of course not . My apologies if I have left that impression. I do think the historical record should guard against revisionism . Slavery and it's subsequent resolution has been a difficult process and the southern poor have been expecially burden . I have no individuals in mind only institutions and those who exploit the situation . Texas is a dynamic and proud place with no time for persuction politics . It can handle an accurate history.
Slavery still legal in the US. "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, *except as a punishment for crime* whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction."
You're doing great work. Teaching us every thing that we didn't learn at school. We learned about slavery in Suriname, but not to this extent. Could you tell us more about the history of the Dutch East Indies?
Me, a moroccan, watching this video about the Netherlands "late" abolishion when my country only abolished black slavery in the 1920s and closed the last black slave market in the 1930s and doesn't even teach about it in schools and hope it's forgotten, so now although a third of thr country is of black slave descent they're clueless about the country's dark history.
Thanks for sharing.
@@HistoryHustle welcome, love your channel, keep up the great work.
Such a sad yet important part of history to discuss. Really great study on this heartbreaking topic. Thank you!
🥉rd reply. Thanks 😁
its not a sad part of history lol, slavery was normal for the past thousands of years and helped shape our current great living standards too
@@trader2137 I'm sure you can agree that the "normality" of slavery in the past is indeed a sad part of history.
@@suzanned7472 it might only be sad for snowflakes that look at world through pink glasses and take everything for granted, we owe alot of our great living standards to slaves and their hard work in the past, if it wasnt them, our lives would be in way worse state
@@trader2137 it is unknown what type of life we would have absent slavery . Certainly the total misery and subjection of classes of people is regrettable history . What if future generations prospered due to your and your families enslavement ? Would that be acceptable ?
A large proportion of British slaves were on Jamaica and the British could not control them so slave owners were more pliable especially as they were liberally compensated.
This left the British free to board anyone's ship they thought had slaves.
Mostly their enemies, Spain and. France.
Mixed motives.
Something I knew nothing about. Thanks for the information, and the bell at 11:00. Take it ding dong easy.
Cheers!
Certainly, the Slave trade was nothing to be proud of.......Unfortunately, it still exists today, in not so obvious forms....Great feature again Stefan!
Thanks for your reply.
If I were Dutch, I certainly wouldn’t feel particularly guilt stricken about that date. As we all know, slavery was quickly reimposed on Black Americans post - Reconstruction, associated with ‘ Jim Crow ‘ laws, the share cropping system , segregation nation -wide, ‘ race riots ‘, and more.
True, but do not forget. African American enslaved people lived in the the USA. The Netherlands didn't had this amount of enslaved Africans on their land.
There were lots of White sharecroppers in the USA, too. Probably “are” lots, as it makes economic sense for the farmer and isn’t bad for the owner.
The problem with share cropping is when the farmer HAS to rent the tools from the landowner.
Thanks for the informative video. How did the abolition of slavery effect the island St.Martin which was split between both the Dutch and French? Did the enslaved people run away or wait from slavery to be abolish?
I talk about it in the video :)
Hello Stefan! Love your videos. I have a question. Is it true that the british played a major role in the abolition of slave trade worldwide? Using the power of their navy not just to end slavery within their own realm, but actually blocking foreign slave traders as well?
Yes, that's true. Although I support slavery, the amount of hate Britain receive from the leftist "progressives" is unbelievable and ridiculous, in fact Britain and other European powers contributed to end slavery more than anyone.
True. Look it up.
Yes, it's true.
Did you by any chance look this up and find a usable, credible source?
British opposition to slavery was indeed hypocritical as they conducted raids on American plantations around the Chesapeake Bay during the War of 1812 offering freedom to slaves who enlisted in the marines. At wars end these men were sold back into slavery in Britain's Caribbean colonies. Uncle Tom's Cabin was absolute hooey. Kudos to the Netherlands for compensating owners, a Brazilian emperor proposed a similar plan and here in America one wonders if the War of Northern Agression could have been avoided by such an idea.
The again you're spouting garbage, as no marine slaves were sold back into slavery, but Britain was in fact obliged by treaty to compensate their previous owners to the tune of 1.2 million IS dollars.
Britain compensated owners as well. British tax payers only recently paid off the debt. Britain also spent the 19th century patrolling the west African coast and intercepting slave ships. Freeing the slaves and taking them to Freetown, Sierra Leone.
Wasn't there slavery in the Dutch East Indies as well? I had been under the impression that the Cape colony had imported slaves from the Asian islands.
Thank you I learned something new today. I always wondered why and up untill now I thought it was because of the small economic dependence on slavery (thus it was not a hot topic / opposition to it) .
Thanks for your reply!
Could you do a video on the economic impact of slavery on the Dutch economy of the time? People seem unable or unwilling to tackle this topic. I am aware of the horrors of slavery on the enslaved but slavery is in it's core an economic model so why not look at that side?
Hey, at least you did it before the US.
Oh well...
@@HistoryHustle
Mauritania has exited the chat.
There still is slavery everywhere, even labour for minimum wages is a kinda slavery. Will they speak about this in 150 years from now, just as we do now here?
It certainly exists in China, and everybody in the world turns a blind eye.
Please don't muddy the waters with unjust arguments. Keep it a clean discourse.
That's not a fair comparison. Even if you struggle to get by supporting a family on minimum wage flipping burgers for McDonald's, you'd still have it 1000 times better than an actual slave from say, the 1800s in America. Here's why. To use my burger flipping example, McDonald's doesn't get to legally 1) keep you from going home at the end of your shift, 2) r*pe you, 3) beat you, or 4) sell your children. Saying that modern day minimum wage work is equivalent to slavery diminishes the horrors of actual slavery.
Yes, there is still such a thing as slavery in modern times and it's disgusting. But that's more like people being trafficked and then held against their will while they "work off" the fee for smuggling them into somewhere. Or like how North Korea rents out laborers to Russia who work in modern gulags, and the North Korean government keeps the worker's wages. It's not the same thing as working for minimum wage at an actual job.
The Dutch common people were effectively slaves too, although by law they were free people. We had to except any hard manual labor job, like towing ships along canals like mules. And they lived in very bad housing, like in the countryside of Drenthe, poor people lived in clay huts. With free pets, sorry vermin in the walls.
@@mardiffv.8775
A situation that didn't change much until late 18-1900's
One essential element was that Dutch slavery happened far away from the home land with many foreign sailors and employees involved. It is easy to get away with evil if those that regulate you are not touched or involved, but do get the benefits.
I also always find it important to point out trade with our former colonies is currently way, way more profitable (to both sides) than it ever was during the colonial and slavery periods. Colonies has a poor population so they couldn't buy anything and the low labour costs resulted in massive overproduction reducing profits in Europe.
Never forget the VOC went bankrupt! In the end the Dutch colonies were as much a pyramid scheme as the South Sea Company was with only the early investors and upper class still benefitting.
Not exactly fair to compare modern interconnected technologically advanced economies to the colonial era
@@sebe2255 It is totally fair and very essential. The VOC made massive profits early on, when most of Asia was not colonised and trade was still a two way street.
Now why do you think trade with Japan stayed profitable?
Colonies and slavery failed economically, period. When formerly colonised regions got their own economy going again trade with them became profitable again.
Another great discussion
RS. Canada
Thanks for watching.
To answer your question regarding if any of us were aware that part of Brazil was controlled by the Dutch from 1630-1654. I actually was aware of this fact before watching this video. Good little bit of info though. The map you have for this video is quite lovely aswell.
Much love from Oregon U.S.A.
Thanks for your reply.
I enjoyed your video except for the parts when ya mispronounce Suriname but ya did do ya research on this subject because I know a lot of Surinameese that don't even know this info , Hele fijne feestdagen en een gelukkig 2023 voor u .
Thanks for your reply 🎅👍
If you think the Dutch abolished slavery so late, wait to you hear how long it took in some places in the Middle East and North Africa. Morocco did not abolish slavery until 1961; Saudi Arabia did not abolish slavery until 1962; Oman did not abolish slavery until 1970; Maurtania did not abolish slavery until 1981, and was the last country in the world to do so.
Compared to other European countries. Please watch the video before you reply.
Please, don’t take this negatively. I was not trying by any means to downplay what you said in your video. I was just giving another perspective.
The Dutch abolished slavery so late, bla bla bla. We were late with a lot of things. Late with starting slavery also, after Arabia, Spain and Portugal. Late with spice trade, after Spain and Portugal. Late with industrialization, after England, France, Belgium etc. I don’t mind about these history facts about my ancient forefathers, if my forefathers even were from The Netherlands. I wouldn’t know. I’m not making excuses for whatever my father or grandfather did in their life (those are the forefathers I do know personally) if that was not according to our standards nowadays. And I don’t expect any excuses from Spain for Alva’s reign over The Netherlands and their holy war against protestantism which killed a lot of people. I don’t even want excuses from the Germans for Adolf’s occupation of The Netherlands during WW2. That’s all history, literally. What I do mind is that we didn’t do enough about making living standards higher for people by improving healthcare, education, infrastructure and poverty reduction in our overseas territories and countries of our Kingdom during my lifetime. That’s something we could and should have done a lot better for the people living there now. Everything else is just bleating.
@Marcon: I understand, thanks for your reply. See, many people comment without watching the video. Because they are triggered. With what you said I do understand what you're pointing out. Thanks.
@@RealConstructor The Dutch were early with most things. They were the first with objection to slavery, but also the first to develop hypocrisy in foreign relations, acknowledging slavery was wrong but looking away from it being done overseas. It was not up to our standards of back then either. This hypocrisy has been copied by all Western governments up to our current time, it's what allows us to walk on Nikes, use Iphones and drive a Tesla while feeling good about ourselves. .
A thing that hardly ever gets mentioned when talking about the abolition of slavery is that this follows the change of the economies more than an evolution of mentalities. Portugal abolishes slavery in mainland Portugal, Azores in the XVIII century. Sugar producing Madeira Island a few decades later and Portuguese India. Where it was economically relevant: Brazil and Africa it remains in place. In Portuguese Africa in the mid XIX century although it gets somewhat replaced with systems that not being slavery can be compared to servitude with villages having to provide work for taxes. Independent Brazil has to wait for the late XIXth century even when both Emperors of Brazil were negative towards slavery
As a British citizen I must admit that Slavery is a strange subject, on the one hand we are proud to have abolished it but then if it was so wrong then why did we allow it in the first place?
Because black people were seen as an economic resource, and their labor was needed to keep the empire profitable. If they had to pay white people to go here and build it then colonialism probably wouldn't of been worth it.
You planned this out really well didnt you? :P
👍
Would love to see an end to serfdom video , especially central and Eastern Europe. Many don’t know it how long it lasted.
Perhaps one day.
Yeah I want my reparations from the aristocracy too
Thank You for a Brilliant lesson!🇳🇱🇳🇬🇺🇸
Thanks.
Another really interesting video. I'd also love to see ones about the history of the Netherlands East Indies.
Hi Brian, have you already seen this one?
czcams.com/video/RlSXajHiPUU/video.html
I would like to point out the last convicts were sent to Australia in 1868 , the convicts were basically slaves - slave labour people sent to Australia because they stole food and other small items in the UK and Ireland because they were starving
Slavery in Dutch Indonesia continued after that. Dutch historians just revleaed that slavery in Indonesia was bigger there then in the West Indies and Suriname
Well to be fair the Dutch East India Company freed all its slaves in the Neuw Nederlandt Province when they had to surrender it to the British per the terms of the treaty of Westminster that ended the Third Anglo Dutch War. This happened in 1674...
No. The Ducht East India Company wasn't in New Netherland, that was the WIC. East for East, W for West. They didn't free the slaves, they weren't slaves. The WIC started out as being very much opposed to slavery as was the Dutch government (which did turn a blind eye on the VOC in this respect) and it's main job was to wage war with the Spanish. So the slaves on captured Spanish ships were set free, but not brought back of course. So many ended up working in New Netherland for the WIC or in the Dutch Republic itself. It is known that Rembrandt had black neighbours in the Jodenbreestraat for example.
With the transfer of New Amsterdam to the English, Stuyvesant made sure their status as free citizens, the WIC had given up on it's objection to slavery by then, was clear to the English, as well as the records of their ownership of land and their marital records.
Ironically Curaçao was the place which brought freedom to thousands of Jews in Europe. Before Operation Barbarossa in 41, thousands of European Jews took advantage of Dutch Curaçao governor general (why Curaçao, not Suriname nobody knows) declaring no visa entry requirements in convincing USSR and Japan giving them transit visas enroute to Curaçao .In the case of Japanese visas they were granted by the ‘Japanese Schindler’ Mr Sugihara the Japanese consul in Lithuania. All these Jews managed to reach Japan or Shanghai and had their lives saved. Unsurprisingly none of these Jews ever stepped foot on Curaçao and there was not even any memorial in Curaçao commemorating this event.
Was it a trap?
Slavery continued to exist in some parts of the Dutch East Indies under indirect rule. On the island of Sumbawa this lasted until March 31, 1910, on Samosir even longer.
Is there also information about slavery inside the netherlands itself ?
From the information you give i assume that a lot of people didnt realise how bad it was untill those books where published and people properly informed.
Or was it already pritty commen knowledge how horrible these people where treated ?
Slavery was banned in the Netherlands itself. If there were slaves on board ships that reached the Netherlands, the slaves were returned or confiscated by the Dutch authorities, followed by a fine for the ship's captains.
The Dutch population was not well aware of the poor treatment of the indigenous population in the colonies until Multatuli wrote a book in 1859 (Max Havelaar) about the poor conditions of the indigenous population. This book influenced Dutch society and was partly the beginning of the dismantling of the cultivation system later in the Dutch East Indies.
I believe that's what happened yes.
Very informative. Thanks. BZ
Don't know much about the Dutch slave trade. I believe you have a festival Keti Koti to commemorate the abolition?
True, on 1 July.
I wonder how countries like Ireland that were ruled by Britain and Norway that were ruled by Denmark at the time feel about the Slave trade back then
Ha Stefan, prachtige video weer! En over boeiende materie die nu nog steeds zo actueel is.
Laatst zag ik een video over het einde van slavernij in de VS (czcams.com/video/j4kI2h3iotA/video.html&ab_channel=KnowingBetter ik ken het kanaal verder niet heel goed). Er waren kennelijk allerlei mechanismen, zoals debt peonage, die de facto slavernij in stand hielden waardoor de laatste persoon die 'zijn schuld afbetaalde' aan zijn 'schuldeiser' pas vrijkwam in 1942(!), is zoiets ook in Nederland of in de voormalige koloniën gebeurd? Of was na 1873 iedereen die zich in Nederland en de voormalige koloniën bevond echt vrij? (wat dat ook moge betekenen)
Hoezo actueel? 101 jaar na mijn geboorte denk ik niet dat ik me de slavernijhistorie dien aan te trekken en niemand niet. Excuses nu gegeven wordt gegeven door mensen die er niets mee te maken hebben gehad en geaccepteerd door mensen die er ook nooit mee te maken hebben gehad. Ik sta liever stil bij de vorm van slavernij die nu bestaat. Chinese, Indische, Pakistaanse etc mensen die tegen een hongerloon onder slechte omstandigheden onze jeans, T-shirts, GSM's en schoenen in elkaar zetten.
@@sonnylatchstring Persoonlijk voel ik geen verantwoordelijkheid voor de transatlantische slavenhandel, daarom vind ik ook niet dat ikzelf zou moeten delen in de excuses die de regering aanbied. Jij ook niet, fair enough. Het was destijds legaal, en iedereen deed het. Het was niet goed, maar we zijn er dan ook mee gestopt. Andere samenlevingen zijn er niet mee gestopt, en die mogen daar zeker op aangekeken worden.
Naast dat de regering haar excuus heeft aangeboden bestaat slavernij in andere delen van de wereld nog steeds, en is in sommige landen behalve in naam nog steeds legaal. Dat maakt het m.i. een onderwerp dat zeker waarde heeft voor de actualiteit.
Het praten over het onderwerp zet je natuurlijk wel even stil bij wat het betekent om vrij te zijn. En daar val nog best op wat te winnen, en te verliezen, ook los van de geschiedenis van de driehoekshandel.
@L4wyrup: dank voor je reactie.
Also, not to mention that nowadays the governments of the Netherlands don't want foreigners living there but a. The truth is that they owe us a lot.
Where?
And what is strange about a 12 hour working day? It was the norm as well in Europe until the 19th century and for some nations even into the 20th century. And still than 7 days in the week.
Your point?
@@HistoryHustle in the build-up of your spoken commentary the number of hours working was linked to the bad reputation of sugar plantations. However correct your assesment of work on a sugar plantation is, the number of hours worked by slaves were similar to those worked by non-slaves. With the lack of historic knowledge in this field amongst most listeners a bit of perspective might help to assess the gravity of each aspect of forced labour however cruel and inhuman slavery in most aspect was. Working hours as such were not a distinguishing factor towards those not being slaves.
Historic 12 hour work days are really misleading if you are holding them to modern standards. The 12 hour work day you are imagining, in the West at least, only happened during the Industrial revolution before laws caught up and with slaves. Otherwise you had times when you did a lot of work like sowing and harvesting season but otherwise had quite a lot of free time to such an amount that there were generally only 4-6 work hours per day. Before the industrial revolution we generally slept in two 4 hour periods at night with 1 hour of awake time in between.
@@eyeli160 So the slaves were supposed to keep on working while the supervisors were taking a nap?
@@pjotrsimon8245 You do know that the supervisors also came from the slave population and give benefits not given to other slaves
When someone has colonies and slavery, cheap labor, he does not care about his own self-sufficiency. In times of peace, the exchange of goods (import, export) is most convenient. Why invest money in growing potatoes when you can earn more by planting tulips. In difficult times of war, when colonies and cheap labor were lost, and blockades made imports impossible. you even had to eat tulips. Self-sufficiency was well understood by the countries of Central, Eastern and Northern Europe, which did not have large overseas colonies.
The Netherlands was not the very last last country that end slavery. Portugal end slavery in Brazil in 1888.
True, the Dutch werent the latest.
The last country to abolish slavery was Mauritania, in 1981.
Indeed, very late that was.
It's necessary to remember.
It is.
Why did you ignore the Netherlands biggest colony, Indonesia? The Dutch brought slaves to Indonesia from India and then enslaved different Indonesian ethnic groups who fought against them and lost. They also, brought Indonesian slaves to South Africa. It was they who opened the Cape for agriculture. Raffles was the first to try to abolish slavery in Indonesia. The Dutch did so much later but even after slavery was banned in practice it took much later to actually take effect.
First: look at the title of this video.
Second: Indonesia is widely covered on this channel.
@@HistoryHustle Indonesia is not widely covered on this channel and the title tells me nothing.
Welke personen hebben aan de slavernij daadwerkelijk verdiend? en hebben daadwerkelijk hieraan meegewerkt?
De regentenelite en vrij weinig als je het ten opzichte van de Nederlandse bevolking beschouwt.
In 1812 the slave trade was abolished in the Netherlands and it took another 50 years for normal regular people to completely abolish the slavery.
Yes.
In het nederlands lijkt het mij ook wel leuk. Kijk ze al een tijdje in het engels hoor 👍👍
👍 Op het Nederlandse kanaal staat nu de Nederlandstalige video.
2:11 Yes, I did know that during the 17th century, the Dutch held part of Brazil for a while.
Did you hear about a man named Krzysztof Arciszewski?
I think that I might have mentioned him before...
We were still earlier than the United States of America and many other countries in the world, so this title is not very well chosen.
The Arabic and African slave trade started well before any European set foot on African soil. Also, their international slave trade did not cease until well into the twentieth century.
And sure, the Commonwealth beat us to it. But that does not make us Dutch a people that held on to slavery until the bitter end.
Perhaps it has something to do with the discussion about slavery in The Netherlands at the moment? Or did you choose it to generate as many clicks and views possible?
I am not trying to be mean, just curious! Love the channel, by the way 🙂
1863 is late for European states. I think the title fits.
That's why I named it as such. Compared to other European states. And of course, it gives also some extra clicks. You got me there, Ismar.
No , we were not !
Slavery was abolished between 1777 and 1804 in the northern states of America ; it took untill between 1862 and 1865 before the southern states abolished slavery, but not before they were defeated by the Northern States during the Civil War ( between 1861 and 1865 ).
Wether 1863 is late is of course relative, compared to some countries it was late, compared to other it's not:
1949 kuwait
1952 Qutar
1958 Bhutan
1960 Niger
1962 Saoudi Arabia
1970 Oman
1981 Mauritania
those aren't European/ Western countries so they're hold to different standard, to treat them and their actions the same as ours would be racist and culturally insensitive.
Most of those places had technically already abolished slavery when they were part of the French or British colonial empires, once independent they had to introduce locally developed legislation to formally ban it which was then passed not long after independence. More relevantly, though hidden, slavery actually does still exist in many places even though its technically banned, including Western Europe and the US.
@@rehurekj Your bitter racist tears make me sad
Late compared to other European countries.
It's never too late to abolish slavery.
👍👍
:)
I am learning Dutch now. The vowel pronunciation is killing me.
I understand.
👍
🥇
Does it mean, there was no slavery in EIC (todays indonesia) in the eyes of dutch history?
No, but the VOC had less slaves.
Your information about Spain is not correct, 1811 is the date of the elimination of feudal rights by the courts of Cadiz, which would be reestablished shortly after by Fernando VII the felon, the most accurate date, because it was done gradually, it would be 1886, for Cuba which was still a Spanish province.
I see. In that case I stand corrected.
1 July 1863 the battle of Gettysburg begins (What a coincidence) ...
Actually it is yes.
And one of my ancestors went up the hill with Pickett's division on the 4th. Surviving a charge that resulted in 90% casualties and only five feet tall he was known to comment that, "The damn Yankees were all shooting to high." He had thirteen daughters, all widows of Confederate soldiers at wars end.
Britain abolished the slave trade on 25 March 1807
Ok.
isn't just what you do but what you don't do. Not just what you did but how you did it. Not just what you said but how you said it. Love is so simple yet the simple make it so hard. Love Is full of knowledge yet even the smart don't get it. Love doesn't cost a fortune yet fortunes are spent trying to gain it. Love does demand of you yet you are not willing to sacrifice for it. Those who only seek what love can give and do for them, do nothing for love and others and in such selfish pursuit, in turn rob themselves of love's best gift. Make this year the year you seek to sow love and not just reap it. Be love and not just think it. Do love and not just say it. Talk love and just don't fake it. Seek love and just don't chase it. Embrace it but don't enslave it, share it but don't dare boast in it. Enjoy it but don't abuse it. Free it and watch it come back. Invest in it and watch it pay back. Wash your life in it, light your darkness with it, eat your food with it conduct your business with it and above all else Serve God in it. For whatever love is and is not, it's all of, for and From Him. He is LOVE! "
By Steven Gooden
And what do you think of the video?
@@HistoryHustle excellent
@HistoryHustle Can't Make You Love Him like I do
Can't Make You Give Him all of You
Can't Make You Sing and Dance To Make Him Happy
Or give you joy
That keeps you laughing.
No, I can't do any of that for you.
But only by my own example
What I do.
All this too, you must learn and follow
For each of us will be judged for yesterday and today on that last tomorrow!
By
steven f gooden-cohen
In short: pragmatism, diminished opportunity and the pressure of the public opinion.
Yes.
To be fair didn't we try to still take political control in indonesia around 1950? Like wasnt Indonesia technically the last place we really had a colony?
True, but holding a colony doesn't equal slavery.
Late? It was 10:00 AM.
Ok.
Who is the Ghana King at that time?
Don't know. Anyone?
I'm guessing that would be the Asantehene, king the Ashanti Empire, Kwaku Dua I...he reigned from 1834 - 1867
@@jerasi Thnx . I mean between the 16 17 century when slave trade start. As Italian I appreciate too much what Dutch people is doing this action of them push me to investigate also about the colonialism in Sardinia by Spain . I know that in the old times before Roman Empire came and predominate the island Sardinian people trade with African but is also proved that they have friendship with Egyptian and Persian and also with Mongolians so this friendshipis always exist just Rome destroy that to create a common vision. The high medieval age where people start to going outside from the Church curse prove that they are the reason for why we don't know about this side of the world . I mean... how is possible that Alessandro Magno arrive in Asia and in the 1492 Cristoforo Colombo with the money and blessing of the holy church start this mission discovering the new world ?. Bon
France did it in 1793 btw 1848 was the second time after Napoléon reinstated it in 1812
Thanks for sharing this additional information.
1793 was only for mainland France.
@@quincyquincy4764 It was effectively never legal in England, going back to around 1200. Wikipedia suggests the same was true in France, going back to the 14th century.
I mean whoops.
It still was a long time ago tho, please don't hate us.
Hope they don't...
they wanted to be like the US , minus a civil war .
G E K O L O N I.....wacht effe, dat lijkt me niet zo gepast hier.
👍
Zeg Makker...
Define 'late'? There were still countries who only abolished the practice _after_ WW2..
Watch the video.
At that point in time the normal people in the Netherlands had no voice 96 % was a semi slave on the land owners farm , first time for the normal men to vote was 1917 and for women 2 years later , so the People of The Netherlands have no stake in this most of them never heard of Africa let alone seen a black person , pls go to the owners of the West India Company Gr Gerard
These owners are now dead.
Late? The US didn't abolish slavery until 18 December 1865 & Brazil didn't do it until 1888.
Compared to other European countries. Please watch the video before replying.
ther are alot of country s that still doing slavery mostly in the midden east
Now do one, why are there still slaves held in Africa.
Still?
Money
🥈
Well not really actually...
0:37 Spain did not abolish slavery in 1811
When then?
@@HistoryHustle 1837 Slavery was abolished outside its colonies , 1870 children of slaves are free people. 1886 slavery abolished in cuba
I see. I read 1811. In case you're right I stand corrected.
Well because our slaves didn't deserve to be free. Proven by the filth in our prisons even today.
Are you a bigot? That very same racism is the reason why dark skinned people are a majority in prison. Africans are the first humans, and the original race and white people are just a subset of that. White people are the snake that came into the garden of eden, white people came death, destruction and disease. Today the world has never recovered.
@@Qhawe_Jameson. He means slave descendant people. The indians brought to europe as slaves by the ottomans who are called roma and sinti or gypsie are also highly in prison. Also some marginalized native people for example in new zealand 50 percent of prison inmates are maori and in canada around 50 percent are native americans. In japan there were korean slaves their descendants are also highly in crime and in prison
Thats the fate of ex slave populations. The indians brought to europe as slaves by the ottomans who are called roma and sinti or gypsie and they are also highly in prison. Also some marginalized native people for example in new zealand 50 percent of prison inmates are maori and in canada around 50 percent are native americans. In japan there were korean slaves their descendants are also highly in crime and in prison
The British empire was responsible for the end of the Slave trade throughout the world.
🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧
No, it wasn’t. There were several major slave-trading routes; through the Sahara, through the Red Sea, the Indian Ocean ports and across the Atlantic. Britain was only involved in one - the Atlantic - and when Britain finally ended its Atlantic slave trade (mainly due to economic considerations) it tried to stop its economic competitors from profiting from the Atlantic slave trade, with fairly minimal results.
@@dereklambe
The British Navy had a fleet whos only purpose it had was to hunt down slave ships.
@@dereklambe look up the west African squadron and Britain actually ended slavery in African places it colonised as late as the 20th century
@@dereklambe
Slavery actually wasn't competitive business
@@dereklambe Mainly due to economic considerations? They had to compensate slave owners, which cost 40% of the Treasury's annual income and 5% of GDP, which necessitated taking out a loan for £20 million. They then devoted 5% of the navy to patrolling the west African coast and intercepting slave ships for ~70 years.
This is just plain wrong.
African "Kingdoms" and states fought to keep slavery. Slavery was Africa's biggest industry and contributed to that continent's wealth far more than Europe's.
2022, Louisiana voted over slavery and kept it legal.
This year? Crazy.
@@HistoryHustle don't believe me. Check it and you will find it to be so.
Long hours only during harvest ,
.
You mean?
the cotton industry was major in what is now the us so if yk what black americans went thru doing tht how could u say it was the least worst, youd have to be more specific and say one of the least cruel from of work for slaves tht the dutch did cause slavery was bad all over the world and was diffrent everywhere but NONE SHOULD BE UNDERMINED CAUSE ALL WERE JUS AS BAD THX FOR THE INFO JUS HAD TO SHARE MY OPINION
isnt it america also end their slavery in 1800s too?
True. They fought a civil war over it.
@@HistoryHustle yeah they made awesome song about it too like dixie land and johny marching home
Hi Stefan. "Enslaved" person, not "slave", please. Nobody is born slave. Just a side note: slavery was abolished, on May 13, 1888 in Brazil.
Obrigado! ヽ(͡◕ ͜ʖ ͡◕)ﾉ 🍀 🇧🇷
Thanks for your reply. The discussion about 'slaves' vs. 'enslaved' is also in the Netherlands.
My thoughts: with the word 'slave' it implies people are forced into this. I don't think people would assume Africans were slaves by nature or choose for this. Its the same with the word 'prisoner'. We don't change to 'imprisoned'. Feel free to share your thoughts on this.
@@HistoryHustle Thank you, Stefan.
That's not true actually. One of the more terrible things about slavery is that people were born into slavery. 'Enslaved' refers to a deed that changes a free person into a slave. So the slaveholder or the slavetrader is not necesseraly the enslaver. When we speak about the enslavers it's usually the Africans doing the enslavement, while the Europeans were slavetraders en slaveholders.
@@DenUitvreter I understand your point, Lynott. My point is the libertarian ethic guide, which means that everybody is born free and with their own body property. So, being a slave is a coercitive, unethical and unnatural condition. Thats why I choose my words more carefully in this case. You are free to choose yours without issues from my part. It is the libertarian way of thinking. Thank you! 🇧🇷
@@marcoskehl Because the condition is unnatural and different from the norm, we have the word slave, to make relevant distincitons.
'Enslaved' is fashionable word in a politically motivated language change. It's mostly used for showing off that you go with the time, that you conform to a certain ideology and political movement.
But it lacks the power of distinction, it's not used to be more precise, on the contrary. Because if I am being precise and use words to their meaning, it is a distinction that doesn't fit that ideology it comes from.
Dutchmen and Akan women reproduced and that’s how my dad’s family existed
Interesting to read.
On this subject, let's leave it alone, very embarrassing for NL
Please explain.
@@HistoryHustlethe Dutch went on as money was more important than conscience. Also the Dutch were known as the cruelest slave owners almost as bad as the Belgians
The Dutch love Slavery. Holland was founded on the misery of Slaves. The Dutch love
slavery today
Un des pire pays exclavagiste.discert mais redoutablement efficace comme a leur habitude.tout ce qui font ils le font a la perfection.ce commerce ils l ont fait comme des experts
I don’t see how you could call this late. Because you compare it to other European Great Powers? European countries were the first in the world to abolish it. Not just that, we along with the British fought wars to end slavery in other countries.
I explain that in the video.
ask the arab nations why they still use slaves, even parts of africa..
Go ahead.
Coz they're amoral. Even more so than other colonizers.
The Dutch don't like elaborate discussions on morals and ethics. Whatever works, which tends to mean, whatever makes money.
More anger than wisdom. Please watch the video.
@@HistoryHustle I was being a bit hyperbolic, sure. But I wasn't being humorous or 'angry'. I'd challenge you, to actually think about what I'm proposing. Instead of giving quick quips.
I think you really can show that, through history and even nowadays, the Dutch aren't very into big sociological debates. (It's actually a quite famous quote of our Prime Minister, that was in power for 12 ish years, the longest sitting PM ever. He said he's not interested in sociological debates or looking for 'sociological causes').
Look at how the Dutch approach and embrace neoliberalism. Not by way of great philosophic thinkers and thinking, but through 'pragmatism'.
The 'polder' system of Dutch politics and society is also all about pragmatism. We do X, because it's necessary and gives us Y. Not because it's what we want, or how we think society or people should be or act, but because it works.
It has its pro's actually. It is my belief, that this is why certain things that were taboo or forbidden in other countries, were tolerated earlier in Dutch society because it's less about principles and morals (and/or even religion), and more about: what works? Like gay marriage, or prostitution. It doesn't bother anyone really, it's okay for the economy? Then it's okay.
A great example might be how we approach marijuana use. We never legalized it, that would mean taking an actual stance on the matter, which some countries have now done. We enacted a policy where the law is not enforced, with lots of vagueness. Which was mostly an experiment. 'It works', so we just left it like that for last 50+ years.
But let's approach this differently, almost by definition, or by reason, if your neighbour abolishes something because it's abhorrent and a crime against humanity. Wouldn't you deem the nation that did it 70 years later, less moral? Or that country seem to value morality and ethics less?
Another example would be how we handled Covid. Not all, but some countries enacted rules based on what they believe is good/bad or right/wrong. Covid is bad, it hurts and kills, so you can't go outside, because you could catch it and die.
The Dutch didn't do that. We were famous for our 'intelligent lockdowns'. It's not about what we think about people getting sick or dying, and whether or not that's okay. We didn't even have that discussion. We made it mostly a rule that the hospitals shouldn't be at overcapacity, but shouldn't be empty either, because that's wasteful. We'll allow as much activity as possible, keeping hospitals at their max capacity of patients. So as much of the economy as possible is spared, and the hospitals are still 'okay'. That a large number of deaths were preventable, that's a discussion we don't seem to particularly interested in having.
That to me, is another example of pragmatism. It doesn't have to be a bad thing per se, as we say in Dutch: it is what it is.
Thanks for sharing your insights.
Saudi Arabia abolished in 1963. Better late than never!
So much for the comparison..
Asnwer: cuz money
Actually not really. It had different reasons. Please watch the video.
I love love Lora .
?
Wel si bo ta kere e fli ey ta sigi bula haltu,kapo ta bini abow dal den bom di corsow habri pora di cielu,pa mundu mira MI STORY.saka bo som.
Please reply in English.
Only the ROYAL HOUSE OF THE CARIBBEAN CAN TELL YOU THE MIS,THE MIS,THE MIS TEORIE.
Well if the Dutch tought me one argument to accept this sad fact. They did legalize gay marriages first . So lets forgive them right ?
Also the whole slavery is mixed in lies, they still fought Indonesia after the japanese got defeated. So after wo 2 they still used force to keep control aka slavery.
Later than the Russian Empire?! They did it in 1861. O, Man!
Wasn't that serfdom?
@@HistoryHustle Yes, serfdom, but it was almost as bad as slavery.
Not exactly the same, but it came close.