Where did the "Jews controlled the slave trade"

>>558057
Probably in the South. At first Jews were proportionally over represented in the formation of the trade but eventually their influence waned considerably

>>558057
It's partially true.

You can find numerous jewish slave traders forming relatively big proportion of overall slave traders "population" when compared to their overall population compared to Europe's population.

Except you can also find similar proportions when you look at soap merchants or limber merchants. Any merchants in fact.

>>558070
Not after 1750 really. Jews were involved in the Spanish and Portuguese slave trade because they went to their American colonies following the inquisition. Once the Brits and Dutch came along, Jewish influence was pretty irrelevant.

>>558057
Because /pol/ is fucking obsessed with jews

>>558081
/thread

>>558057
Let's play a game.
>Where did the "Jews controlled X" /pol/ meme come from?
Try to replace the X with something that would render the question false.

>>558070
Also, when you're dealing with such an insignificant population as the Jewish population in the U.S. during the slave trade, you can get all kinds of weird stuff about statistical proportions.

For example, Jews were also wildly, wildly overrepresented in British Boxing champions in the last quarter of the 18th century.

>>558090
My dick.

>>558096
Wrong, /pol/ says your dick likes certain porn because of jewish influence, try again.

>>558093
>Jewish population in the U.S. during the slave trade
Portugal and nations having colonies in Carribean islands matter more in this case than the US to be honest.

>>558057
Some Jews in the Southern US were financiers who had connections with the slave trade. Some even spoke in favor of the CSA during the Civil War. Their number of course were infinitesimally small compared with Anglo types who were in similar positions.

(Not that it prevents /pol/ from saying Jews also cause miscegenation and race mixing but they're retarded like that)

>>558093
>For example, Jews were also wildly, wildly overrepresented in British Boxing champions in the last quarter of the 18th century.
Really?

>>558102
Their dick.

Also, I really want to know /pol/'s theory on why the Jews are behind slob fetish.

Hyperbolic Satire is a logical fallacy.

Try to disprove the historical records on the subject before you spout your "Jews literally never did anything wrong" canard to the goyim.

>>558057
I think a better question is, how did all the neonazis/nazis/facists on the internet find /pol/ ? did they not have their own forum before /pol/?

Not that I would ever expect good discussion about politics on an internet message board, but /pol/ is nearly incomprehensible in its shittiness

>>558131
The moment I am brought actual evidence and not an infographic or a video by David Duke I will disprove it.

>>558145
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Martin_(professor)

He is ostensibly credible.

>>558137
https://www.google.co.uk/?gws_rd=ssl#q=4chan+%2Fpol%2F+site:stormfront.org

>>558152
>Institute for Historical Review

No he is not

>>558110
Eh. Point still stands. When you're dealing with "Portuguese Jews, who live in the carribean who are involved in the slave trade" and "Portuguese Jews, who live in the carribean" the sample size is so small you still can't draw meaningful data out of it.

>>558115
Daniel Mendoza was the most influential boxing champion in history, rivaled only perhaps by John L. Sullivan. It is little exaggeration to say that Mendoza invented dodging.

Before him boxers weren't athletes, they were pissed off dudes with disputes. Mendoza himself started boxing when he was a merchant apprentice. His master got into a trade dispute with a customer (someone either added or subtracted a zero to an order). They agreed to settle it by a boxing match, and decided to both pull seconds. But being a Jewish merchant in port in England, the only man the merchant could pull was Mendoza who was a manlet. Mendoza proceeds to backpeddle while punching until the other guy is hamburger.

He then makes a career out of taking on other boxers and winning.

'Champion' in those days didn't refer to a formal regulated title, but an acclimation, so it's difficult to number them. Within a 25 year period, there's less than 10 champions.

I don't have solid statistics, but I'd wager much less than one in ten Britons at the time were Jews.

>>558165
IF the research is valid, what difference does it make where it comes from? That's a form of fallacy.

>>558122
>Their dick.
I honestly imagine people on /pol/ having a secret "degenerate" fetish over any other board.

>>558168
>Daniel Mendoza was the most influential boxing champion in history, rivaled only perhaps by John L. Sullivan. It is little exaggeration to say that Mendoza invented dodging.
>Before him boxers weren't athletes, they were pissed off dudes with disputes. Mendoza himself started boxing when he was a merchant apprentice. His master got into a trade dispute with a customer (someone either added or subtracted a zero to an order). They agreed to settle it by a boxing match, and decided to both pull seconds. But being a Jewish merchant in port in England, the only man the merchant could pull was Mendoza who was a manlet. Mendoza proceeds to backpeddle while punching until the other guy is hamburger.
>He then makes a career out of taking on other boxers and winning.
>'Champion' in those days didn't refer to a formal regulated title, but an acclimation, so it's difficult to number them. Within a 25 year period, there's less than 10 champions.
>I don't have solid statistics, but I'd wager much less than one in ten Britons at the time were Jews.

That's pretty cool. I know some Jews had success in boxing in the US in the 20th century but didn't know it went back this far.

>>558152
>ostensibly
>apparently or purportedly, but perhaps not actually.
At least you're honest.

>>558137
>>558157
Have you younglings not heard the story of /news/ and how the taint was spread across the boards (but mostly to /v/?)

>>558171
Historical research is supposed to be reasonably unbiased.

If you are writing about Jews and you go to an antisemitic, Holocaust denying organization and give a talk titled "Tactics of Organized Jewry in Suppressing Free Speech", you are not unbiased or credible.

>>558057
Has anyone here actually read the book in OP's pic? If not how do you know whether it's valid or not?

I haven't FWIW.

>>558181
Because I suspect this is the crux of the question define "knowing".

>>558184
Well are the sources historically valid or not, can anyone access the records that the authors claim to access in order to verify their contents, does the data support the argument, etc.

Cherrypicking data to support your argument is problematic but its not unheard of in academia. Falsifying data is a serious issue, but if they haven't falsified anything, what is the criticism? Just because a work advances an unpopular narrative doesn't make it invalid if the available evidence supports the argument being made.

I'm assuming that the book is a poor work of history, but is it?

>>558181
Is there any book titled "The secret relationship/history of Y" that isn't shit historiographically?
Weatherford's "The Secret History of the Mongol Queens" and Ha Joon Chang's "Bad Samaritans: The Myth of Free Trade and the Secret History of Capitalism" are entertaining but not too good from a historical perspective.

>>558198
>Well are the sources historically valid or not, can anyone access the records that the authors claim to access in order to verify their contents
No, access to external reality is impossible.

Serious answer: Why is there any reason to assume the book uses original first source documents not in use elsewhere?

>>558199
The Secret History of the Mongol is at least valuable?

File: the-real-pol-redpill.jpg (2MB, 1242x7491px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1242x7491px

>>558173
>secret

>>558057

historical fact?

Jews formed a significant part of the early slave trade

>>558181

From what I know, it does provide its sources so you can cross check them.

>>558096

Circumcision

Boom