Joe W.
http://www.africawithin.com/black_history/overview_chapter18.html
In 711 A.D., General Tarik, accompanied by 100 horses and 400 African soldiers, crossed over into Spain on an exploratory mission. Tarik's small army ravaged several Spanish towns and returned to Africa laden with spoils. Later that same year, Tarik took an army of 7000 Africans, crossing from Africa to Gibraltar (named after him), defeating King Roderic and conquering most of the Iberian Peninsula. Thus began the Moorish domination of Spain, which was not fully ended until 1492.
The Moors built magnificent cities in Spain. Cordoba, in the tenth century was much like a modern metropolis. The streets were paved, and there were sidewalks for pedestrians. At night it was said that one could travel for ten miles by the light of lamps along a continuous strip of buildings. This was several hundred years before there was a paved street in Paris or a street lamp in London. The population of the city was over one million. There were 200,000 homes, 800 public schools, a number of colleges and universities, and many royal places surrounded by beautiful gardens....
....Scientific progress in astronomy, chemistry, geography, mathematics, physics, and philosophy flourished in Moorish Spain. Scholars, artist and scientists formed learning societies, while scientific congresses were organized to promote research and to facilitate the spread of knowledge. A brisk intellectual life flourished in all Islamic dominated societies.
The Moors also introduced the manufacture of gunpowder into Europe, which their enemies later adopted, using this explosive to drive them back to Africa.
>From: Wojtek Sokolowski <sokol at jhu.edu>
>Reply-To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
>To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
>Subject: RE: [lbo-talk] Superprofits
>Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 13:05:01 -0500
>
> > Has G7 power always rested on the backwardness of the Third World?
>Answer:
> > yes. How was Latin America supposed to compete and win, when
>Europeans were
> > enlsaving its labor force and sucking away every once of its internal
> > capitalizable wealth? Answer: It could not. Same for India under
>Britain,
> > China and Korea under Japan, etc., etc., etc.
>
>So why, then Americans or Africans did not come to Europe to conquer,
>enslave and exploit, but the other way around? Does the fact that
>Europeans already possessed technology and institutions that gave them
>superiority over others _before_ they landed in America or Africa have
>anything to do with it?
>
>We can ask what conditions give Europeans that superiority, but assuming
>that it was benefits of future exploitation defies the most rudimentary
>rules of logic. My preferred response to this question is "geographical
>accident" - the geographical location of Europe gave it the advantage
>of exchanging agricultural technologies with other peoples across the
>Eurasian land mass because most of that land mass was in the temperate
>climate zone, which made the agricultural technology dissemination
>possible, Ag technological advances, in turn, produced surplus, freeing
>parts of population to engage in pursuits other than food production,
>which further aided creation of new technologies, including military
>technology.
>
>Both African and American land masses, by contrast, are spread through
>several very different climate zones, which effectively inhibited agric.
>technology dissemination. As a result, technology advances on these
>continents were confined to small geographical areas and did not benefit
>from exchange with other peoples. This argument was advanced by Jared
>Diamond in _Guns, germs, and Steel_.
>
>In short, Europeans dominated because they were lucky to find themselves
>in a resource rich- and favourable geographical environment. If the
>Africans or Americans found themselves in a similar geographical
>environment, it would be them who landed on different continents,
>colonized, enslaved, and plundered.
>
>As far as slavery is concerned - this institution was brought to Africa
>by Arab traders and practiced for centuries. Americans took advantage
>of it, but Europeans did not for obvious reason. Europeans did not face
>a shortage of cheap indentured labor, the Americans did. However, it is
>European colonialism that finally ended the slave trading practices in
>Africa. European colonization of Africa (but not South Africa!),
>terrible as it was, actually brought progress by ending the Arab slave
>trade and introducing Western institutions and technologies.
>
>Wojtek
>
>
>
>
>
>
>___________________________________
>http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
_________________________________________________________________ Crave some Miles Davis or Grateful Dead? Your old favorites are always playing on MSN Radio Plus. Trial month free! http://join.msn.com/?page=offers/premiumradio