Posts mit dem Label Revolte werden angezeigt. Alle Posts anzeigen
Posts mit dem Label Revolte werden angezeigt. Alle Posts anzeigen

17.02.2016

Coromantee

Coromantee oder Coromanti people, auch Coromantins war im karibischen Raum die Bezeichnung für die letzten versklavten Menschen von der Goldküste, dem heutigen Ghana. Aufgrund ihres militärischen Hintergrundes und der gemeinsamen Sprache Akan[1][2] organisierten die Coromantee Dutzende von Sklavenaufständen in Jamaika und anderswo in der Karibik. Ihre harte und rebellische Natur war im 18. Jahrhundert unter weißen Plantagenbesitzern so berüchtigt, dass ein Gesetz vorgeschlagen wurde, um – trotz ihres Rufes als starke Arbeiter – die Einfuhr von Menschen aus der Goldküste zu verbieten.


Karte der Goldküste und des Aschanti-Reiches

Etymologie
Der Name leitet sich ab von der ghanaischen Küstenstadt Kormantse und ist die englische Bezeichnung für Angehörige der Volksgruppe der Akan. Der Name gilt heute als veraltet und wurde und wird ausschließlich in der Karibik verwendet.
Herkunft
Als Coromantee wurden in der Karibik, vor allem auf Jamaika, Sklaven bezeichnet, die von der Goldküste, dem heutigen Ghana, kamen. Die Sklaven stammten von verschiedenen Ethnien der Volksgruppe der Akan ab, wie zum Beispiel den Aschanti, Fante oder Akim. Das Volk der Akan hatte auf Jamaika den größten kulturellen Einfluss. Auch die dort verbreiteten Maroons sind Nachfahren mit kulturellen sowie sprachlichen Wurzeln der Akan.
Geschichte



Yam Zeremonie der Ashanti - Gemälde von Thomas Edward Bowdich

14.01.2016

Plantation uprisings / Judges, Masters, Diviners: Slaves’ Experience of Criminal Justice in Colonial Suriname

Chapter 14: To rise or not to rise.




The opportunities for a large-scale slave revolt.

A casual observer of the 18th century Surinam slavery system might have predicted a development akin to that in Saint-Domingue. All the conditions for a large-scale rebellion by the black population seemed to be present in optima forma. Eugene Genovese has outlined the circumstances leading to a higher probability of slave revolt:
(1) The master-slave relationship had developed in the context of absenteeism and depersonalization as well as greater cultural estrangement of whites and blacks;
(2) economic distress and famine occurred;
(3) slaveholding units approached the average size of one hundred to two hundred slaves, as in the sugar colonies, rather than twenty or so, as in the Old South;
(4) the ruling class frequently split either in warfare between slaveholding countries or in bitter struggles within the slaveholding country;
(5) blacks heavily outnumbered whites;
(6) African born slaves outnumbered those born into American slavery (Creoles);
(7) the social structure of the slaveholding regime permitted the emergence of autonomous black leadership;
(8) the geographical, social and political environment provided terrain and opportunity for the formation of colonies of runaway slaves strong enough to threaten the plantation regime.”
It seems at first sight that the situation in Surinam fitted this model rather well.

Absenteism and cultural estrangement.

Absenteeism was rampant in Surinam. Apart from the earliest period, few Surinam planters lived on their estates. They preferred to reside in Paramaribo and in many instances, it took them days to reach their plantations by boat. Consequently, they were only dimly aware what went on there most of the time. The majority did not seem to be very interested anyway. They were driven by an animus revertendi, a desire to return to their homeland with their fortune made. In many instances, their eagerness for maximum profit overrode any humanitarian concerns they might have had. As the saying goes in Holland: what one does not know does not hurt. The Surinam plantation owners preferred not to know. After the Amsterdam stock-exchange crisis of 1773, the situation worsened. Many of the new plantation owners were Dutch investors, who had little knowledge of agriculture and who only tried to recoup their losses as much as possible. They gave free reign to callous administrators and directors. The latter, in the 17th and 18th centuries especially, were mostly recruited from the lower rungs of white society, in particular from the ranks of former soldiers and sailors. Accustomed to harsh discipline themselves and obliged to deliver a maximum crop by their patrons, they were not unduly bothered by altruistic feelings either. So, Surinam exhibited the classic features of too much absenteeism.

Just as important was the fact that masters and slaves had totally different cultures, with only limited influence on each other. This was partly the result of the fact that the bondsmen formed a large numerical majority and spent most of their time with little or no white supervision. However, it was also partly the result of a deliberate policy of the whites. Being such a tiny minority, they were in danger to be swallowed up by their subjects: biologically through miscegenation and culturally through ‘negroization’. Therefore, they strove to keep people of color apart from white society and to keep some cultural accomplishments exclusively their own, in particular those with a ‘boundary defining character’ (like language and religion). The whites jealously guarded these: they did not want their slaves to speak Dutch, or to become Christian. In later times, they relented a bit and saw some advantage in converting slaves to Christianity, but by then it did not matter anymore.

Economic distress.

Surinam has shown the characteristics of a volksplanting only for a very limited period. By the time slavery became entrenched, it was already clear that Surinam would be an exploitation colony par excellence, geared to produce commodities for the world market and largely oblivious to the needs of its own population. One result of this attitude was the fact that production for the home market was often neglected. This was the case with timber, for example: Surinam had an abundance of high quality wood, but people were often forced to import timber from the United States to build their houses. It was even more apparent in the production of food. All through the slavery era, there were plantations that specialized in the cultivation of victuals, but most of their products went to Paramaribo and they never produced sufficient quantities anyway. Especially during the early period, the lowland planters preferred to put all their energy into the cultivation of cash crops, hoping that they would be able to buy the foodstuffs they needed for their slaves at home or abroad. Often this was indeed possible, but when droughts, floods, or other calamities resulted in a particularly meager crop, the slaves went hungry. Some planters were even forced to let them fend for themselves in the forest. In the 18th century, the situation improved somewhat because the coffee grounds often produced more plantains than they had use for, but even then, many planters could buy only a minimal amount of food –just enough to keep their slaves from running away or being unable to work. The ‘frugality’ of the planters was even more visible in the distributions of ‘luxuries’ as meat, fish, salt, tobacco and clothes. These always had to be imported, which drove up the prices, and they were often unavailable when the trade routes were cut off during one of the many wars that plagued the Caribbean during this period. However, it was not only stinginess that withheld food and clothing from the slaves: in later times, many plantations fared so badly that they could hardly afford the barest necessities.

In the eyes of many people, even the inhabitants, 18th century Surinam was the epitome of a prosperous plantation colony. In the early part of the century, when the prices of the commodities it produced were high, this was indeed the reality. Money poured in and the planters were quick to spend it in the most conspicuous manner possible. The apparent prosperity made the planters eligible for ample credits and generous loans and this enabled them to maintain a high level of consumption a few decades longer. However, during the latter part of the 18th century, Surinam lived far above its station. The conditions for plantation agriculture were not exactly ideal. Land was plentiful, but land suitable for plantations was not and it had to be prepared by a costly procedure. Slaves were hard to come by and the fact that Surinam was located outside the main trade routes made them very expensive. As a result, the production costs compared unfavorably with those in other parts of the Caribbean, especially the French colony Saint-Domingue and (in later times) the Spanish colony Cuba. Fortunately, the Dutch market could absorb all of Surinam’s production (in fact much more).

In the 19th century, the number of plantations fell drastically and the remaining ones barely survived by a process of shifting to sugar, modernization of the production and much subsidy (mostly by hapless stockholders, who wasted the chance to invest their money more productively in the Netherlands). What it boils down to, is that Surinam has been a genuinely prosperous colony only during a few decades: it merely managed to give that impression a while longer because of high prices in the developing world market and the misuse of credit that was never paid back. Economically speaking, the situation of most Surinam plantations for most of the time was precarious and only in favorable circumstances the slaves were not victimized by this.


A predominance of large plantations.

During most of the slavery era, sugar plantations formed the majority of Surinam estates. They were condemned to a certain minimum size to make it possible to exploit an expensive sugar mill profitably. In the early period, when most of these mills were simple, animal-driven constructions, Surinam plantations could be small: a force of 10 to 20 slaves was not unusual. However, when water mills (and in later days steam mills) came in vogue, the production capacity increased and additional slaves were needed. Plantations with more than a hundred bondsmen became the norm in the 18th century. Even the coffee grounds, though much more flexible in the number of hands they employed, were comparatively large. In other plantation colonies, they were often relegated to marginal lands, but in Surinam, they took up some of the most fertile grounds, especially in the Commewijne district. Their overall size was somewhat smaller than that of sugar plantations, but they had more land under permanent cultivation. In the United States, planters owning more than 100 slaves tended to split up their holdings into several independent units, because it made supervision easier and the cotton plantations that predominated there hardly profited from the economies of scale. In Surinam, on the other hand, the few plantations specializing in cotton belonged to the largest in the colony.

While the coffee grounds lost terrain in the latter part of the slavery era, the remaining sugar estates grew in size steadily through a process of concentration: many 19th century estates boasted 200 to 400 slaves. Although this did not facilitate close supervision (which had never been a prime concern for many Surinam planters anyway), it made technological innovation -on a modest scale- possible. For the slaves, this process of concentration held little promise and they often protested the fusion of slave forces vehemently. With regard to the United States, it has often been maintained that the treatment of slaves was much better on small units than on larger ones. In Surinam, size seems to have made little difference. The slaves on large plantations were in some ways better off: they had less supervision and fewer problems to recruit the personnel for a large-scale rebellion.

22.08.2015

The Netherlands (Holland and Dutch) Slavers



Netherlands--The Netherlands despite being a small country, lacking in natural resources, was able in the 17th Century to become the centre for European overseas trade, including the trade in human beings. This 'Dutch Miracle' was a product of numerous innovations in navigation, manufacturing and finance, which allowed for slaves and slave produce to be transported at greater capacity and at lower cost. The first recorded trader sold 20 Africans to the colony of Virginia in North America in 1619, but the Dutch trade only really took off in response to labour shortage in the newly conquered sugar plantations of Northern Brazil in 1630. Wars with Portugal (1620-1655) left the Dutch in control of many of the slave depots on the West African coast, centred on modern Ghana, which by 1650 had dispatched 30,000 slaves to Brazil alone. After the return of the Brazilian colonies to Portugal in 1654, the Dutch traders were able to draw upon their network of forts to supply other European powers, dominating the supply to Spain until the 1690s. However the near constant warfare the Netherlands were waged in with other European nations, such as Spain, France and Britain, by Imperial Spain, did eventually sap its strength, and Dutch involvement in the trade declined in the 18th Century, and effectively ceased in 1795. When the final abolition of the trade and institution of slavery formally occurred in 1863, Dutch agents had brought 540,000 Africans to the Americas and cast the spectre of slavery east, from the Cape of Good Hope to the Indonesian archipelago.

30.11.2013

Luddismus

Luddismus


„The leader of the luddites“
Stich aus dem Jahr 1812
Zerstörung eines Webstuhls (1812)
Der Begriff Luddismus (oft deckungsgleich mit „Maschinensturm“ verwendet) bezeichnet eine der großen Wellen des Kampfes englischer Arbeiter Anfang des 19. Jahrhunderts gegen Statusverlust und drohende soziale Verelendung durch die einsetzende Industrialisierung.
Die Ludditen waren Textilarbeiter, die gegen die Verschlechterung ihrer Lebensbedingungen im Zuge der Industriellen Revolution kämpften und dabei auch gezielt Maschinen zerstörten. Die nach ihrem legendenumwobenen fiktiven Anführer Ned Ludd benannte Bewegung wurde bis 1814 militärisch niedergeschlagen. Zahlreiche Beteiligte wurden hingerichtet oder nach Australien deportiert.

Ned Ludd

Aufrufe der Ludditen waren ungeachtet der eigentlichen Urheberschaft häufig mit Ned Ludd, der auch King Ludd, General Ludd oder Captain Ludd genannt wurde, unterzeichnet. Ned Ludd fungierte als fiktiver Anführer der Ludditen und kollektives Pseudonym der unterschiedlichen Gruppen. Er war der Wiedergutmacher oder Große Vollstrecker, der die traditionellen Rechte der Handwerker und Gesellen verteidigte.[1]

Geschichte

Die Bewegung entstand 1811 in Nottingham. Bis 1812 verbreitete sie sich über ganz England. Dabei zerstörten die Ludditen zahlreiche Woll- und Baumwollspinnereien. Die größte Stärke entwickelten sie im November 1811 in Nottinghamshire, Anfang 1812 in West Riding of Yorkshire und ab März 1812 in Lancashire. Regelrechte Schlachten lieferten sich die Ludditen mit dem Militär in Burtons’ Mill in Middleton und in Westhoughton Mill, beide in Lancashire. Andere Angriffsziele waren Richter und Lebensmittelhändler, da den Richtern ein zu hartes Vorgehen gegen Ludditen vorgeworfen wurde, während die Lebensmittelhändler bezichtigt wurden, den geringen Lohn der Arbeiter erpresserisch für ihre Waren zu fordern.
In der Folge wurde „Maschinenstürmerei“ (Sabotage) zum Kapitalverbrechen erklärt und die Bewegung militärisch niedergeschlagen. Zahlreiche Ludditen wurden nach Massenprozessen hingerichtet oder nach Australien deportiert.
Der Luddismus ist einer der großen Kampfzyklen der englischen Arbeiterklasse Anfang des 19. Jahrhunderts. Er ist eingebettet in eine allgemein zunehmende Unruhe, die z. B. 1817 zum Aufstand von Pentrich führte.

Rezeption

In der Rezeption fortschrittsgläubiger politischer Richtungen, wie Liberalismus und später Sozialdemokratie und Leninismus, wurden die Ludditen als reaktionär und technikfeindlich wahrgenommen.

Edward Palmer Thompson

Edward Palmer Thompsons Buch: The Making of the English Working Class trug auch in einer breiteren Öffentlichkeit zu einem neuen Verständnis des Luddismus bei. Laut Thompson waren die Ludditen in der Hauptsache nicht Gegner der neuen Technik, sondern Gegner der neuen Wirtschaftsbeziehungen (so Abschaffung der Festpreise), die im Zuge ihrer Einführung durchgesetzt werden sollten.
Die Maschinen seien dabei nicht wahllos als vermeintliche Verursacher dieses Wandels angegriffen worden. Die Zerstörung der Maschinen war demgemäß eine organisierte und gezielte Aktionsform, die sich gegen bestimmte Eigentümer richtete, die zur Einhaltung der alten Regelungen bewegt werden sollten, während Maschinen anderer Eigentümer häufig verschont blieben. Die hohe Effizienz, Zielgerichtetheit und Organisiertheit der luddistischen Aktionen mit bis zu 100 Teilnehmern gilt Thompson auch als Anzeichen der großen Akzeptanz der Ludditen in ihren Gemeinden.
Insgesamt erscheinen nach Thompson die lange Zeit auch in der Linken üblichen Vorstellungen – Ludditen sind randalierende Verbrecherbanden oder beschränkte Arbeiter, die in den Maschinen selbst die Ursache ihres Elends sehen – als Fortsetzung der damaligen Propaganda von Regierung und Eigentümern. In Wirklichkeit waren die Ludditen nichts weiter als Menschen, die sich zur Verteidigung ihrer Interessen zusammenfanden und nach erfolgversprechenden Wegen suchten.

Lord Byron

Einer der wenigen prominenten Fürsprecher der Ludditen und Gegner der Repressionsmaßnahmen war Lord Byron. So verteidigte er in seiner Jungfernrede am 27. Februar 1812 die Aktionen der Ludditen seines Wahlkreises Nottinghamshire im House of Lords des britischen Parlaments.[2] Er wandte sich auch 1812 mit einer mäßigenden Rede gegen das Frame Breaking Bill. 1816 feierte er die Ludditen in seinem Gedicht Song of the Luddites:
As the Liberty lads o’er the sea
Bought their freedom, and cheaply, with blood,
So we, boys, we
Will die fighting, or live free,
And down with all kings but King Ludd!
When the web that we weave is complete,
And the shuttle exchanged for the sword,
We will fling the winding-sheet
O'er the despot at our feet,
And dye it deep in the gore he has pour'd.
Though black as his heart its hue,
Since his veins are corrupted to mud,
Yet this is the dew
Which the tree shall renew
Of Liberty, planted by Ludd!

Neo-Luddismus

Auch im 20. und 21. Jahrhundert gibt es luddistische Strukturen wie die Adbusters Media Foundation, eine konsumkritische Organisation. Andere luddistische Gruppen wie das deutsche „Hekla-Empfangskomitee“ oder die italienische „Nucleo Olga Federazione Anarchica Informale Fronte Rivoluzionario Internazionale“ unternehmen Brandanschläge auf Verkehrsmittel oder Anschläge auf Personen, die sich mit Kern- oder Nanotechnologien beschäftigen.[3]