Dan McLaughlin wrote a long essay under the title: “American Slavery in the Global Context,” and the subtitle: “An ancient evil abolished.” It was published on January 6, 2022 in National Review Online.
The title and subtitle tell the readers what the essay is about. It is
meant to be a comprehensive study of slavery in the world, and its imitations
such as serfdom and other forms of servitude. The essay is a massive
undertaking that required a great deal of research. But whereas parts of it were
narrated and described in minute details, other parts were narrated in general
terms, often negative ones. And this proved to be a shortcoming that hurt the
historical record the writer was trying to establish.
Let’s consider this sentence from the article: “The term ‘slave’ evolved
from ‘Slav,’ reflecting the massive slave trade out of Russia and other Slavic
lands into the Ottoman Empire and southern Europe.” This being the case, the
word “slave” cannot be used to describe what was happening before that era
without a thorough explanation as to the similarities and/or differences that
existed between the Slavic experience and what allegedly happened before that
era.
Given that Dan McLaughlin has referred to Egypt on several occasions, it
behooves us to take a close look at what the verifiable record says, and
compare it to what the legends say, be they religious or folkloric legends. As
far as the record goes, there is not a single painting or a sculpture done by
the ancient Egyptians to suggest they had a system of slavery or as the Jews
put it, “bondage.” In fact, there is nothing to suggest that the Jews were even
in Egypt as an identifiable group.
What there is that passes as record, are stories that cannot be verified
about Jews being kept in Egypt, not against their will, but against the will of
their leader, the one named Moses who wanted to take them to some place else.
Despite their bondage, goes the story, the Jews were able to loot the homes and
temples of their treasures in the middle of the night, murder the first born of
every family without waking anybody, and run into the desert. A few days into
their journey, the Jews got fed up with life out of Egypt despite the manna that
fell from the sky for them to feed on every day. And so, the Jews begged to
return to the life of bondage they left behind in the land that they looted and
where they committed horrible murders. This makes you wonder what kind of
bondage that was.
If you believe in that story, might as well believe that slavery or
bondage or whatever you want to call it, existed in ancient Egypt. And there is
nothing that can be said or done to make you believe otherwise. But if you
believe that this is a quilt (or mosaic) of folkloric stories spliced together
to form the basis of a religious doctrine, you will have to believe in the accepted
record, which shows that there was no slavery or bondage of any kind in ancient
Egypt.
If now, you assume that a group of Jewish travelers visited Egypt,
gathered tidbits of information about the country, and used them to make their
stories sound real, then the description of what they saw would point to an era
in the history of Egypt that was well past the time when massive construction,
such as the pyramids, requiring hard physical labor, had cease to happen 1,300
years prior. In fact, the era that the Jews might have been describing was known
as the Amarna period, a time when King Akhenaten worried about the growing
power of the clergy, and proclaimed there was only one God, the Sun God Ra.
That moment in history also marked the rising power of Egypt to its cusp and
the beginning of its slow decline. The country was eventually conquered by
other rising powers.
In fact for the next 2,500 years, Egypt was ruled by foreigners. It was
not until the revolution of 1952 that Egypt was again ruled by an Egyptian. It
was President Mohammed Naguib who was quickly followed by Gamal Abdel Nasser …
and the rest is history. Thus, we must be conscious of the reality that what was
happening in Egypt during those two and half millenniums, were not choices made
by Egyptians.
Let’s now look at another passage in Dan McLaughlin’s article. It reads
as follows:
“Slaves in
other systems served quite different purposes: Women were purchased as
concubines or brides, and male slaves served as eunuchs, soldiers, even
generals and ministers of state. The medieval Mamluk sultans of Egypt were a
class of slave rulers; ‘mamluk’ is Arabic for an enslaved person. Until they developed
plantation systems in the 19th century, most Islamic societies used slaves in
service, not production”.
Did you spot the oxymoron in that passage? If you haven’t, then try to
define the expression: “a class of slave rulers.” How can slaves rule over
subjects who are supposed to be their masters? This is such a messy
incongruity, it calls for a radical explanation and an honest explanation.
Well, here is the full explanation, my friend:
Have you ever heard of Paula Abdul? What’s that “abdul” in her name? It
is an Arabic word that is also used as a proper name. It is derived from the
word “Abeed” which is usually translated as slave. And there lies the problem,
because the name Abdallah would have to translate as “slave of God.” But God
does not take slaves. He has servants. All of us are his servants even if we’re
not named Abdallah, Abdulrahim (servant of the clement,) Abdelfattah (servant
of the conqueror,) or any of the 40 attributes by which God is referred to.
Knowing all this, the quote cited above yields a completely different
meaning. It says that men died in wars leaving behind women who will never
marry or form a family unless they are adopted by the winners. In fact, the
women looked forward to being adopted and serve as one of the four wives
allowed in Islam, or serve as concubine. As to the men who fought on the losing
side but survived, they were taken into the households of the winners to be
servants, or were enrolled to serve the state, working as soldiers or generals
or ministers of state.