You’re only confused about this because you’re trying to change the point.

No, Africans were not the only kidnappers of Africans during the slave trade, though they did participate. Yes, some of the kidnappers were Black, but others were Arab and European (both of which were called “white” by Black Africans).

The point is not who did the kidnapping, though you enjoy bringing up the fact that Africans participated in our own enslavement. The point is that Africans were called Black during that time even before there were any Africans in the Americas.

Blacks who have been born in America are not the only Africans who are called Black. This comment is meant to refute Dickerson’s point, not to confuse you about who kidnapped whom.

This comment confuses me, Nadir. The “kidnappers” in Africa were black themselves, including certainly some of your ancestors. You had ancestors who were kidnapped, for sure, but probably also some black kidnappers. These black kidnappees and kidnappers were calling the Europeans “white”, no? Where these people calling the honkies “white” any different than the honkies (including most likely some of your ancestors!) calling the Africans “black”?

And what of the Arabs who — along with the honkies — were purchasing the kidnapped Africans from the African kidnappers? Did they, like the honkies, call these Africans “black”?

I don’t understand the complaint. Europeans, Arabs, and Africans all practiced slavery against Africans, but as far as I can tell, only Africans performed any kidnapping of these enslaved African. Also, about a million honkies got kidnapped into slavery by northern African Arab muslims.

It seems to me that all three groups included horrible brutes and victims as well; but you seem only interested in the Africans who were victims, and only then if they were victimized by brutes who were honkies.