>>213375630
actual historical record dictates it didn't, the kind of people who bitch about this shit are just retarded pundits and armchair activists or just plain old retards who need some paper-thin reason to chimp out - and none of them have ever actually done any research
slaves since as far back as the romans are an investment, the whole fucking point is that they are CHATTEL, they are YOUR property. do you just walk around your house with your greasy, hairy belly out, laughing and smoking a cigar as you callously break your own kitchen appliances? probably not - so why the fuck would you do the same with the exorbitantly expensive living farm equipment that you own?
most african slaves were treated about as well as they could be treated: safe and clean living quarters, fed modestly for their work, given certain freedoms based on their experience and trustworthiness, plenty of clean water, and time out of the sun in the hottest parts of the day - obviously, again - because if you paid for these people and are one part owner of their lives and one part their employer, you don't want them dying or getting injured and becoming useless. some of the wealthier landlords and farmers probably even could shell out for medical care for their slaves if and when needed
and just like the romans, there were plenty of laws and communal ethics regarding the treatment of slaves among others - and people would get in trouble legally all the same for "damaging your property" and attacking or killing your slaves, so outside aggression in any cartoonishly evil lefty racial sense is also unlikely
did it happen here and there? most likely. was it enough to say it was common? nah. would the preponderance of the abuse of slaves have anything to do with the behavior of niggers today or excuse their behavior in any way? fuck no
