Tax collection, slavery and moral rule model
(På svenska)

In the middle ages, the Swedish king had no permanent capital instead the king traveled around with the court in Sweden and lived periodically on various royal estates where the bailiffs stored what they collected by taxation from the farmers. When the stored goods were consumed at one royal estate, they traveled on to the next royal estate. It had not worked in a warmer climate where what the bailiffs collected could not be stored for any longer time without being spoiled. And if the storage period is too short, the tax collection system stops working, thereby it is not possible to finance a kingdom by taxation from the farmers.

It may seem strange that among those with dark skin color it is more common to have the warfighting white slave owner with Jewish and African slaves as a moral role model, which is not as common among those with light skin color. However, this is due to the fact that the difference in solar radiation between different parts of the world, which created a difference in skin color before the 20th century, also affected the rulers' ability to finance kingdoms through tax collection. In the north with weaker solar radiation that gives light skin color, where the climate is colder and food could be stored for a longer time without being destroyed, the rulers could create kingdoms through taxation of agriculture. Most worked in agriculture to produce food, so the taxes consisted mainly of agricultural products that were distributed to those who worked in the service of the kingdom, mainly in the armed forces. It was necessary to create a surplus to survive the winter before spring comes and new crops can be grown. By taxing this surplus, the people were forced to increase their work effort to get enough to both survive the winter and provide for the government.

In tropical Africa, on the other hand, with stronger solar radiation that gives dark skin color and a warmer climate, food could not be stored for as long without being destroyed, so it was more difficult to create kingdoms through taxation of agriculture. More bailiffs are needed who have to visit the villages more often to collect tax, which received a smaller amount at each visit, which must be passed on more quickly to those who are to be supplied with the collected tax. With too short storage times, tax collection became unprofitable and therefore could not be used by rulers to create kingdoms. The lack of growing seasons meant also that the people could produce crops for immediate consumption all year round and thus minimize surpluses that could be spoiled during longer storage periods or taken by tax collectors. Since it was not pissible to create kingdoms by taxation of agricultcre, rulers could insteade create kingdoms that were financed by slavery by taking prisoners and exporting them as slaves, using the incomes to finance the army needed to conquer and defend the kingdoms. Since slave exports provided greater income than taxation of agriculture, rulers who exported slaves could defeat those who sought to create kingdoms through taxation of agriculture. To justify the slave export, the rulers chose the doctrine of the warfighting slave owner as a prophet and moral role model. To reduce the risk of being taken prisoner and sold as slaves, the people also had to convert to the doctrine of the rulers with the warfighting slave owner as prophet and moral role model, which is why it became common among those with dark skin to have the warfighting slave owner as a moral role model.

In regions with a colder climate, such as in Europe, where kingdoms could be financed through the taxation of agriculture, rulers did not need a doctrine to justify slavery. Instead, rulers who most often came to power and created kingdoms through victories in war chose the doctrine of the Son of God who through crucifixion died on a cross for our sins and resurrected on the third day, to appear more good and thus be accepted by the people. The rulers were also able to show how good they were by banning slavery, whereby slavery in 1335 was abolished in Sweden. This meant that it became more common among those with light skin color to have the crucified Son of God as a moral model. The technological development that resulted from the replacement of slaves by hired labor since slavery in the Middle Ages was banned in our part of the world led to the industrial revolution and the success of Western civilization. The value of a product does not depend primarily on how much work is needed to manufacture it but on what a buyer is willing to pay for it. By maximizing the benefits and minimizing the work effort by developing products or working methods, a worker who gets paid for the work can have the opportunity to get paid better. As it is those who perform the work who have the best knowledge and thus the opportunity to find changes that can make it more efficient, you get a technical development if the work is performed by paid labor that is not obtained if the work is performed by slaves. Many believe that the success of Western civilization is due to Lutheran work ethic. A precondition for this work ethic to arise was that slavery had ceased because if work is something performed by slaves, there would have been no Lutheran work ethic Why other parts of the world did not have a similar development is due to that the abolition of slavery came much later. In large parts of the world where they have the war fighting slave owner as prophet and supreme moral role model and rulers who financed their kingdoms with slave exports, slavery was not seen as something negative to be abolished, so they missed the development we got in our part of the world. Slavery remained there until the 19th/20th century when Western imperialism forced them to close the slave markets, resulting in a world divided into rich developed countries and poor non developed countries.

The fact that it was more difficult to create kingdoms in regions with warmer climates than in colder ones meant that the Spanish conquerors found no major kingdoms in South America except the Inca Empire in the Andes Mountains where the climate due to high altitude is colder. Even in the Ethiopian mountains in Africa where the climate due to high altitude is colder there was a kingdom that could be financed through taxation of agriculture, which is why the rulers there could choose the doctrine with crucified Son of God as a moral model. The rulers of Africa could export slaves to the slave markets in the Middle East and North Africa, but there was no corresponding export market for possible slave-exporting rulers in South America, so Spain and Portugal with a small group of conquerors without meeting large resistance could divide South America in the 16th century. If Spain and Portugal had had to send the Spanish and Portuguese armies to conquer America, they would not have been feasible. The armies were needed in Europe to fight the Moors and other European rulers and how to supply large armies in America. The difficulty of storing food in tropical climates meant that the plantations Europeans had in America produced products that were less edible for both macro- and micro-organisms and could therefore be stored as sugar, tobacco and cotton and thus could be shipped for sale in Europe. Less edible products, however, are not useful for local rulers to create kingdoms based on the taxation of agriculture. That it was not possible to tax the people in central Africa was something even King Leopold of Belgium experienced when, after the congress in Berlin in 1884, he got his own kingdom in Africa. They found a product, rubber, that could be stored and exported, but that was not a vital product for the people, so there was no domestic rubber production that could form the basis for tax collection, resorting to inhumane methods to force the people to produce rubber. The import of unhealthy products such as sugar and tobacco from the colonies in America is not, as the left believes, the basis for prosperity in Europe. Although slave owners in America became rich, it had a negative impact on the people of Europe. It was the abolition of slavery in the Middle Ages that provided the conditions for creating prosperity for the European people and thus a market for products from the plantations in America.

The transatlantic slave trade arose when European rulers with colonies in America discovered that there were slave-exporting rulers in Africa who had long ago exported slaves to the Arab world. Since as many men as women are born, the polygamy meant that many men lacked women, thus the Arabs mainly demanded women to have as sex slaves and castrated men had higher value than uncastrated ones. The great demand for female slaves meant that the Crimean Tatars in their raids on the Russian/Ukrainian countryside often killed men to take women prisoners for sale in Ottoman slave markets, which ceased when Russia conquered Crimea in 1783. European empires with colonies in America needed male slaves to work on the plantations in America, so the African slave-exporting rulers could sell men to the Europeans and women to the Arabs. This increased the income of the slave-exporting rulers in Africa and thus their ability to defend their kingdoms. However, after thnat the British Parliament banned the slave trade in 1807 and British warships began to hunt for slave ships, the income of the slave-exporting rulers in Africa ceased, after which the Europeans could conquer and divide Africa.

Erik Levlin

Ass Professor, PhD.

http://www.levlin.se