you see i would agree with this analysis but considering Wallachia and Moldova introduced chattel slavery, depended on the economic exploitation of Romani people, passed strict anti-miscegenation laws and allowed Romanian slave-owners to kill their Romani slaves slavery a full 300 years before the English did kind of contradicts the idea that "slavery in its most radical form triumphed in the golden age of liberalism" (considering it had been triumphing for 300 years before its introduction in America), that racial chattel slavery is a 1600s liberal invention and that "the most oppressive dominion exercised by man over man" happened in the late 1600s in the US when it had been happening in Wallachia and Moldova since the Middle Ages. I think books and articles that tackle the racism endemic to liberal ideologies should take into account Romani chattel slavery considering it was one of the longest forms of chattel slavery to ever exist (500 years) and that it predates American chattel slavery (which doesn't mean that one is worse than the other, both are equally bad, but pretending racial chattel slavery didn't exist before the English came up with it is Romani history erasure)
