independent and unofficial
Prince fan community site
Mon 16th Sep 2019 1:25pm
Welcome! Sign up or enter username and password to remember me
Forum jump
Forums > Politics & Religion > Debunking a Myth: The Irish Were Not Slaves, Too
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Page 1 of 2 12>
Reply   New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
Author

Tweet     Share

Message
Thread started 08/28/19 5:10am

2elijah

avatar

Debunking a Myth: The Irish Were Not Slaves, Too

For informational purpose:

I was surprised to see this article written two years ago, because there is a popular book about Irish Slavery in America, that stated that the Irish who were enslaved in America, were treated worse than Africans who were enslaved here. This was mentioned in Sean O’callaghan’s book ‘To Hell or Barbados’. Even I believed what was written about it in that book, but now many historians are debunking what they call is a myth.

https://www.google.com/ur...0081848146

Debunking a Myth: The Irish Were Not Slaves, Too


By Liam Stack
March 17, 2017

“It has shown up on Irish trivia Facebook pages, in Scientific American magazine, and on white nationalist message boards: the little-known story of the Irish slaves who built America, who are sometimes said to have outnumbered and been treated worse than slaves from Africa.

But it’s not true.

Historians say the idea of Irish slaves is based on a misreading of history and that the distortion is often politically motivated. Far-right memes have taken off online and are used as racist barbs against African-Americans. “The Irish were slaves, too,” the memes often say. “We got over it, so why can’t you?”

A small group of Irish and American scholars has spent years pushing back on the false history. In 2016, 82 Irish scholars and writers signed an open letter denouncing the Irish slave myth and asking publications to stop mentioning it. Some complied, removing or revising articles that referenced the false claims, but the letter’s impact was limited.


Fact vs. Fiction

“The Irish slave narrative is based on the misinterpretation of the history of indentured servitude, which is how many poor Europeans migrated to North America and the Caribbean in the early colonial period, historians said.

Without a doubt, life was bad for indentured servants. They were often treated brutally. Not all of them entered servitude willingly. Some were political prisoners. Some were children.

“I’m not saying it was pleasant or anything — it was the opposite — but it was a completely different category from slavery,” said Liam Hogan, a research librarian in Ireland who has spearheaded the debunking effort. “It was a transitory state.”


The legal differences between indentured servitude and chattel slavery were profound, according to Matthew Reilly, an archaeologist who studies Barbados. Unlike slaves, servants were considered legally human. Their servitude was based on a contract that limited their service to a finite period of time, usually about seven years, in exchange for passage to the colonies. They did not pass their unfree status on to descendants.


Contemporary accounts in Ireland sometimes referred to these people as slaves, Mr. Hogan said. That was true in the sense that any form of coerced labor can be described as slavery, from Ancient Rome to modern-day human trafficking. But in colonial America and the Caribbean, the word “slavery” had a specific legal meaning. Europeans, by definition, were not included in it.

“An indenture implies two people have entered into a contract with each other but slavery is not a contract,” said Leslie Harris, a professor of African-American history at Northwestern University. “It is often about being a prisoner of war or being bought or sold bodily as part of a trade. That is a critical distinction.”


(Click on link to continue reading)
[Edited 8/28/19 19:34pm]
“Uncomfortable conversations creates change” — Anonymous
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #1 posted 08/28/19 6:21am

IanRG

What about the convicts sent from the UK to Australia and forced into labour to establish colonies with little or no hope of ever returning? A large number of these were Irish.

.

Before there were any significant numbers of free settlers as the population were mostly working for military in charge of the convicts or where convicts. This meant that is was illegal to have a number of things like currency.

.

There is the difference that these convicts could be more easily emancipated by completing their sentence or receiving a full or partial pardon, but almost none could afford to go home. An emancipated convict had more rights than a convict but less than a free settler or soldier.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #2 posted 08/28/19 7:18am

luv4u

Moderator

avatar

moderator

The Irish Slave Trade – The Forgotten “White” Slaves


https://www.globalresearch.ca/the-irish-slave-trade-the-forgotten-white-slaves/31076



Slavery in Ireland

https://en.wikipedia.org/...in_Ireland


Viking Age slave chain (found in Germany)

Slavery had already existed in Ireland for centuries by the time the Vikings began to establish their coastal settlements, but it was under the Norse-Gael Kingdom of Dublin that it reached its peak, in the 11th century.[1]



Edmonton, AB - canada
Mod Goddess of the SNIP & BAN Making Moves - OF4S
Ohh purple joy oh purple bliss oh purple rapture!
REAL MUSIC by REAL MUSICIANS - Prince
"I kind of wish there was a reason for Prince to make the site crash more" ~~ Ben
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #3 posted 08/28/19 7:20am

luv4u

Moderator

avatar

moderator

IanRG said:

What about the convicts sent from the UK to Australia and forced into labour to establish colonies with little or no hope of ever returning? A large number of these were Irish.

.

Before there were any significant numbers of free settlers as the population were mostly working for military in charge of the convicts or where convicts. This meant that is was illegal to have a number of things like currency.

.

There is the difference that these convicts could be more easily emancipated by completing their sentence or receiving a full or partial pardon, but almost none could afford to go home. An emancipated convict had more rights than a convict but less than a free settler or soldier.

WHY WERE CONVICTS TRANSPORTED TO AUSTRALIA?



https://sydneylivingmuseu...-australia

They were convicts, committed crimes and what not.

Edmonton, AB - canada
Mod Goddess of the SNIP & BAN Making Moves - OF4S
Ohh purple joy oh purple bliss oh purple rapture!
REAL MUSIC by REAL MUSICIANS - Prince
"I kind of wish there was a reason for Prince to make the site crash more" ~~ Ben
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #4 posted 08/28/19 9:10am

poppys

2elijah said:

For informational purpose: I was surprised to see this article written two years ago, because there is a popular book about Irish Slavery in America, that stated that the Irish who were enslaved in America, were treated worse than Africans who were enslaved here. This was mentioned in Sean O’callaghan’s book ‘To Hell or Barbados’. Even I believed what was written about it in that book, but now many historians are debunking what they call is a myth. https://www.google.com/ur...0081848146 Debunking a Myth: The Irish Were Not Slaves, Too By Liam Stack March 17, 2017 “It has shown up on Irish trivia Facebook pages, in Scientific American magazine, and on white nationalist message boards: the little-known story of the Irish slaves who built America, who are sometimes said to have outnumbered and been treated worse than slaves from Africa. But it’s not true. Historians say the idea of Irish slaves is based on a misreading of history and that the distortion is often politically motivated. Far-right memes have taken off online and are used as racist barbs against African-Americans. “The Irish were slaves, too,” the memes often say. “We got over it, so why can’t you?” A small group of Irish and American scholars has spent years pushing back on the false history. In 2016, 82 Irish scholars and writers signed an open letter denouncing the Irish slave myth and asking publications to stop mentioning it. Some complied, removing or revising articles that referenced the false claims, but the letter’s impact was limited. Fact vs. Fiction “The Irish slave narrative is based on the misinterpretation of the history of indentured servitude, which is how many poor Europeans migrated to North America and the Caribbean in the early colonial period, historians said. Without a doubt, life was bad for indentured servants. They were often treated brutally. Not all of them entered servitude willingly. Some were political prisoners. Some were children. “I’m not saying it was pleasant or anything — it was the opposite — but it was a completely different category from slavery,” said Liam Hogan, a research librarian in Ireland who has spearheaded the debunking effort. “It was a transitory state.” The legal differences between indentured servitude and chattel slavery were profound, according to Matthew Reilly, an archaeologist who studies Barbados. Unlike slaves, servants were considered legally human. Their servitude was based on a contract that limited their service to a finite period of time, usually about seven years, in exchange for passage to the colonies. They did not pass their unfree status on to descendants. Contemporary accounts in Ireland sometimes referred to these people as slaves, Mr. Hogan said. That was true in the sense that any form of coerced labor can be described as slavery, from Ancient Rome to modern-day human trafficking. But in colonial America and the Caribbean, the word “slavery” had a specific legal meaning. Europeans, by definition, were not included in it. “An indenture implies two people have entered into a contract with each other but slavery is not a contract,” said Leslie Harris, a professor of African-American history at Northwestern University. “It is often about being a prisoner of war or being bought or sold bodily as part of a trade. That is a critical distinction.” (Click on link) [Edited 8/28/19 5:12am]


Interesting thread topic 2e, thanks for posting. Fast forward to the present -

Feb 11, 2019 - Virginia's governor called slaves 'indentured servants' (CNN) Once again, Virginia's governor caused a nationwide facepalm with race-related comments. This time, Gov. Ralph Northam told "CBS This Morning" that slaves who landed on the shores of Virginia centuries ago were "indentured servants."

Mar 6, 2017 - Ben Carson refers to slaves as ‘immigrants’ in first speech to HUD A few days after being sworn in as the new Housing and Urban Development Secretary. pbs.com

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #5 posted 08/28/19 12:48pm

IanRG

luv4u said:

IanRG said:

What about the convicts sent from the UK to Australia and forced into labour to establish colonies with little or no hope of ever returning? A large number of these were Irish.

.

Before there were any significant numbers of free settlers as the population were mostly working for military in charge of the convicts or where convicts. This meant that is was illegal to have a number of things like currency.

.

There is the difference that these convicts could be more easily emancipated by completing their sentence or receiving a full or partial pardon, but almost none could afford to go home. An emancipated convict had more rights than a convict but less than a free settler or soldier.

WHY WERE CONVICTS TRANSPORTED TO AUSTRALIA?



https://sydneylivingmuseu...-australia

They were convicts, committed crimes and what not.

.

Yes, the convicts were convicts.

.

The crimes of many were minor eg stealing a loaf of bread. However, for the Irish, many of them were imprisoned for political reasons - sometimes just because they were too "Romish" or "Papist" and resisted the Church of the Establishment and British control of their land. The latter is not that different from how many of the African slavers captured people from tribes opposed to, or subjugated by, their tribe.

.

None of this changes the fact that the convicts were forcefully removed from their homeland and forced to work without remuneration or freedom half way round the world with the strong likelihood that they would die in servitude or have to live out the rest of their lives with less rights than free settlers and retired military if they were emancipated.

.

The only difference between "slave labour" and "convict slave labour" at this point in time was the latter was caught for a minor crime and instead of being sold, they were selected as suitable labour to work as a slave for the British government rather than another person/business. Just as the slave market judged people by the suitablility for different tasks, the British prison system selected those with skills needed for the colony - builders, farmers, women capable of bearing children, those stong enough to make the journey and useful at the end of world.

.

In this the Irish were slaves in Australia - and elsewhere as your other links show. There is more to the story than whether indentured servitude is same as slavery.

[Edited 8/28/19 12:51pm]

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #6 posted 08/28/19 12:58pm

poppys

Georgia as a penal colony

The state of Georgia was not a penal colony in the sense usually meant, although it was initially settled almost entirely with convicts. Its founder was given the authority to take volunteers from the royal gaols, and he relied on debtors, prostitutes and the odd pickpocket for most of his initial population.

www.quora.com/Was-America-a-penal-colony

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #7 posted 08/28/19 1:33pm

IanRG

poppys said:

Georgia as a penal colony

The state of Georgia was not a penal colony in the sense usually meant, although it was initially settled almost entirely with convicts. Its founder was given the authority to take volunteers from the royal gaols, and he relied on debtors, prostitutes and the odd pickpocket for most of his initial population.

www.quora.com/Was-America-a-penal-colony

.

And many of the prisons in the USA today use their population as labour to produce incomes for the prisons. Although the prisoners do get some compensation / reward for their work.

.

My understanding is that, yes the original convicts were volunteers, but subsequent convicts were sentenced to Georgia from the UK against their will.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #8 posted 08/28/19 1:37pm

IanRG

.

On the right wing white wash - It is not a good argument to seek to downplay the impact of actual slavery whilst overemphasising indentured servitude. All this is saying is "we did not just do evil things to your people, we did evil things to other people who were different from us as well".

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #9 posted 08/28/19 2:08pm

poppys

IanRG said:

poppys said:

Georgia as a penal colony

The state of Georgia was not a penal colony in the sense usually meant, although it was initially settled almost entirely with convicts. Its founder was given the authority to take volunteers from the royal gaols, and he relied on debtors, prostitutes and the odd pickpocket for most of his initial population.

www.quora.com/Was-America-a-penal-colony

.

And many of the prisons in the USA today use their population as labour to produce incomes for the prisons. Although the prisoners do get some compensation / reward for their work.

.

My understanding is that, yes the original convicts were volunteers, but subsequent convicts were sentenced to Georgia from the UK against their will.


Guess that's why it says initial population. I think Quora.com is very simplistic in general, more aimed at younger school children doing their homework. I read more about it once, a long time ago.

Makes sense that instead of feeding people in jail, they sent them far away. Probably very handy for getting rid of people challenging the political status quo too.

[Edited 8/28/19 14:22pm]

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #10 posted 08/28/19 7:18pm

2elijah

avatar

luv4u said:

The Irish Slave Trade – The Forgotten “White” Slaves



https://www.globalresearch.ca/the-irish-slave-trade-the-forgotten-white-slaves/31076




Slavery in Ireland

https://en.wikipedia.org/...in_Ireland








Viking Age slave chain (found in Germany)



Slavery had already existed in Ireland for centuries by the time the Vikings began to establish their coastal settlements, but it was under the Norse-Gael Kingdom of Dublin that it reached its peak, in the 11th century.[1]






Did you read the entire article posted in page one of the thread? That first link to the book you posted, is one of the books that was said to have false info about Irish Slavery.

Here’s an excerpt from the article I posted regarding that link you posted about that book:


“Some of them are easy to disprove. Many of the memes use photographs, including of Jewish Holocaust victims or 20th century child laborers, to illustrate events they claim happened in the 17th century, long before the invention of photography. Many reference a nonexistent 1625 proclamation by King James II, who was not born until 1633.


They often hijack specific atrocities committed against black slaves and substitute Irish people for the actual victims. A favorite event to use is the 1781 Zong massacre, in which over 130 African slaves were thrown to their deaths off a slave ship.

InfoWars, the far-right conspiracy site favored by President Trump, is one site that has falsely claimed Irish people were the victims of the Zong massacre, whose death toll it inflated by adding a zero to the end.”
[Edited 9/7/19 14:08pm]
“Uncomfortable conversations creates change” — Anonymous
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #11 posted 08/28/19 7:19pm

2elijah

avatar

poppys said:



2elijah said:


For informational purpose: I was surprised to see this article written two years ago, because there is a popular book about Irish Slavery in America, that stated that the Irish who were enslaved in America, were treated worse than Africans who were enslaved here. This was mentioned in Sean O’callaghan’s book ‘To Hell or Barbados’. Even I believed what was written about it in that book, but now many historians are debunking what they call is a myth. https://www.google.com/ur...0081848146 Debunking a Myth: The Irish Were Not Slaves, Too By Liam Stack March 17, 2017 “It has shown up on Irish trivia Facebook pages, in Scientific American magazine, and on white nationalist message boards: the little-known story of the Irish slaves who built America, who are sometimes said to have outnumbered and been treated worse than slaves from Africa. But it’s not true. Historians say the idea of Irish slaves is based on a misreading of history and that the distortion is often politically motivated. Far-right memes have taken off online and are used as racist barbs against African-Americans. “The Irish were slaves, too,” the memes often say. “We got over it, so why can’t you?” A small group of Irish and American scholars has spent years pushing back on the false history. In 2016, 82 Irish scholars and writers signed an open letter denouncing the Irish slave myth and asking publications to stop mentioning it. Some complied, removing or revising articles that referenced the false claims, but the letter’s impact was limited. Fact vs. Fiction “The Irish slave narrative is based on the misinterpretation of the history of indentured servitude, which is how many poor Europeans migrated to North America and the Caribbean in the early colonial period, historians said. Without a doubt, life was bad for indentured servants. They were often treated brutally. Not all of them entered servitude willingly. Some were political prisoners. Some were children. “I’m not saying it was pleasant or anything — it was the opposite — but it was a completely different category from slavery,” said Liam Hogan, a research librarian in Ireland who has spearheaded the debunking effort. “It was a transitory state.” The legal differences between indentured servitude and chattel slavery were profound, according to Matthew Reilly, an archaeologist who studies Barbados. Unlike slaves, servants were considered legally human. Their servitude was based on a contract that limited their service to a finite period of time, usually about seven years, in exchange for passage to the colonies. They did not pass their unfree status on to descendants. Contemporary accounts in Ireland sometimes referred to these people as slaves, Mr. Hogan said. That was true in the sense that any form of coerced labor can be described as slavery, from Ancient Rome to modern-day human trafficking. But in colonial America and the Caribbean, the word “slavery” had a specific legal meaning. Europeans, by definition, were not included in it. “An indenture implies two people have entered into a contract with each other but slavery is not a contract,” said Leslie Harris, a professor of African-American history at Northwestern University. “It is often about being a prisoner of war or being bought or sold bodily as part of a trade. That is a critical distinction.” (Click on link) [Edited 8/28/19 5:12am]


Interesting thread topic 2e, thanks for posting. Fast forward to the present -

Feb 11, 2019 - Virginia's governor called slaves 'indentured servants' (CNN) Once again, Virginia's governor caused a nationwide facepalm with race-related comments. This time, Gov. Ralph Northam told "CBS This Morning" that slaves who landed on the shores of Virginia centuries ago were "indentured servants."

Mar 6, 2017 - Ben Carson refers to slaves as ‘immigrants’ in first speech to HUD A few days after being sworn in as the new Housing and Urban Development Secretary. pbs.com



It’s interesting how some try to put softener on ugly, historical truths. Smh.
[Edited 8/28/19 20:04pm]
“Uncomfortable conversations creates change” — Anonymous
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #12 posted 08/28/19 7:24pm

2elijah

avatar

IanRG said:



poppys said:




Georgia as a penal colony






The state of Georgia was not a penal colony in the sense usually meant, although it was initially settled almost entirely with convicts. Its founder was given the authority to take volunteers from the royal gaols, and he relied on debtors, prostitutes and the odd pickpocket for most of his initial population.



www.quora.com/Was-America-a-penal-colony






.


And many of the prisons in the USA today use their population as labour to produce incomes for the prisons. Although the prisoners do get some compensation / reward for their work.


.


My understanding is that, yes the original convicts were volunteers, but subsequent convicts were sentenced to Georgia from the UK against their will.


I worked for a state correctional agency’s administration office, (not in the prisons though), some years ago. They use minimum-level inmates only, in work release programs, and rent them out to construction companies, popular fast food and family restaurants, etc.,

Those employers call the State work-release program to request how many inmates, they need and for how long. A cheap labor force/modern day slavery in my opinion. Those inmates get paid way less than minimum wag.
[Edited 8/28/19 19:30pm]
“Uncomfortable conversations creates change” — Anonymous
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #13 posted 08/28/19 7:34pm

luv4u

Moderator

avatar

moderator

2elijah said:

luv4u said:

The Irish Slave Trade – The Forgotten “White” Slaves


https://www.globalresearch.ca/the-irish-slave-trade-the-forgotten-white-slaves/31076



Slavery in Ireland

https://en.wikipedia.org/...in_Ireland


Viking Age slave chain (found in Germany)

Slavery had already existed in Ireland for centuries by the time the Vikings began to establish their coastal settlements, but it was under the Norse-Gael Kingdom of Dublin that it reached its peak, in the 11th century.[1]



Did you read the entire article posted in page one of the thread? That was one of the books that was said to have false info about it: Here’s an excerpt from the article I posted regarding that link you posted about that book: “Some of them are easy to disprove. Many of the memes use photographs, including of Jewish Holocaust victims or 20th century child laborers, to illustrate events they claim happened in the 17th century, long before the invention of photography. Many reference a nonexistent 1625 proclamation by King James II, who was not born until 1633. They often hijack specific atrocities committed against black slaves and substitute Irish people for the actual victims. A favorite event to use is the 1781 Zong massacre, in which over 130 African slaves were thrown to their deaths off a slave ship. InfoWars, the far-right conspiracy site favored by President Trump, is one site that has falsely claimed Irish people were the victims of the Zong massacre, whose death toll it inflated by adding a zero to the end.”



I stand by the links I posted.

Edmonton, AB - canada
Mod Goddess of the SNIP & BAN Making Moves - OF4S
Ohh purple joy oh purple bliss oh purple rapture!
REAL MUSIC by REAL MUSICIANS - Prince
"I kind of wish there was a reason for Prince to make the site crash more" ~~ Ben
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #14 posted 08/28/19 7:53pm

2elijah

avatar

luv4u said:



2elijah said:


luv4u said:

The Irish Slave Trade – The Forgotten “White” Slaves



https://www.globalresearch.ca/the-irish-slave-trade-the-forgotten-white-slaves/31076




Slavery in Ireland

https://en.wikipedia.org/...in_Ireland








Viking Age slave chain (found in Germany)



Slavery had already existed in Ireland for centuries by the time the Vikings began to establish their coastal settlements, but it was under the Norse-Gael Kingdom of Dublin that it reached its peak, in the 11th century.[1]






Did you read the entire article posted in page one of the thread? That was one of the books that was said to have false info about it: Here’s an excerpt from the article I posted regarding that link you posted about that book: “Some of them are easy to disprove. Many of the memes use photographs, including of Jewish Holocaust victims or 20th century child laborers, to illustrate events they claim happened in the 17th century, long before the invention of photography. Many reference a nonexistent 1625 proclamation by King James II, who was not born until 1633. They often hijack specific atrocities committed against black slaves and substitute Irish people for the actual victims. A favorite event to use is the 1781 Zong massacre, in which over 130 African slaves were thrown to their deaths off a slave ship. InfoWars, the far-right conspiracy site favored by President Trump, is one site that has falsely claimed Irish people were the victims of the Zong massacre, whose death toll it inflated by adding a zero to the end.”



I stand by the links I posted.



Lol, I’m not saying you shouldn’t. I was just asking because I was wondering if you read the initial article, because the article/book you posted is mentioned in the initial article, and just letting you know, it is one of the books Mr. Hogan and some scholars are debunking some of the info in it. That’s all.

Anyway, another book that I posted about Irish slavery, some years ago on this site, is also being debunked and mentioned in the article.

It’s by Sean O'Callaghan and titled To Hell or Barbados: The Ethnic Cleansing of Ireland. This was the books where I read about Irish slavery. The initial article on page one, caught my attention, because I remember reading about Irish slavery in this book, and was surprised that the info in it is also being debunked by some Mr. Hogan and sone Irish Scholars.
[Edited 9/7/19 14:10pm]
“Uncomfortable conversations creates change” — Anonymous
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #15 posted 08/28/19 8:09pm

IanRG

poppys said:

IanRG said:

.

And many of the prisons in the USA today use their population as labour to produce incomes for the prisons. Although the prisoners do get some compensation / reward for their work.

.

My understanding is that, yes the original convicts were volunteers, but subsequent convicts were sentenced to Georgia from the UK against their will.


Guess that's why it says initial population. I think Quora.com is very simplistic in general, more aimed at younger school children doing their homework. I read more about it once, a long time ago.

Makes sense that instead of feeding people in jail, they sent them far away. Probably very handy for getting rid of people challenging the political status quo too.

[Edited 8/28/19 14:22pm]

.

It all happens in a historical sequence:

.

1 The colony if Georgia starts initially using volunteer convicts.

.

2 It refuses to allow purchased slaves.

.

3 The British Courts start convicting people against their will directly to Georgia as convict slaves.

.

4 This becomes more expensive than the purchased slaves as used in South Carolina.

.

5 1749 Georgia switches from convict slaves to purchased slaves.

.

6 UK prisons keep on growing with punitive punishments for small and minor crimes.

.

7 1770 Joseph Banks sales with Captain Cook to the east cost of Australia.

.

8 There are various incidents and battles with the French with your War of Independence, what is happening in Canada, the Seven Year's war, Battle of Saintes etc. Plus the competing colonisations round the word starting to reach out into the Pacific.

.

9 Banks pushes for a colonisation of Australia. This ends up being by the military and convicts to stop the French from doing the same.

.

10 The French fall apart with the Revolution and Napoleon takes over with a continental focus (with eyes on India, North Africa and North America)

.

11 In the meantime, slavery was not allowed on English soil and this was affirmed in the courts in 1772. In 1807 the Slave Trade Act limited the slave trade to just by the British East India Company (the main British user and trader of slaves) and in 1833 they banned all slavery in the Empire with the Slave Abolition Act.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #16 posted 08/28/19 8:09pm

2elijah

avatar

IanRG said:

.


On the right wing white wash - It is not a good argument to seek to downplay the impact of actual slavery whilst overemphasising indentured servitude. All this is saying is "we did not just do evil things to your people, we did evil things to other people who were different from us as well".





This is interesting. I don’t really like Wikipedia as a source, but again was surprised to see this in there:

Irish slaves myth


https://en.m.wikipedia.or...laves_myth


“The Irish slaves myth concerns the use of the term Irish "slaves" as a conflation of the penal transportation and indentured servitude of Irish people during the 17th and 18th centuries. Some white nationalists, and others who want to minimize the hereditary chattel slavery experience of Africans and their descendants, have used the false equivalence myth to attack contemporary African American efforts for equality and reparations. The Irish slaves myth has also been invoked by some Irish activists, to highlight the British oppression of the Irish people and to suppress the history of Irish involvement in the transatlantic slave trade.[2]

The myth has become increasingly prominent since the 1990s and has been prominent in online memes and social media debates.[3] This has led a large number of historians to publicly condemn it.[3][4)”
“Uncomfortable conversations creates change” — Anonymous
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #17 posted 08/29/19 7:33am

2freaky4church
1

avatar

The Irish were treated pretty bad. The potato famine was awful. The rich British oligarchs made them work for potatos.

All you others say Hell Yea!! woot!
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #18 posted 08/29/19 11:39am

2elijah

avatar

2freaky4church1 said:

The Irish were treated pretty bad. The potato famine was awful. The rich British oligarchs made them work for potatos.


I’ve heard about that. But I’m wondering why some Irish scholars are debunking Irish slavery in some places, like in America in the past.
“Uncomfortable conversations creates change” — Anonymous
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #19 posted 08/29/19 1:02pm

luv4u

Moderator

avatar

moderator

2freaky4church1 said:

The Irish were treated pretty bad. The potato famine was awful. The rich British oligarchs made them work for potatos.

And that's why a lot of people perished. Most that could afford it left Ireland for America to start a new life.


Potatoe famine: https://www.history.com/t...ato-famine




Moving to America: https://www.irish-genealo...erica.html

Edmonton, AB - canada
Mod Goddess of the SNIP & BAN Making Moves - OF4S
Ohh purple joy oh purple bliss oh purple rapture!
REAL MUSIC by REAL MUSICIANS - Prince
"I kind of wish there was a reason for Prince to make the site crash more" ~~ Ben
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #20 posted 08/29/19 1:16pm

IanRG

luv4u said:

2freaky4church1 said:

The Irish were treated pretty bad. The potato famine was awful. The rich British oligarchs made them work for potatos.

And that's why a lot of people perished. Most that could afford it left Ireland for America to start a new life.


Potatoe famine: https://www.history.com/t...ato-famine




Moving to America: https://www.irish-genealo...erica.html

.

Agreed, so these immigrants were clearly not slaves.

.

The potato famine was not because people were made to work for potatoes, it was because the landlords (primarily remote English landowners) severely restricted the area of the farms allowed to be used by the tenant farmers to provide for themselves. The farmers were very reliant on growing potatoes in these small personal use plots and the breed of potato got a blight. The farmers and their familes were dying of malnutrition whilst seeing the rest of produce of their farm being exported to feed England.

[Edited 8/29/19 13:19pm]

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #21 posted 08/29/19 1:22pm

2elijah

avatar

IanRG said:



luv4u said:




2freaky4church1 said:


The Irish were treated pretty bad. The potato famine was awful. The rich British oligarchs made them work for potatos.





And that's why a lot of people perished. Most that could afford it left Ireland for America to start a new life.


Potatoe famine: https://www.history.com/t...ato-famine




Moving to America: https://www.irish-genealo...erica.html



.


Agreed, so these immigrants were clearly not slaves.


.


The potato famine was not because people were made to work for potatoes, it was because the landlords (primarily remote English landowners) severely restricted the area of the farms allowed to be used by the tenant farmers to provide for themselves. The farmers were very reliant on growing potatoes in these small personal use plots and the breed of potato got a blight. The farmers and their familes were dying of malnutrition whilst seeing the rest of produce of their farm being exported to feed England.

[Edited 8/29/19 13:19pm]


Thanks for that Ian, you always come through.
“Uncomfortable conversations creates change” — Anonymous
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #22 posted 09/03/19 8:16am

jaawwnn

avatar

2elijah said:

2freaky4church1 said:

The Irish were treated pretty bad. The potato famine was awful. The rich British oligarchs made them work for potatos.

I’ve heard about that. But I’m wondering why some Irish scholars are debunking Irish slavery in some places, like in America in the past.

Generally because the Irish slaves myth is used by racists in America to talk down chattel slavery, as if indentured servants and slaves were the same thing. Irish people generally aren't huge fans of Irish-Americans for that very reason. We're embarrassed for them.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #23 posted 09/03/19 1:45pm

guitarslinger4
4

avatar

I've never heard of the Irish being slaves in North America, I always heard it was related to the Turks ransacking a part of Ireland and bringing them to North Africa:


https://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/the-irish-slaves-in-north-africa-26354879.html


So the horror of inhabitants finding their homes besieged and set on fire, opening their doors to Barbary Pirates, then dragged off to become slaves in North Africa - men, women and children - may be difficult to imagine. Des Ekin paints an effective word picture of what happened to them.



It began on Monday, June 20 of 1631 when 230 troops of the Turkish Ottoman Empire and Barbary Coast Pirates from North Africa carried out the 'sacking of Baltimore.' The author appears to have spent a lot of time researching the tale of the life of slavery to which the villagers were subjected in Algiers and how some captives converted to Islam because their lifestyles as slaves were actually better than at home in Ireland under British rule.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #24 posted 09/04/19 8:33am

jaawwnn

avatar

guitarslinger44 said:

I've never heard of the Irish being slaves in North America, I always heard it was related to the Turks ransacking a part of Ireland and bringing them to North Africa:


https://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/the-irish-slaves-in-north-africa-26354879.html


So the horror of inhabitants finding their homes besieged and set on fire, opening their doors to Barbary Pirates, then dragged off to become slaves in North Africa - men, women and children - may be difficult to imagine. Des Ekin paints an effective word picture of what happened to them.



It began on Monday, June 20 of 1631 when 230 troops of the Turkish Ottoman Empire and Barbary Coast Pirates from North Africa carried out the 'sacking of Baltimore.' The author appears to have spent a lot of time researching the tale of the life of slavery to which the villagers were subjected in Algiers and how some captives converted to Islam because their lifestyles as slaves were actually better than at home in Ireland under British rule.

It appeared on IrishCentral in recent years, which made it seem like it was genuinely something that happened, I don't know if it's still on that website but here's Liam Hogan's work on it it:

https://medium.com/@Limer...65e445802a

He's fairly made it his full-time job to tear apart the myth.

Here's his selection of comments taken from the Irish central FB page when one of the pieces was shared, obviously a comment is just a comment but it's certainly indicative of a certain mindset. I'm sure some (in fact, lots) of it is just people interested in their heritage not realizing that they are being lied to but it can go to some dark places.


[Edited 9/4/19 8:49am]

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #25 posted 09/04/19 9:23am

guitarslinger4
4

avatar

Again, I'm not disputing that it's possibly a myth, I've never heard anything about Irish being slaves in North America until this thread actually.

But there were Irish taken as slaves in the Barbary Coast slave trade and maybe that's what people are referring to, but trying to rewrite history to suit their purposes by saying Irish were slaves in North America too.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #26 posted 09/04/19 9:25am

jaawwnn

avatar

guitarslinger44 said:

Again, I'm not disputing that it's possibly a myth, I've never heard anything about Irish being slaves in North America until this thread actually. But there were Irish taken as slaves in the Barbary Coast slave trade and maybe that's what people are referring to, but trying to rewrite history to suit their purposes by saying Irish were slaves in North America too.

Whether or not you personally have heard of the myth, the links demonstrate with lots of evidence that it is a very pervasive myth. Maybe you just never came across it, that's fine.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #27 posted 09/04/19 4:45pm

2elijah

avatar

jaawwnn said:



2elijah said:


2freaky4church1 said:

The Irish were treated pretty bad. The potato famine was awful. The rich British oligarchs made them work for potatos.



I’ve heard about that. But I’m wondering why some Irish scholars are debunking Irish slavery in some places, like in America in the past.

Generally because the Irish slaves myth is used by racists in America to talk down chattel slavery, as if indentured servants and slaves were the same thing. Irish people generally aren't huge fans of Irish-Americans for that very reason. We're embarrassed for them.


What about the book ‘To Hell or Barbados’

I believe I read that they were slaves in North America and many were sent to Barbados, and they were worth less than African slaves in America back then. I need to find the part in that book where I read that. Not sure now if any of that is true now since I ran across Hogan’s article. In another book I read they weren’t warmly welcomed to the New World as immigrants, and some of them took jobs as bounty hunters, to catch former African slaves of the south who escaped to the north to be free. Many did it to appease/be accepted by other Europeans in the North who were classified as White.
[Edited 9/4/19 18:24pm]
“Uncomfortable conversations creates change” — Anonymous
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #28 posted 09/05/19 5:08am

jaawwnn

avatar

2elijah said:

jaawwnn said:

Generally because the Irish slaves myth is used by racists in America to talk down chattel slavery, as if indentured servants and slaves were the same thing. Irish people generally aren't huge fans of Irish-Americans for that very reason. We're embarrassed for them.

What about the book ‘To Hell or Barbados’ I believe I read that they were slaves in North America and many were sent to Barbados, and they were worth less than African slaves in America back then. I need to find the part in that book where I read that. Not sure now if any of that is true now since I ran across Hogan’s article. In another book I read they weren’t warmly welcomed to the New World as immigrants, and some of them took jobs as bounty hunters, to catch former African slaves of the south who escaped to the north to be free. Many did it to appease/be accepted by other Europeans in the North who were classified as White. [Edited 9/4/19 18:24pm]

Well I haven't read it but my understanding is that it's generally considered to be a best selling fraudulent piece of work. There's no doubt that the Irish were treated badly and that life as an indentured servant was far from nice but it's still a world of difference to being a slave. Not to mention the unpleasant fact that many Irish who left for America were or became slave-owners themselves.


To Hell or Barbados is a work that is riddled with basic errors and there is not enough space nor time to enumerate and expose them all. It is a book about an important and traumatic period in Irish history that is utterly ruined and discredited by flights of fancy, a compulsive need to conflate indentured servitude or forced labour with the experience of the chattel slave. Despite the large number of fallacies that this work promotes, it has had a considerable and disturbing influence on Irish public memory of the Cromwellian conquest. Thus an important question needs to be asked, how did such a flawed work gain a prominent position in Irish culture, inspiring numerous documentaries, novels, articles and even songs and albums? How was this work, which appropriated the horrific punishments meted out to enslaved Africans across the Anglo-Caribbean, being continuously and uncritically absorbed by thousands of people each year?

Firstly, O’Callaghan’s book focussed on what was then a relatively overlooked piece of Irish history and it was in turn universally lauded by a number of leading national newspapers in Ireland. It was described as a “fascinating read” (The Sunday Tribune), “wonderful” (The Irish Times) and “essential reading” (The Irish Examiner). Notably none of the reviewers were historians of slavery, or the Early Modern Period, and so they simply did not have the knowledge to recognise the archive of errors within.



[Edited 9/5/19 5:11am]

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #29 posted 09/05/19 7:13am

poppys

jaawwnn said:

2elijah said:

jaawwnn said: What about the book ‘To Hell or Barbados’ I believe I read that they were slaves in North America and many were sent to Barbados, and they were worth less than African slaves in America back then. I need to find the part in that book where I read that. Not sure now if any of that is true now since I ran across Hogan’s article. In another book I read they weren’t warmly welcomed to the New World as immigrants, and some of them took jobs as bounty hunters, to catch former African slaves of the south who escaped to the north to be free. Many did it to appease/be accepted by other Europeans in the North who were classified as White. [Edited 9/4/19 18:24pm]

Well I haven't read it but my understanding is that it's generally considered to be a best selling fraudulent piece of work. There's no doubt that the Irish were treated badly and that life as an indentured servant was far from nice but it's still a world of difference to being a slave. Not to mention the unpleasant fact that many Irish who left for America were or became slave-owners themselves.


To Hell or Barbados is a work that is riddled with basic errors and there is not enough space nor time to enumerate and expose them all. It is a book about an important and traumatic period in Irish history that is utterly ruined and discredited by flights of fancy, a compulsive need to conflate indentured servitude or forced labour with the experience of the chattel slave. Despite the large number of fallacies that this work promotes, it has had a considerable and disturbing influence on Irish public memory of the Cromwellian conquest. Thus an important question needs to be asked, how did such a flawed work gain a prominent position in Irish culture, inspiring numerous documentaries, novels, articles and even songs and albums? How was this work, which appropriated the horrific punishments meted out to enslaved Africans across the Anglo-Caribbean, being continuously and uncritically absorbed by thousands of people each year?

Firstly, O’Callaghan’s book focussed on what was then a relatively overlooked piece of Irish history and it was in turn universally lauded by a number of leading national newspapers in Ireland. It was described as a “fascinating read” (The Sunday Tribune), “wonderful” (The Irish Times) and “essential reading” (The Irish Examiner). Notably none of the reviewers were historians of slavery, or the Early Modern Period, and so they simply did not have the knowledge to recognise the archive of errors within.


Interesting. Makes sense.

Seems trans-atlantic slavery was so horrible that people will do anything to distance themselves from it. Including fabricating things that happened to their 'group'. It would be better if we could just acknowledge it. The enormity of it all happened over many hundreds of years, 300 years is 15 generations. It was an economic system that ran Europe and the Americas for so long. Individual stories tend to get lost in overviews.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Page 1 of 2 12>
Reply   New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Forums > Politics & Religion > Debunking a Myth: The Irish Were Not Slaves, Too