Biden Administration Supports Reparations Study As New Bill Is Introduced In Congress

It’s undisputed that large numbers of Europeans arrived here in some form of servitide — maybe even half.
What’s at issue is a) how well were they treayed and b) were they then freed according to their contracts?
You claim that many (most?) Were not on voluntary contracts but were instead kidnapped & held against their wills.

History records one reason for the War of 1812 was this practice in the British navy of kidnapping US sailors for impressment in the British navy.
That suggests Americans were violently opposed to such forms of enslavement.
So it seems unlikely Americans would tolerate massive kidnapping & permanent enslavements among themselves.

For one thing, the USA is huge, and people especially whites who wanted to could just walk away from their “owners”.
Unlike with black slaves, there were zero organized slave-catchers going after escaped “white slaves”.

We should also note that in those days life was often “brutish, nasty & short” even under normal conditions, and what people would toletate then was a far cry from conditions today.

Bottom line: suggestions that there were millions of “ white slaves” in, say, 1776, are gross & unfair exaggerations.

again, read the links or don’t- i don’t care- what you are saying flies in the face of reality-

[[For one thing, the USA is huge, and people especially whites who wanted to could just walk away from their “owners”.
Unlike with black slaves, there were zero organized slave-catchers going after escaped “white slaves”.]]

Flat out untruth- you woudl know that if you bothered reading any of the link i posted—

Again- ignore the links if you wish- but what you are saying simply isn’t true- I posted the research into the the issue- Claiming what you are doesn’t jive with facts-

Bob434: "I’ll get into treatment in a little bit, but what would any thinking person call this?”

White Slaves in America?

I finally had time to read your link.
It is not surprising or shocking, it's simply a recounting of a very small part of the human history of slavery:

"Evidences of slavery antedate written records; the practice has existed in many[13] if not most cultures.[14]
Mass slavery requires economic surpluses and a high population-density to be viable.[15]
Due to these factors, the practice of slavery would have only proliferated after the invention of agriculture during the Neolithic Revolution, about 11,000 years ago."

I'd argue that's just nonsense depending on the fact that "slavery" is a legal concept requiring enforced law, meaning civilization, but involuntary servitude must be as old as the human race itself, and I submit as evidence the ancient Roman Rape of the Sabine Women.
The idea that young warriors would assault their neighbors and abduct young women by force did not need civilization to invent.
And these women, like some white women abducted by American Indians, often bore & raised their children -- at what point, if ever, did "involuntary servitude" become family?

Point is: there were slaves from time immemorial, with or without the sanctions of law.

But there is no reason to exaggerate the role of "white slavery" in Britain's North American colonies.
First of all, the examples your link cites are all from the 1600s and all from the Caribbean Islands, not North America.

Indeed, in American colonies like Jamestown, the whole reason they finally went to African slaves was because they had already tried everyone else possible, and none of them worked!.
"White slaves" in Virginia couldn't be used to grow tobacco or anything else of value.
African slaves worked harder with less complaints.

Bottom line: there's no evidence in your link of massive numbers of "white slaves" kidnapped and held against their will in England's North American colonies of the 1700s, or in the United States in the 1800s.

goodbye

Bob434: "Nope! Nothing there about folks being hired to come to America to work as indentured slaves.
They were kidnapped, just like black slaves were.
No distinction between the two
Your denial of white slavery in america is baffling."

Some were kidnapped, some were convicts enslaved by the Brits for crimes, some were "sold" by their parents to pay debts, some sold themselves for a limited time: indentured servants.

Much of your article simply expands on the British philosopher Thomas Hobbes' description of 17th century life as sometimes, "SOLITARY, POOR, NASTY, BRUTISH, AND SHORT".
Huge numbers -- a third or more -- died within a year of arriving in North America.
Only a few lived long enough to be freed from their indentures and of those even fewer became land owners.
Their treatment was so poor in 1676 it caused a rebellion in Virginia of servants, known as Bacon's Rebellion, which did force some improvements.

By 1800 Americans forced the British to stop sending us their convicts, it's the reason about 168,000 were then shipped to Australia.

Buh Bye- not playin the games- you have enough evidence in the various links provided- either read them and learn about what took place or don’t-

Bob434: "Buh Bye- not playin the games- you have enough evidence in the various links provided- either read them and learn about what took place or don’t-"

I read them.
They are simple history, nothing more.
They say nothing to justify your ridiculous claims.

[[They are simple history, nothing more]]

Wow. Okie Dobie then. History be Damned!

"Wow. Okie Dobie then. History be Damned!"

No, history is important, accurately reported.
Your links looked fine to me, no disagreement with them.
Your characterizations of what they say... that's something different, FRiend.

[[Your characterizations of what they say... that’s something different,]]

Yeah sure- you’re ‘indentured servgaNT’ silliness wasn’t a bastardization of history at all- nope no siree!

"Yeah sure- you’re ‘indentured servgaNT’ silliness wasn’t a bastardization of history at all- nope no siree!"

Sorry, FRiend, but you are a very confused puppy, with no real clues as to what you are ranting about.
Your links are perfectly fine, but you didn't really read them yourself and so misunderstand what they say.

I don't think I can help you with basic reading comprehension.
You were supposed to learn that in school.

Your petty insults aside, I understand 5he evidence just fine. You are the one astardizing the historical facts that too, place. “Nothing but indentured servants who worked off their freedom”... y e p, sure they did. Yes sirree Bob!

The links, prove otherwise but do keep personally insulting me, it really helps your case. And before you complain that stating that you are bastardizing history, it is a fact that you are doing so. Those links prove that people who came here were beaten and worked to death and denied their contractual right (those that were actually “lu KY enough” if you can call it that, to have a contract. Which never was honored) to freedo when their terms were up.

You wanna play games and pretend that because so e had contracts that it really was indentured servitude, then that’s your business. But history proves that no, they were not truly I indentured servants, and were worked and beat e en to death and denied their freedoms whe there terms were up

IF you have evidence that contradicts this, the present it civilly, engaging in Personal attacks doesn’t refute the facts, and saying nah uh doesn’t either. Show me the historical facts that prove the vast majority of white people stolen against their wiols, brought here and sold back and forth between owners ,in vil.ation of the contract f to, were free people and not jnf a ft slaves until. They died in their captivity

Bob434: "Your petty insults aside..."

You don't want to pay attention, your mind just wanders all over creation, making ridiculous claims -- those are facts, FRiend, not "petty insults".

Bob434: "You are the one astardizing the historical facts that too, place.
“Nothing but indentured servants who worked off their freedom”... y e p, sure they did.
Yes sirree Bob!"

So you're going to claim there were no "indentured servants" under contract, who eventually worked off their indentures and became freed citizens?
That's ridiculous.

Your links report that some of the earliest settlers here were convicts taken from prisons, or poor people kidnapped off the streets of, say, London.
They say many (most?) were kept in slavery until they died, which for most was just a few years, if even that long.
Here is how a different source reports those numbers:

"The total number of European immigrants to all 13 colonies before 1775 was 500,000–550,000; of these, 55,000 were involuntary prisoners.
Of the 450,000 or so European arrivals who came voluntarily, Tomlins estimates that 48% were indentured.[15]
About 75% were under the age of 25.
The age of legal adulthood for men was 24 years; those over 24 generally came on contracts lasting about 3 years.[16]
Regarding the children who came, Gary Nash reports that, "many of the servants were actually nephews, nieces, cousins and children of friends of emigrating Englishmen, who paid their passage in return for their labor once in America."[17]"

Did you catch that?
In 1776 the US population was roughly 3 million and they were the offspring of ~550,000 immigrants from Europe.
Of the 550,000 immigrants, about 55,000 were your prisoners.
Another ~240,000 were "indentured servants" of whom those over the legal age of 24 (~60,000) were typically indentured for three years.
Many of the children (~180,000) were family members who worked until their majority.

That same piece goes on to say:

"The majority of indentured servants ended up in the American South, where cash crops necessitated labor-intensive farming.
As the Northern colonies moved toward industrialization, they received far less indentured immigration.[42]
For example, 96% of English emigrants to Virginia and Maryland from 1773 to 1776 were indentured servants.
During the same time period, 2% of English emigrants to New England were indentured.[43]"

And then there's this:

"Even as late as 1770, William Eddis, the English surveyor of customs at Annapolis, thought that the Maryland Negroes were better off than 'the Europeans, over whom the rigid planter exercises an inflexible severity.'
The Negroes, Eddis thought, were a lifelong property so were treated with a certain care, but the whites were 'strained to the utmost to perform their allotted labour.'[39]"

Did you catch that?
White indentured servants were worked harder because they'd only be there a short time, whereas lifelong black slaves had a much easier time of it.

Now, are you still confused?
Why is that?

again- most of those coming over “Voluntarily” were screwed out of their contracts- beaten and worked to death- what don’t you understand about that? You are cherry picking excerpts to uphold your false narrative-

[[So you’re going to claim there were no “indentured servants” under contract, who eventually worked off their indentures and became freed citizens?]]

NOWHERE did i say anything like that- stop putting words in my mouth to try to make your false narrative seem true-

Your liberal source flies in the face of the facts- There are a number of sites that contradict that ‘most worked off their contracts’ and were set free- The first link i posted has studied this issue thoroughly- and your wikipedia site- which has not- isn’t giving you facts- The links provided show that these contracts were NOT honored- contrary to your wiki site- There were far more than 55,000 kidnapped slaves- Several of the sites point that out- Contracts were NOT honored- that won’t change no matter how many wiki quotes you copy and paste-

Hell, even the NYT admits that white slaves were beaten to death, worked to Death, and never got their freedoms because they kept being denied it in court as pointed out by the source i listed-

Are you still confused? Why is that? There is plenty of evidence to contradict your wiki propaganda so that you don’t have to be- -

From the l inks i gave you

“In the past, white slavery was acknowledged as having existed in America only as “indentured servitude.”

Such indentured servants were, for the most part, convicts, who served a term of four to seven years laboring on the farms, plantations, and estates in Virginia, Georgia, Maryland, and the Carolinas in exchange for their freedom. But they represented only a small fraction of the hundreds of thousands of whites who remained slaves for life. Such slavery was hereditary: children of the white slaves also became chattel without hope of freedom”

“In George Sandy’s laws for Virginia, Whites were enslaved “forever.” The service of Whites bound to Berkeley’s Hundred was deemed “perpetual.””

“Throughout the colonial period, white slaves remained the main labour force on the Virginia and Maryland plantations, outnumbering Africans by as many as four to one.”

“1652 alone, the population of the Irish fell from 1,466,000 to 616,000. That’s because roughly 500,000 Irish were killed by the English and another 300,000 were sold as slaves. But that’s over 50% of their entire people.”

“In the Calendar of State Papers, Colonial Series; America and West Indies of 1701, we read of a protest over the “encouragement to the spiriting away of Englishmen without their consent and selling them for slaves,”

” John Pory declared in 1619, “white slaves are our principle wealth.”

People from the British Isles were kidnapped, put in chains and crammed into ships that transported hundreds of them at a time. Their destination was Virginia Boston, New York, Barbados and the West Indies. The white slaves were treated the same or worse than the black slave. The white slave did not fetch a good price at the auction blocks. Bridenbaugh wrote in his accounting on page 118, that having paid a bigger price for the Negro, the planters treated the black better than they did their “Christian” white servant. Even the Negroes recognized this and did not hesitate to show their contempt for those white men who, they could see, were worse off than themselves.”

“At least 70,000 white men, women, and children from England and Ireland were shipped to the colonies to be sold as slaves on the auction block during the 170 years of British rule.”

These were NOT indentured servants- contrary to your weird insistence otherwise- They were stolen and sold as slaves- and spent their lives in salvery

Now, are you still confused?
Why is that?

Bob434: "again- most of those coming over “Voluntarily” were screwed out of their contracts- beaten and worked to death- what don’t you understand about that?
You are cherry picking excerpts to uphold your false narrative-"

I think I know part of what has you so confused.
You've conflated the shipment of white prisoners to British Caribbean Islands with those sent to North America, and so exaggerated both the total numbers and the brutality of their treatment.

Bob434: "NOWHERE did i say anything like that- stop putting words in my mouth to try to make your false narrative seem true-"

No, that's exactly what you've been trying to sell us.
You wish to maximize the numbers and brutal treatment of prisoners shipped to Britain's North American colonies while minimizing the numbers & eventual release of voluntary indentured servants.
Your exaggerations are in service of some purpose which is not at all clear to me...

Bob434: "There were far more than 55,000 kidnapped slaves- Several of the sites point that out- "

Sure, but only if you include prisoners shipped to Britain's Caribbean Island colonies -- go back and read it again.

Bob434: "Contracts were NOT honored- that won’t change no matter how many wiki quotes you copy and paste-"

First, I notice you've stopped copying & pasting any quotes, and instead just rant insanely.
Second, of course, prisoners had no "contracts" and often soon died, no question about that.
And convicts represented about 10% of immigrants to the original 13 colonies.

Bob434: "Hell, even the NYT admits that white slaves were beaten to death, worked to Death, and never got their freedoms because they kept being denied it in court as pointed out by the source i listed-"

Sure, some, a few of the children who came as family members with no contracts, required to work until their majority may have felt obliged to continue working after, or, if young women, to marry against their wills... all sorts of bad things happen in the affairs of mankind...

It does not mean that all, or even the majority, were abused, mistreated or killed.
Neither the numbers nor anecdotes bear out such claims.

Bob434: "At least 70,000 white men, women, and children from England and Ireland were shipped to the colonies to be sold as slaves on the auction block during the 170 years of British rule."

So, here's where things stand: your source says 70,000 captive prisoners shipped, including to Britain's Caribbean colonies.
My source said ~55,000 just to the 13 North American colonies.
The difference works out to about 100 prisoners per year, a small shipload.

In the mean time, the total number of immigrants was roughly 550,000 of which something like half (~240,000) were voluntary indentured servants.
Of those about 60,000 were adults with (typically) 3-year contracts, the rest were children travelling with their families.
How well or poorly their families treated children is a matter we might want to debate, so I'd argue their families treated them roughly as well in this country as they would have back in their home countries.