Posted on 06/20/2020 10:56:07 AM PDT by Ken H
Two-thirds of Black Americans favor renaming Confederate bases
As the country grapples with a widespread reckoning over the prevalence of racism, majorities of Americans are resistant to renaming U.S. military bases that carry the names of Confederate leaders, and are voicing particular opposition to providing descendants of slaves with reparations, according to a new ABC News/Ipsos poll released Friday.
While 56% are opposed to changing U.S. military bases named for Confederate leaders, which stand as a reminder of the nation’s complicated history with race, 42% of Americans support the move.
Nearly three-fourths of Americans believe that the federal government should not provide payments to black Americans whose ancestors were slaves to compensate for the toll of slavery. Only 26% of Americans are in favor of reparations.
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
I do believe I said “in the 1850s” when I replied about the Irish being slaves. I have no doubt that in earlier Colonial periods, there was in fact slavery of Irish and other whites. This practice had in fact died out by the 1850s, and, in any case, was never to the industrial level as was practiced in the 1850s, nor was it enshrined in the legal fabric of the nation.
Just to make it clear, I am not in favor or reparations to any descendants of any enslaved persons. I just believe that the formal enslavement of nearly 4 million African Americans in this country is without parallel.
actually it’s not without parallel- Jews have been enslaved by the millions as have other groups- and like i mentioned- it’s becoming known that whites were enslaved in larger numbers than black folks have been and for a much longer period of time-
This isn’t to excuse any of it- it is just to get the facts out there that they don’t wish to admit- Many black folks were slave owners, and many black folks were slave traders- and many many white folks were slaves-
Also note- I didnt’ see you mention anything about time periods- all i saw was your question about links to sites that speak about the study- you state you hadn’t heard about any of it before- so i assumed you wanted info about the fact that whites were taken as slaves- and not just irish whites either- Brits were taken as slaves, White Christians were taken as slaves- Heck- it’s still going on- with the sex slave trade- white folks are kidnapped and forced into prostitution- This is no less horrible-
and white folks even in recent years were forced into sweat camps- which is also a form of slavery- many died in these camps from malnutrition, overwork, abuse etc-
in 2010 it was estimated that 27+ million people worldwide- black and white, were slaves in some form or another- sweat shops- ‘indentured servants’ (that are indistinguishable to actual slaves), sex slaves, both male and female- white and black and every color- forced slavery for debts- etc- this is all still going on- and black folks are just as guilty as white folks of committing these atrocities- even in modern times-
[[This practice had in fact died out by the 1850s,]]
not true- as mentioned above- it wasn’t just irish or white during a set time period- it’s still going on- with all races being both victims and oppressors- and really, that has nothing to do with the fact that one group is demanding reparations while ignoring the fact that white folks were slaves too, and that the numbers were likely larger than black slaves- it also ignores the fact that black slave owners and black slave traders was very common- even in the 1900’s -
Why is one group special and demanding reparations, while many folks of the white race are also ‘ancestors of folks who were enslaved’? It’s not because recent slave owners were more brutal- that isn’t the case- Some slave owners all down through history- even to this day- are and were brutal- Are the more special and thus more deserving because the majority of black slaves were until 160 years ago kept as slaves? Do they think they are more deserving than other races because they claim they were taken in larger numbers than other slaves? If so- we’re finding that likely isn’t even true-
Not sure why one group of slaves think they are more entitled to reparations than any other race of people- Christians have been forced into slavery for many 1000’s of years- brutally treated- boiled alive, skinned alive, fed to animals while still alive- set on fire to entertain the crowds- (back during roman times), White folks forced into sex slavery, work slavery- etc- beaten, tortured, maltreated- etc etc- many maltreated by black owners- some by white owners- many by muslim owners- Every race has had slaves, and been slaves themselves practically down through the years- no one group gets to claim special consideration
“Other parts of Europe, Italy, Spain, France, Portugal, Netherlands, Sicily, Malta and as northwards as Iceland were raided by African pirates whose sole purpose was to capture European slaves.”
http://blog.swaliafrica.com/when-europeans-were-slaves-to-africans/
>>Well then when they pass the legislation you should be able to apply for reparations. Since so many of your kin were slaves.<<
Yep. It continues to haunt me, like a Quenetin Tarrantino movie.
[[Just to be clear, I’m talking about the 1850s era, and not when there was indentured servants earlier ]]
Ok- thsi was your post to another fella after your post to me- but I’ll address that-
“Indentured servants’ is a term used by those who deny the fact that whites were slaves throughout history- while some folks were truly indentured servants- that is not what the irish were they were property of owners- Revisionist historians want to whitewash this fact by calling them ‘indentured servants’-
[[Really? An Irishman could have his children taken away from him and be sold without his consent?
If an Irishman left his job, he could be hunted down with dogs and whipped?
An Irishman’s boss could sell him to another boss and ship him across the country without his consent?]]
“But the Irish did suffer tremendously and there is a clear tendency to undermine that truth. Adults and children were torn from their homes, transported to the colonies in bondage against their will, and sold into a system of prolonged servitude.
The argument goes that the Irish were indentured servants and therefore could be set free at some point after they had worked like slaves literally for years.
But, as the following court case from 1661 shows, the terms of servitude were not always so cut and dry, with masters extending them at will, with full support of the court system and laws of the day.
What is especially interesting is that indentured servitude was said to be a contract between the servant and his master. However, in this case the contract was between the ship captain who captured the Irishmen and the family he sold them to.”
to say these folks were ‘indentured servants’ is to bastardize the term indentured servant- They were clearly slaves- bought and sold as property- Were they abused and whipped for disobeying and running away? There is no legitimate reason to think they weren’t- it almost entirely probable that they were-
“They came in the holds of overcrowded ships, packed in among cargo and animals, and those who survived the journey were bought and sold in chains to work as hard as their owners chose. They were taken to the Carribean, to the American colonies, and beyond. Sound familiar? But these forced immigrants, deprived of all personal freedom, were Irish slaves, and their servitude started long before black slavery was common.
The history of the Irish slaves has long been suppressed, and a modern movement of Irish slavery denial has even gained mainstream acceptance. Promoters of this toxic ideology claim that it is ‘racist’ to say the Irish were ever sold as slaves, as this ‘takes away’ from the black experience.
Nothing could be further from the truth. Slavery is slavery. Any person who is bought and sold, chained and abused, whether for a decade or a lifetime, deserves to be remembered, their tragic legacy respected.”
https://newspunch.com/almost-one-million-irish-slaves-at-risk-of-being-scrubbed-from-history/
here’s a site that documents somewhat the history of irish slavery, a fact that many on the left want to whitewash and claim was nothing more than ‘indentured servantude’
https://newspunch.com/almost-one-million-irish-slaves-at-risk-of-being-scrubbed-from-history/
some places these irish slaves were sent to- the slaves made up over 65% of the populations there- They were ‘cheaper to import’ than black slaves, and so the loss when being beaten to death by the owners were less than the loss they would take if they did the same to a black slave- the children of irish slaves were also kept as slaves- as property- and were treated just as cruelly as their parents- likely even worse because they didn’t cost the slave owner any money to purchase
it is filthy of the left to try to whitewash irish slavery by claiming they were ‘indentured servants’ - and downplaying what actually took place- they are playing one race against another- in an effort to support their ‘reparations for me but not for thee’ agenda- As I mentioned in other posts- many races all down through history were bought and sold as slaves- Christians and Jews all down through history were bought and sold as slaves and were very brutally treated as well- But the left think, and portray the agenda that only black slaves matter-
Considering how short life times were then and an indenture being 7 years dying in servitude wasn’t hard to do. Also indentures could be extended for infractions, a few of those and your enslaved for life.
So, let’s get some points of agreement straight;
a) Indentured servitude was bad, and the entire system was rife with abuse.
b) The Irish, in particular had it extremely bad, with the English treating them very poorly, and indenture was often used as a punishment
3) In many cases, indentured servitude had conditions very similar to slavery.
However, to quote from the linked Irish Central Article “To be clear, there is no way the Irish slave experience mirrored the extent or level of centuries-long degradation that African slaves went through.” It even goes on to say “some would call it slavery”. This is comparison to the actual slavery experienced by the African Americans. While the indentured servant system was abused, with terms in some cases arbitrarily increased, the term for the African American slaves was in perpetuity, on to all of their descendants.
By the 1850s (the time I was talking about, remember), the number of African American slaves was just shy of 4 million. The number if Irish held in indentured servitude - zero.
So, to summarize: slavery is bad, nobody should be held in slavery, or in conditions similar to slavery.
[[While the indentured servant system was abused, with terms in some cases arbitrarily increased, the term for the African American slaves was in perpetuity, on to all of their descendants.]]
Did you read the link i provided? Irish children born to their irish slave parents were kept as slaves too- thsi was not ‘indentured servantude’- not even close-
[[By the 1850s (the time I was talking about, remember), the number of African American slaves was just shy of 4 million. The number if Irish held in indentured servitude - zero.]]
And what in the world does time period have to do with anything? Black slavery was ‘worse than white slavery because it happened later’? The irish were not the only slaves taken- you took a quote from the one link i provided that gave details about the irish slavery- but it was from a site that downplays the atrocities that the irish had to endure- comparing what htey went through to ‘indentured servantude’ is dishonest- it was slavery- every bit as brutal as what black slaves went htroug- perhaps even more brutal for the simple reason that irish slaves were much cheaper to buy- so it wasn’t a large loss for hte owner when they died-
The4 only reason i posted that one site was because it at least attempted to be partially honest about what they went through- but the blew it later i n the article by dishonestly comparing it to simple indentured servitude
Read the link i gave that other fella a couple of posts back- the irish were not ‘obliged servants’- nowhere near that- Nor were the great many Christian and Jewish slaves even remotely comparable to indentured servantude- We can drop that title- it’s dishonest- Children born to irish slaves were also kept as slaves-
Here’ here’s an exerpt:
“If a planter whipped or branded or beat an Irish slave to death, it was never a crime. A death was a monetary setback, but far cheaper than killing a more expensive African. The English masters quickly began breeding the Irish women for both their own personal pleasure and for greater profit. Children of slaves were themselves slaves, which increased the size of the master’s free workforce.”
https://newspunch.com/almost-one-million-irish-slaves-at-risk-of-being-scrubbed-from-history/
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.