Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: lbryce

I would say askthe Australians of today whether they would go back to England or if they feel they are entitled to reparations.

http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/first-australian-penal-colony-established

The first 736 convicts banished from England to Australia land in Botany Bay. Over the next 60 years, approximately 50,000 criminals were transported from Great Britain to the “land down under,” in one of the strangest episodes in criminal-justice history.

The accepted wisdom of the upper and ruling classes in 18th century England was that criminals were inherently defective. Thus, they could not be rehabilitated and simply required separation from the genetically pure and law-abiding citizens. Accordingly, lawbreakers had to be either killed or exiled, since prisons were too expensive. With the American victory in the Revolutionary War, transgressors could no longer be shipped off across the Atlantic, and the English looked for a colony in the other direction.

Captain Arthur Phillip, a tough but fair career naval officer, was charged with setting up the first penal colony in Australia. The convicts were chained beneath the deck during the entire hellish six-month voyage. The first voyage claimed the lives of nearly 10 percent of the prisoners, which remarkably proved to be a rather good rate. On later trips, up to a third of the unwilling passengers died on the way. These were not hardened criminals by any measure; only a small minority were transported for violent offenses. Among the first group was a 70-year-old woman who had stolen cheese to eat.

Although not confined behind bars, most convicts in Australia had an extremely tough life. The guards who volunteered for duty in Australia seemed to be driven by exceptional sadism. Even small violations of the rules could result in a punishment of 100 lashes by the cat o’nine tails. It was said that blood was usually drawn after five lashes and convicts ended up walking home in boots filled with their own blood—that is, if they were able to walk at all.
SNIP
*****************************************

And then I would ask what is the difference between Australians who descended from prisoners and black Americans who descended from slaves.


24 posted on 10/08/2012 10:33:09 AM PDT by MestaMachine (obama kills and none dare call it treason.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: MestaMachine

Back in 1971 I knew a guy who was moving to Australia. And it was a privilege.

He’d spent 3 years in a waiting lie just to be considered, he had to have substantial money of his own, and he had to have a number of people inviting him, among them employers. Not to mention the security clearances.

Now, of course, it’s enough that you wave the koran in the air, and you can parasitize anything.


36 posted on 10/08/2012 10:47:51 AM PDT by Hardraade (http://junipersec.wordpress.com (I will fear no muslim))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies ]

To: MestaMachine

The Australian women weren’t property that could be raped at will by their owners. Their children could not be taken away from them and sold like cattle. The men could not be castrated and mutilated by owners, or even killed at will the way people slaughter animals.
Just s few of the differences that you have overlooked.


63 posted on 10/08/2012 12:15:04 PM PDT by kabumpo (Kabumpo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson