Well, now I have no idea what's accurate or not, and I'm not vested enough to parse the accuracy of any claims.
There are papers on both sides, and nobody cites legal sources, so it's buried in paperwork, somewhere.
I may be reading too much into it, but anon's statement was to show the way by which the treatment of Irish people was justified. "Indentured servant" sounds a lot better than slave, just as "collateral damage" sounds better than "killed an innocent."
They do have slightly different meanings, though. At least currently, slavery was usually much closer to indentured servitude than what we think of today
I cringe every time I see this **** . You guys desperately want to believe that Irish indentured servitude was comparable to black slavery so that you can whine about black people some more. It's just not true - the same "slavery facts" comp pops up on this site every couple of months with all these supposed facts and figures that the blacks don't want you to know. Thing is, the only source is one author who has pretty much no academic credentials and is basically the only one making that sort of claim. It's pure propaganda, google that **** and all you will find is hardcore right wing sites and white supremacy sites. But it fit's so nicely into FJ's little make believe world where us straight white men have it harder than everybody else that it gets thumbs every time its posted, spawns comments like this, and just keeps on circulating. Everyone on this site is entitled to their own opinion, but pretty much everything I see posted about "Irish slavery" is hyperbole at its best and ******** at its worst.
thank god someone is saying it, even if you're getting thumbed down. Anyone who says the courts are equal and not slanted by race is demonstrably wrong, and yet it's somehow the fault of black people.
Why are you trying to make a contest out of it...? Are you really going to belittle the Irish slaves just because they weren't as many, as if human suffering is only counted in numbers?
They weren't ******* slaves. They weren't treated as property. There is no historical precedent for such claims, "Irish slaves" is a myth. I'm speaking to deaf ears here.
The only debate is whether or not they were slaves in America. Irish slavery was a very real thing in Europe for centuries, and one very undeniable example was when Oliver Cromwell shipped off thousands of Irish to work as slaves in (I want to say Barbados) working in the sugar cane fields and growing tobacco. They were treated as lesser beings. It's not brought up to undermine Blacks arguments as it is to join together with them and agree that everyone has suffered and slavery is not ******* okay - it's like ******* Black Lives Matter vs. All Lives Matter. We're not trying to undermine anybody, and the Black Lives Matter movement is creating a further divide between the races where as the All Lives Matter movement is trying to just bring everybody ******* together because we're all ******* humans.
Only if speaking in regards to American slavery. I have no sources, but I doubt the Romans shied away from enslaving the Celts anymore than they did anyone else. Although, while involuntary, it was still closer to indentured servitude than the livestock-style slavery that we associate with the word.
Liam Hogan is probably the best source - he's an Irish scholar who has written or contributed on several op-ed pieces on the subject and has a book coming out later this year.
Sure, but enslavement was just a thing colonial empires used to do. Only in the US was slavery based on race, and even this was a later development: pro-abolitionist sentiments were starting to hold root, so the slave trade used propaganda and us vs. them mentality to preserve their cash flow.
He pointed out the IRA as a response to slavery, then asked when the last time anyone took up activism in response to slavery, and this is the answer to that question.
But but they is white. ANd if white people enslave other white people then the white people that are enslaved still have privilege. Despite african slaves being valued more.
Origin of the word slave:
Middle English: shortening of Old French esclave, equivalent of medieval Latin sclava (feminine) ‘Slavic (captive)’: some South Slavic peoples had been reduced to a servile state by conquest in the 9th century.
im gonna be honest, i never even knew irish slaves existed until recently. im only 19 but my school/college never told me about irish slaves, only black slaves. feels kind of prejudiced.
Now now, we dont speak ill of Great Britain and their glorious accomplishment. Or the West Brits in power in Dublin and their slave mentality... or the concious segregation of nationalist professors up at Queen's University Belfast and Unionist benefits.
We also do not speak of warcrimes, ethic crimes, crimes against humanity, close proximity genocide or being the country which has broken more International humanitarian laws than nay other country almost combined.
This isn't really true though. I'm half Irish myself and I know all about how the Irish were treated in the earlier days of America. They weren't slaves though, or at least not in the same sense as African slaves. They were indentured servants. They were still treated like **** but not nearly as badly as African slaves. They were freed after they payed their debt for the crossing to America (generally after 7 years). Many chose this fate for themselves to escape famine or poverty though others were captured and forced into it. Not only were they freed after 7 years, their children were not forced into servitude nor were their decisions of who to marry controlled by their owner. While their treatment was certainly subhuman and deplorable, it was not nearly as destructive as generational slavery. It was really more similar to the form of slavery practiced in Western Africa in which people (sometimes prisoners, sometimes family members) were used as collateral for debt. Once the debt was payed, or after a certain period of time, the person was returned home unharmed. The Irish were essentially using their lives (for seven years) as collateral to escape to a new world where they could be free of British tyranny. While some were captured against their will, these were the minority, and the alternative was likely spending the rest of their lives in some debtors prison rather than becoming free men after 7 years. The treatment of the irish (and many other races for that matter) during the period of indentured servitude was certainly horrible, but it does not compare to people who were captured to become slaves for their entire lives, and for their children, and their children, and their children children children and so on to have a single day of freedom. 7 years is nothing compared to being born, living, and dying all as a slave. To never know freedom, to never know that freedom is even possible, is a far crueler fate.
This is what happens when you read one little infographic on the internet and do no further research.
The facts you all are blindly circle-jerking to come from this one unsubstantiated article that made it's way through the internet. www.globalresearch.ca/the-irish-slave-trade-the-forgotten-white-slaves/31076 Unfortunately, the stuff written in this article is not backed by any historical documents, articles, or... Well, anything at all, really. It's total bollocks.
Now don't get me wrong. Modern social-justice, race-based nonsense is complete ******** . Pretending that Irish went through 'slavery' the same way Blacks did centuries ago is ALSO ******** . It's history and it's no excuse for black behavior today, but don't twist the facts to suit your own agenda or you end up looking like just as big of a fool as the social justice warriors do. No, things are not as bad for blacks now as many people pretend they are. But YES, they WERE really ******* bad for blacks centuries ago.
I hate social justice propoganda as much as the next guy. But I don't hate social justice propoganda so much that I'll blindly consume propoganda from the opposite side, either.
I wouldn't mind if they killed the new leprechaun, like violently, like dig his eye out with a grapefruit spoon cut off his dick and shove it in his eye hole... or something.
I've never seen any Rick and Morty episodes. I was under the impression that it was a kid's show along the same wavelength as Adventure time or gravity Falls, you know, kinda weird and wacky but ultimately...for kids...I'm getting a sneaking suspicious that this is in fact not the case
100% **** no, Rick and Morty is the best thing i'm following right now, it's so much funnier than family guy or simpsons or any of that **** . I do like adventure time though, but it's not similar in any way, except the voice actor for one character is actually one of the creators of Rick and Morty.
Personally I don't like the Americans because they bang on about how they're proud to be German or Irish, but not one seems to be proud to be English, even though it was English Americans who founded the ******* country.
And, before anyone says, being born in America doesn't count, you're English by blood so be proud of it. If a dog is born in a stable, it doesn't make it a horse, and if your last name is:
Smith
Johnson
Williams
Jones
Brown
My last name is Martin, which when I research, I learn that it's attributed to the Irish, Scottish, German, Czech, English, and Italian, and apparently is derived from the name Mars, after the god of war.
Why should I be proud of how I was born? I did nothing for, it's just a part of who I am. I would no sooner be proud of being blonde. It's what you do with what you're given that really matters, in my opinion, and I haven't done ********* .
Again, how does anyone live on that in Ireland? Not to mention that is mean.
Most people probably live on more like 1,500 quid a month. Lucky to rent a flt in the ghettos for that. Let alone buy food.
Most people live comfortably enough in Ireland. Don't get me wrong. They are just not rich. For instance, very few people own houses in Ireland. Or "single detached homes". What the Irish call "houses" are usually what we give people for free in America to live in, because they can't afford their own place. "Townhouse" they are called. Basically just an apartment or flat that is a little bigger. I rarely ever saw people in Ireland driving Hummers.
I am not saying the Irish live in a 3rd world nation like the Philippines. There just does not seem to be many rich people running around. But people seem pretty equal there. I loved Ireland. As a German-American who cannot identify with the Irish at all, I loved the nation and the people very much. Actually, I just realized typing this, that I think I enjoyed myself there more than anywhere I ever lived. But with 5 kids, probably never be able to move back there again...
Your assertation was that Ireland was "a relatively poor country". It is not.
I never said it was a cakewalk living here.
Your assertation about house ownership is plain wrong. Irish people, much more than people on the continent, seek to own their own homes, for better or worse. We also have comparitvely few apartments, especially family ones. You must have never left Dublin, because even in the suburbs, a 3-bed semi-detached 2 storey house is the norm. Townhouses like you describe date from the Georgian period, and cost a bloody FORTUNE.
There aren't that many rich people in ANY country, in terms of populace.
Average US salary is $52,000. So not that far away, really, once one considers the sheer amount of concentration of US wealth in the hands of the richest.
Am I the only one that thinks paying for a service actually makes sense? Sure, water should be free, but actually getting it to my house is a service that needs cash to function. That's not a problem for me.
yes,but the situation in ireland is a bit different as your social housing charge goes towards your water payment,along with your tax money, ALONG with part of the money you pay on motor tax, not to mention that the Siemens company approached the irish government saying they would install and supply the meters at no/next to no cost but yet some prick in dail eireann wanted to line his buddies pockets with a massive contract. Thats why people can be pissed off about Irish water.
What do you think taxes are for? Do you think the water just magically flowed to our taps before this?
The issue is that they're making an entirely new branch of government to deal with it, wasting **** knows how many taxpayer euros to pay utterly unneeded government employees, in addition to the strong chance that it will later be privatized, meaning we could lose our basic right to drinking water.
It's not necessarily because we're not pussies, its because we pick our battles. We do get offended, its just that when we get offended, we don't do so through internet hatefights. If you offend us, you don't get a hurtful tweet, you get a moltov cocktail to the face.
Though the moltov cocktail will be full of piss and won't really work Gratuitous waste of alcohol...
Definitely not all Irish would be offended, up the north in the tense areas yeah probably.
But having said that I dont know anyone who'd wear clothes with a union jack on it, so maybe theres a little dis taste for it, but I wouldn't call it offensive
On the other hand, the only people you see wearing the Union Jack in the UK are tourists, weirdos obsessed with the royal family, and members our borderline fascist political parties.
I think a lot of the stink that's made about so-called offensive logos and such isn't actually made by the supposed offended group. It's often made by rich white people with too much time on their hands.