[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Not all "Blacks"
- Subject: Not all "Blacks"
- From: zen at freedbms.net (Zenaan Harkness)
- Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2018 11:15:01 +1100
- In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
- References: <[email protected]>
Sobering. Need another soul cookie after reading this ...
On Fri, Feb 09, 2018 at 08:55:00PM +0000, Barry Gibbs Me Dats wrote:
> > juan juan.g71
> > Fri Feb 9 09:36:06 PST 2018
>
> > who writes this shit
> IDK.
> Last one.
>
> - - -
â?¦
> Ireland quickly became the biggest source of human livestock for English
> merchants. The majority of the early slaves to the New World were
> actually white.
>
> >From 1641 to 1652, over 500,000 Irish were killed by the English and
> another 300,000 were sold as slaves. Irelandâ??s population fell from
> about 1,500,000 to 600,000 in one single decade. Families were ripped
> apart as the British did not allow Irish dads to take their wives and
> children with them across the Atlantic. This led to a helpless
> population of homeless women and children. Britainâ??s solution was to
> auction them off as well.
>
> During the 1650s, over 100,000 Irish children between the ages of 10 and
> 14 were taken from their parents and sold as slaves in the West Indies,
> Virginia and New England. In this decade, 52,000 Irish (mostly women and
> children) were sold to Barbados and Virginia. Another 30,000 Irish men
> and women were also transported and sold to the highest bidder. In 1656,
> Cromwell ordered that 2000 Irish children be taken to Jamaica and sold
> as slaves to English settlers.
>
> Many people today will avoid calling the Irish slaves what they truly
> were: Slaves. Theyâ??ll come up with terms like â??Indentured Servantsâ?? to
> describe what occurred to the Irish. However, in most cases from the
> 17th and 18th centuries, Irish slaves were nothing more than human cattle.
â?¦