yeah I’m having a laugh. But the whole notion of blaming the English for this and the English for that marginalizes the very substantial role played by Scots in the Empire.
In 1811, for instance, the population of England was 8.7 million. The population of Scotland was 1.8 million Yet in 1817, Scots owned 32 precent of the slaves in Jamaica.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demography_of_England
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demography_of_Scotland
Except that: most indentured servitude (for Europeans, anyways) wasn’t “forced” in that it was a contract willingly entered into to gain passage to the colonies in exchange for a limited period of labor. A relatively small number of people were kidnapped or tricked and sold into servitude, but that was a minority of cases. Also, in the American colonies it was hardly exclusively Irish, either - or even significantly Irish (most were English, especially Northern English thanks to crop failures of the time). Not counting prisoners (who were a minority of the immigrant population), about half of Europeans who came here before the revolution were indentured. The vast majority of the Irish who came at that point were Scots-Irish. By the time the big wave of Irish immigration hit the US because of the potato famine, indentured servitude of Europeans was effectively long over.
Except that: a distinction was made between Christian and non-Christian indentured servants from the start (hint: non-Christians didn’t have the same rights, i.e. non-Christians could be forced into slavery), and by the mid-16th century there was a large distinction between black slavery and white indentured servants, with black slavery being a life-long state inherited by the children of black slaves.
So no, not the same at all.
The Scottish were certainly part of the British Empire… the policies that moved food out of Ireland to sell on the European market as the Irish peasantry starved came from London, no?
As far as I can tell, there are very few ethnic groups that have not experienced a period of slavery if you look deeply enough.
I’m likely to accept someone explaining that their forefathers have a history of slavery or forced servitude at face value as long as that person is not trying to make comparisons. Certainly, the Irish have suffered from a negative stereotype which exists to this day. So, instead of assuming people who repeat the Irish slavery stories are racist or bigoted in any way, I’ll simply assume that decades of misinformation is at play. Rather than accusing someone of racism or being a white supremacist as the author of the article has chosen to do, I think I’ll treat each person who repeats this as a human being and talk to them instead before deciding that I know what is in their heart.
Choosing to stereotype and pre-judge a group of people as racists and white supremacists due to what is likely a repeating of misinformation seems kind of childish and bigoted.
Death wasn’t the only way not to get out alive.
Through the late 1700’s, children from England (including Scotland, Ireland & Wales) and France were kidnapped and sold into indentured labor in the Caribbean for a minimum of five years, but usually their contracts were bought and sold repeatedly and some laborers never obtained their freedom. (src)
Chattel Slavery == Traditional Slavery, and the last country to abolish that was Mauritania in 2007! - this isn’t as far away as we would like to believe… 
I don’t know about you, but if I were bought and sold, I wouldn’t give two shits what someone called it a couple hundred years later…
To be clear, this is not a comment on the parent topic as the intent there seems to be friction, which is something we could all use less of.
Except you have to see when it’s brought up… all too often, it’s when there is any discussion on slavery and American racism. Then, let’s face it, it’s racist.
No one said all Irish or Irish Americans do this, but that these myths are deployed in a particular way in order to downplay racism, more often than not. As an Irish American, I’m quite happy to point out racism within my own ethnic group, because fuck that noise.
No one said it was. There are still forms of slavery today, even though it’s illegal the world around. But this is about specific claims that are historically inaccurate. The realities of indentured servitude were harsh and often functioned on brutality. But it was not the same of chattel slavery. Yes, especially early on, many people were worked to death before they could get out (black and white indentured servants), but as life spans increased, it become more cost effective to own slaves rather than to continue to bring in indentured servants.
Sure, but you and I weren’t and most likely, neither were our recent descendants. But we’re talking about how people are using these issues today, not how indentured servants saw themselves, or how slaves saw themselves. I’m sure there is a rich literature on those topics.
Not to repeat @anon61221983 too much, but:
Yes, the author’s characterization of the meme is a general one, and like most such generalities, it does allow for exceptions. However, in my experience (IRL and online) the main reason Irish descendants in the U.S. bring up the claim that their ancestors were enslaved is to say that they were ALSO enslaved. They’re almost always making a comparison to black people, in order to say that the latter should “stop complaining.”
I mean really, why else would a person in the U.S. with Irish ancestors even bring up the topic?
Are we agreed on the definition of Chattel Slavery?
Chattel slavery, also called traditional slavery, is so named because people are treated as the chattel (personal property) of the owner and are bought and sold as if they were commodities.
I think we also need to keep in mind we’re talking about American chattel slavery, which had a specific racial dimension, too. That matters in this current discussion, I think.
I reject that idea entirely. I’ve had many discussions on this topic during my life. As an person of Irish decent, the topic usually comes up in discussions on how the English are just about the worst people.
What you are doing is pre-judging anyone who repeats the stories of Irish slavery whether it is due to a family history of telling the story or racist intent.
Because if there is anyone the Irish truly despise, it’s the English. The long history of Irish mistreatment by the hands of the English should not be discounted. You are making assumptions of an entire group of people based on your limited experience. Surely you can see the flaw in that kind of thinking.
It’s SHITE being Scottish! We’re the lowest of the low. The scum of the fucking Earth! The most wretched, miserable, servile, pathetic trash that was ever shat into civilization. Some hate the English. I don’t. They’re just wankers. We, on the other hand, are COLONIZED by wankers. Can’t even find a decent culture to be colonized BY. We’re ruled by effete arseholes. It’s a SHITE state of affairs to be in, Tommy, and ALL the fresh air in the world won’t make any fucking difference!
A relatively small number of people were kidnapped or tricked and sold into servitude, but that was a minority of cases
It depends what times you look at, and whether you include Australia as well, and it wasn’t just people who were kidnapped or tricked (which was a small minority), convicts made up the majority of the slaves (most of whom weren’t justly convicted of anything, vagabonds, rebels, protesters, orphans, etc.).
You also have to account for the people who did enter into a free contract, but then had the terms of it violated after they arrived (which would have been a substantial proportion, especially in the early days).
Also, in the American colonies it was hardly exclusively Irish, either - or even significantly Irish (most were English, especially Northern English thanks to crop failures of the time).
Yeah, I know, but the Irish were the topic at hand.
So no, not the same at all.
yep, never said it was.
I have no problem acknowledging that some people bring it up for non-comparative (against black people) reasons.
So you’re saying that a lot of Irish Americans you know bring it up in order to vent about the English? Okay, I’ve never heard that, but even if you think it’s common, I’d still bet a ton of money if I had it (and if it could be proven) that by far the main reason it’s brought up is to explain (falsely) the difference between Irish American success and African American success.
That nasty comparison happens enough that it’s a problem worth addressing, based on a myth that’s worth exposing. But if it pleases you, I’ll back off from claiming that it happens in almost all cases that way because yeah, that can’t be proven.
When you say “the English”, do you mean the lads on the left or on the right?
You are making assumptions of an entire group of people based on [snip] the actions of those in power [snip]. Surely you can see the flaw in that kind of thinking.
Nastiness is the bread and butter of the internet. That you can find horrible people saying asinine things shouldn’t surprise anyone. I’m not so sure that little fact needs any exposing or addressing other than shining light on the general cowardly hate machine that is the internet.
I wonder why people living in Ireland bring it up so often? Do you think it’s about comparing themselves to African Americans? Barbados is usually the topic when I’ve had face to face discussions with my family in Ireland. I’ve never heard the discussion turn to Irish slaves in the Sates. Prejudice is a hard thing to let go of.
For me, it’s about education rather than exposition. My experience is that an honest and thoughtful education will have a much greater impact than labeling everyone who’s been misinformed over the years a racist or a bigot.
It’s the same with any racism. Those who hate someone because of their ancestry usually don’t make much distinction. I’m not sure if you are trying to be cute and paint me as someone who shares that mindset but in any case, I am not. I don’t especially hate the English or any group for that matter. I save my ire for individuals.
As was the Bengal famine caused by Imperial control of India. But the Potato Famine was just one in a number of major events in Ireland, which was my point. The famine was not “pretty well everything that happened in Ireland.”
As an English person (of typically purebred Anglo-Huguenot-Jewish-Netherlands-you name it descent, with a Norman surname) I get a bit annoyed at being blamed for everything bad that happened in the world. Whether it’s an unpopular German King sending the Hessians to control the rebellious Americans, landlords of Scottish descent oppressing the Irish, we get blamed for the lot. The idea that the British Imperial period was some kind of monolithic entity that can be used as a bludgeon is, I suggest, not very helpful. What is interesting is why the various players in Irish history, including as I noted the English, the Scots, the Spanish, the French and the Irish themselves (including the ones in the US helpfully funding the IRA) made such a disastrous mess, as bad as any Middle Eastern fustercluck, while the inhabitants of the adjacent country were so much more successful.
Personally I think the clue lies more in the site of Ireland for proxy wars between extreme Protestants and Catholics, while England adopted its middle-of-the-road Anglican church. The Protestant-Catholic wars ravaged Europe for many, many years.
The IRA are quite clear on the subject - they bombed England, although many of the Protestant gunmen actually had bases in Scotland.
And they handled that the way they did because of their policies in Ireland during the famine… See late Victorian Holocaust by Mike Davis, which makes that very specific connection between late 19th century famines in India, and the early policies the British pursued in Ireland during the famine.
Sure, never said it was. However, it is a major event that had a deep impact on modern Irish history. [quote=“kupfernigk, post:97, topic:74747”]
As an English person (of typically purebred Anglo-Huguenot-Jewish-Netherlands-you name it descent, with a Norman surname) I get a bit annoyed at being blamed for everything bad that happened in the world.
[/quote]
I’m not saying that… I’m saying that British policies in the 19th century exacerbated the famine, which led to a major depopulation of the country. I’m not blaming you for anything. It’s part and parcel of your history, from which white English benefited, just like American chattel slavery is a part of my history from which my ancestors benefited.
That’s fair enough, but that doesn’t mean that the empire wasn’t violent and brutal, even if it wasn’t monolithic. If you do know of any works on the role of the Scottish or other ethnic gtroups in the empire, please post a link. I’d be happy to read about it.
That’s true. But ireland was generally underdeveloped as part of the British empire (with the peasantry forced into a monoculture, to free up the land for anglo-Irish elites) and that’s not just due to Irish catholic intransigence. Just like Protestants are not a monolith, neither are the Catholics (not even Irish catholics). It was a specific set of policies of imperial rule. And the Angelican church played their role in fomenting anti-Catholic sentiment, too, let’s not forget that. This is not to say that “all English are bad”, because no one is saying that. But to imagine that the British Empire doesn’t bear any role in the religious wars in Ireland (going into the present day, even), just doesn’t hold much water.
#notallenglish
