right, I did a search and it's all snopes and others claiming they were "indentured servants" or trying to dismiss it. This has convinced me even more this is true.
Lol, they are covering up two hidden facts with that BS.
It was 'indentured servitude' to start with, and they are somewhat correct that indentured servitude was not the same thing as the slavery we so often refer to.
Indentured servitude could be entered willingly, and often was, as it was the only form of welfare around. Guaranteed job security with benefits.
It was also used as incarceration, putting a criminal in the charge of the person they had wronged. The very concept of "Paying your debt to society" was born from this practice.
It had a limit, a maximum of seven years before you were required to be freed. Modern statutes of limitations are born from these same laws.
They had rights, the same rights as any other person minus the right to quit their job.
The person who owned the contract (note the distinction) was required to feed and house the servant for the full seven years, AND their family. The reason people voluntarily entered into servitude.
Most depictions you are familiar with of "Servants" are of this exact system in practice. Some servants renegotiated their contract every seven years and willingly served for life.
The first major disruption of this system was the Slave Trade. Demand had outstripped willing servants, particularly in America where the pioneer spirit meant anyone could head west and make a life for themselves. This left the rich in need of a supply of healthy workers, which the British were all to happy to provide.
But then a BLACK democrat successfully sued to keep one of his slaves past the 7 year contract he was supposed to have freed him by. The end result of that had a DEMOCRAT judge declare that slaves (indentured servants at the time) were actually property, and that black slaves were subhuman and didn't have the same rights as other slaves. This changed virtually everything about indentured servitude and, technically, "Slavery" as we define it now was born at that moment.
This led to things getting much, MUCH worse, for a very short time period that led to the push for abolition becoming wide spread. A cornerstone of human civilization had been twisted into something much worse than it was supposed to be and people were more supportive of abolishing it than trying to fix it.
yeah i also saw the snopes article "setting the record straight" article. I am very skeptical I understand this is debatable but honestly the fact that you are here debating semantics when i wasnt even aware of this "indentured servitude" just makes me rethink a lot of things they didn't consider "good enough" to teach
I... Uh... would like one of the links to these bits of history. When did the lawsuit happen? It seems like Irish slavery existed before black slavery, so I was curious as two when these things happened in relation to each other.
Three quarters of my ancestors came to America fleeing that.
And I'm embarrassed to say that I didn't recognize its Irish-language name. I only knew it in English; they even took the Irishmen's language from them.
Jesus I'm turning 32 next month and never heard about this atrocity. My blood is boiling right now
I'm turning 57 next month and never heard of this. Damn! What the hell else do we not know?
right, I did a search and it's all snopes and others claiming they were "indentured servants" or trying to dismiss it. This has convinced me even more this is true.
Lol, they are covering up two hidden facts with that BS.
It was 'indentured servitude' to start with, and they are somewhat correct that indentured servitude was not the same thing as the slavery we so often refer to.
The first major disruption of this system was the Slave Trade. Demand had outstripped willing servants, particularly in America where the pioneer spirit meant anyone could head west and make a life for themselves. This left the rich in need of a supply of healthy workers, which the British were all to happy to provide.
But then a BLACK democrat successfully sued to keep one of his slaves past the 7 year contract he was supposed to have freed him by. The end result of that had a DEMOCRAT judge declare that slaves (indentured servants at the time) were actually property, and that black slaves were subhuman and didn't have the same rights as other slaves. This changed virtually everything about indentured servitude and, technically, "Slavery" as we define it now was born at that moment.
This led to things getting much, MUCH worse, for a very short time period that led to the push for abolition becoming wide spread. A cornerstone of human civilization had been twisted into something much worse than it was supposed to be and people were more supportive of abolishing it than trying to fix it.
yeah i also saw the snopes article "setting the record straight" article. I am very skeptical I understand this is debatable but honestly the fact that you are here debating semantics when i wasnt even aware of this "indentured servitude" just makes me rethink a lot of things they didn't consider "good enough" to teach
I... Uh... would like one of the links to these bits of history. When did the lawsuit happen? It seems like Irish slavery existed before black slavery, so I was curious as two when these things happened in relation to each other.
Oh, wait til you read the history of the gorta mor.
Three quarters of my ancestors came to America fleeing that.
And I'm embarrassed to say that I didn't recognize its Irish-language name. I only knew it in English; they even took the Irishmen's language from them.