does anyone have proof of this or the revisions done to the history? all i can find about this is that they where indturd servants and that will lead to a loosing argument.
Indentured Servants were slaves, just ones that were given the false hope of freedom after 7 years which 99.9 times never happened. Call it what you will, but when you are hunted, stolen from your family and land, and forced into servitude because of your religion and legally owned by a company, you are a fucking slave.
If the same person owned slaves and indentured servants, they'd take the bigger risks more deadly jobs and have indentured servants do them, particularly shortly before their freedom date. This is different from chattel slavery where they own your wife and kids forever.
Is this what you're talking about, or something else?
There were also crazy stipulations, children born under servitude were company property. Marriages extended servitude. Etc. So they would force the women to breed to produce more slaves. Same shit as "slavery" just a different name.
ok ill give it a read but how do we prove all the main stream sites say it was a lie. how can we prove they are revising history? i know a lot of people that have spent a lot of time in college and there argument always turn to these and how some random person who wrote an article/book does count. (yes i realize the hypocrisy)
I don’t know anything about white slave trade back in 1500s-1800s, but I do know between 1869-1932 England had a program where it shipped off poor and orphaned kids to its colonies (and to the USA), to fill labour shortages. These kids were called “home children” also known as indentured servants/workers. So people may be confusing different (or a never-ending) eras of the white slave trade.
The program fell into controversy after enough abuse of the child laborers was reported. Some of the kids were treated as property, whipped, forced to work long hours, all that. Even the good stories are a little rough, like spending your 7-10 year term living in a barn, working hard labor until you are set free.
The kicker of the story is the program was initially set up by well-meaning ladies who were trying to find a solution to fix the rampant child slavery going on in England itself. lol.
does anyone have proof of this or the revisions done to the history? all i can find about this is that they where indturd servants and that will lead to a loosing argument.
Indentured Servants were slaves, just ones that were given the false hope of freedom after 7 years which 99.9 times never happened. Call it what you will, but when you are hunted, stolen from your family and land, and forced into servitude because of your religion and legally owned by a company, you are a fucking slave.
Why was freedom a false hope?
If the same person owned slaves and indentured servants, they'd take the bigger risks more deadly jobs and have indentured servants do them, particularly shortly before their freedom date. This is different from chattel slavery where they own your wife and kids forever.
Is this what you're talking about, or something else?
agreed. I'm just trying to learn how to argue this. there logic is confusing to me.
There were also crazy stipulations, children born under servitude were company property. Marriages extended servitude. Etc. So they would force the women to breed to produce more slaves. Same shit as "slavery" just a different name.
https://www.globalresearch.ca/the-irish-slave-trade-the-forgotten-white-slaves/31076
ok ill give it a read but how do we prove all the main stream sites say it was a lie. how can we prove they are revising history? i know a lot of people that have spent a lot of time in college and there argument always turn to these and how some random person who wrote an article/book does count. (yes i realize the hypocrisy)
Give some of these videos a watch
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PL7nDVlstWlP9b8cFHVjKlVTmUlYJoAsuV
I don’t know anything about white slave trade back in 1500s-1800s, but I do know between 1869-1932 England had a program where it shipped off poor and orphaned kids to its colonies (and to the USA), to fill labour shortages. These kids were called “home children” also known as indentured servants/workers. So people may be confusing different (or a never-ending) eras of the white slave trade.
The program fell into controversy after enough abuse of the child laborers was reported. Some of the kids were treated as property, whipped, forced to work long hours, all that. Even the good stories are a little rough, like spending your 7-10 year term living in a barn, working hard labor until you are set free.
The kicker of the story is the program was initially set up by well-meaning ladies who were trying to find a solution to fix the rampant child slavery going on in England itself. lol.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Home_Children
Here ya go pede. A playlist I've made on YouTube describing Irish American history
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PL7nDVlstWlP9b8cFHVjKlVTmUlYJoAsuV