ADVERTISEMENT

How many whites were enslaved in America?

lucas80

HR King
Gold Member
Jan 30, 2008
115,133
167,628
113
I thought this might be a new direction to take multiple threads. I can't figure out what to make of IMCC's thread because nobody can provide me any context of the author, Robert M. Grooms. I have a suspicion that using the word author may be a stretch. If I cannot verify the author, or exclude the possibility of bias I can't accept his writings. Not without some level of review by myself or others.
Take that away and I am left wondering what lies underneath. Did any whites find themselves enslaved? Blacks did not control the system of slavery. They had no governmental voice, and could not end slavery if they chose to. It wasn't blacks who created Jim Crow segregation laws. Is the most salient point to discuss in America the statistical fact that some blacks might have owned slaves, even though the facts have muddled context and providence?
 
I thought this might be a new direction to take multiple threads. I can't figure out what to make of IMCC's thread because nobody can provide me any context of the author, Robert M. Grooms. I have a suspicion that using the word author may be a stretch. If I cannot verify the author, or exclude the possibility of bias I can't accept his writings. Not without some level of review by myself or others.
Take that away and I am left wondering what lies underneath. Did any whites find themselves enslaved? Blacks did not control the system of slavery. They had no governmental voice, and could not end slavery if they chose to. It wasn't blacks who created Jim Crow segregation laws. Is the most salient point to discuss in America the statistical fact that some blacks might have owned slaves, even though the facts have muddled context and providence?

Blacks did not control the system of slavery? You can't be that stupid?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_slave_trade
 
Mixing the very very few white slave owners with the rest of the population is a mistake. The poor or middle class whites are tax slaves under the current system.
 
A lot of Europeans came to the America's as indentured servants and many were never allowed to end their servitude, thereby becoming slaves. Also many supposed African slaves had much more European blood than African. It should also be noted that aboriginals(also know as redskins) were the first people(other than many of the sailors on the ships) were the first people enslaved. It is also a fact that many aboriginals own other aboriginals as well as European and African slaves.
 
Mixing the very very few white slave owners with the rest of the population is a mistake. The poor or middle class whites are tax slaves under the current system.
This is what I'm taking away from this discussion too. We need to be taxing the rich a lot more so they can't afford new slaves.
 
  • Like
Reactions: unIowa
This is what I'm taking away from this discussion too. We need to be taxing the rich a lot more so they can't afford new slaves.
I don't understand how you got that from my post. There has been slavery all over for ever. White, black, whatever. Also, i'm for a flat tax with a break for the bottom 10-15%.
 
Servitude and slavery are not the same thing. I will also redirect Smalls to the point of the thread. Slavery in America. Where the slaves came from, and who sold them is irrelevant to who controlled the system in the US, and who was actually enslaved. Point out to me how many whites were sold by other whites into slavery, Smalls.
 
Who cares at this point? Fixing slavery already happened. Plus, only 1.4% of whites owned slaves in the united states at the height of slavery. We need to focus on current problems. Like ending costly wars, destruction of the dollar, or the running of industry out of the country.
 
Last edited:
They came as slaves; vast human cargo transported on tall British ships bound for the Americas. They were shipped by the hundreds of thousands and included men, women, and even the youngest of children.

Whenever they rebelled or even disobeyed an order, they were punished in the harshest ways. Slave owners would hang their human property by their hands and set their hands or feet on fire as one form of punishment. They were burned alive and had their heads placed on pikes in the marketplace as a warning to other captives.

We don’t really need to go through all of the gory details, do we? We know all too well the atrocities of the African slave trade.

But, are we talking about African slavery? King James II and Charles I also led a continued effort to enslave the Irish. Britain’s famed Oliver Cromwell furthered this practice of dehumanizing one’s next door neighbor.

The Irish slave trade began when James II sold 30,000 Irish prisoners as slaves to the New World. His Proclamation of 1625 required Irish political prisoners be sent overseas and sold to English settlers in the West Indies. By the mid 1600s, the Irish were the main slaves sold to Antigua and Montserrat. At that time, 70% of the total population of Montserrat were Irish slaves.

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. Ireland’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. Britain’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. They’ll come up with terms like “Indentured Servants” 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.

As an example, the African slave trade was just beginning during this same period. It is well recorded that African slaves, not tainted with the stain of the hated Catholic theology and more expensive to purchase, were often treated far better than their Irish counterparts.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-irish-slave-trade-the-forgotten-white-slaves/31076
 
  • Like
Reactions: Besthawkfan
For some of you is there an important point in blacks owning blacks? Does it make whites owning blacks more palatable? It seems very important to say blacks owned blacks. Why is that?
 
For some of you is there an important point in blacks owning blacks? Does it make whites owning blacks more palatable? It seems very important to say blacks owned blacks. Why is that?
It shows the nature of it all. Instead of there being a white devil you see that each race is willing to capitalize on the enslavement of people. That way the finger isn't pointed at one demographic. Which is the usual standard.
 
It shows the nature of it all. Instead of there being a white devil you see that each race is willing to capitalize on the enslavement of people. That way the finger isn't pointed at one demographic. Which is the usual standard.
Why do you identify yourself with the slaveholding whites and not the slaves freeing whites? See when someone points how bad slave holders were I never feel judged. I guess I'm weird that way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: THE_DEVIL
For some of you is there an important point in blacks owning blacks? Does it make whites owning blacks more palatable? It seems very important to say blacks owned blacks. Why is that?
Quick question, are there any slaves now? Besides you and me and everyone else of course.

Are the blacks slaves now? How many of them have EVER been slaves? If none ever were, than why are we acting as if they still are? Why are we equating what happened to people generations ago, to the black people of now?

Sorry, but slavery is no longer an excuse. There is a man up in the Oval office who can have you killed while you're on foreign soil. I'm thinking we need to start respecting that we are equal.
 
Why do you identify yourself with the slaveholding whites and not the slaves freeing whites? See when someone points how bad slave holders were I never feel judged. I guess I'm weird that way.
No, it's because that 'guilty' feeling that comes from other liberals who feel they need to speak out for blacks, and preach white privilege, instead of speaking of how we DO get along. Which of course leads to anger from other races, and then it is seen by those white folks, who in turn return the anger, and then the hate boils over on both sides, and then we are hating each other, because of something that happened decades ago, and that no one was actually apart of.

It's the base point for our hate against each other. Will there be racists? Sure there will, from all races, but making a point to only point out one side of it on the media is a symptom of everything I spoke of above. Especially when you bring the past into the foray, and especially when you work to keep the flames going, rather than actually putting them out.

Liberals love to find themselves a racist, or whom they think is a racist. That way they can keep the game going. Sick isn't it,...what's even sicker is that they do it in the name of making a positive change.
 
Why do you identify yourself with the slaveholding whites and not the slaves freeing whites? See when someone points how bad slave holders were I never feel judged. I guess I'm weird that way.
I'm not identifying. I'm saying I'm being unfairly identified. As are you.
 
All the white women in America were enslaved until the
1960's. Then Betty Friedan and Gloria Steinem wrote
their famous books which said that women should get
out of the jail called marriage. The feminist movement
took root and America has been self-destructing since
then.
 
All the white women in America were enslaved until the
1960's. Then Betty Friedan and Gloria Steinem wrote
their famous books which said that women should get
out of the jail called marriage. The feminist movement
took root and America has been self-destructing since
then.
I wonder if they agreed that since they don't need marriage, then they don't need child support? Same thing goes for men who abuse that by the way.
 
All the white women in America were enslaved until the
1960's. Then Betty Friedan and Gloria Steinem wrote
their famous books which said that women should get
out of the jail called marriage. The feminist movement
took root and America has been self-destructing since
then.
Oh boy, women don't want marriage = end of the world. Gays want marriage = end of the world. Marriage is serious business.
 
Oh boy, women don't want marriage = end of the world. Gays want marriage = end of the world. Marriage is serious business.
Marriage works if you actually love one another and want to raise both your kids together in the same household. Other than that, it sucks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LuteHawk
neither of us were alive for either but it keeps coming up. Why do you think it does?
Maybe because we still have monuments celebrating it? Kind of hard to move on when a sizable number think the slavers were right to fight to keep it around.
giphy.gif
 
I thought this might be a new direction to take multiple threads. I can't figure out what to make of IMCC's thread because nobody can provide me any context of the author, Robert M. Grooms. I have a suspicion that using the word author may be a stretch. If I cannot verify the author, or exclude the possibility of bias I can't accept his writings. Not without some level of review by myself or others.
Take that away and I am left wondering what lies underneath. Did any whites find themselves enslaved? Blacks did not control the system of slavery. They had no governmental voice, and could not end slavery if they chose to. It wasn't blacks who created Jim Crow segregation laws. Is the most salient point to discuss in America the statistical fact that some blacks might have owned slaves, even though the facts have muddled context and providence?

I understand what you are saying. And a very good idea to be a skeptic in this day and age. I would point out, that in this case it isn't just that we can't find anything on the author, there is also the package his article was delivered in. Let's face it, "The Barnes Review", a known revisionist bimonthly piece of trash? Who would WANT to publish a piece with them?

I'd even harbor a guess that we're looking at a pseudonym.

But, be that as it may, you can still investigate the claims within the article and when enough have come back false.....would it matter at all if the writer were Joseph Pulitzer himself?!?! I'm sure not.

I would encourage you to go further than not accepting his writings. Take the piece for what it is as compared to information from trustworthy sources...and chuck the thing in the trash where it belongs.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT