- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Slavery is an abomination. England colonized America with white slaves.
Posted on 11/23/18 at 6:17 pm
Posted on 11/23/18 at 6:17 pm
Then switched to colonizing Australia with their enslaved poor after the American Revolution. But slavery continued unabated in America. Africans sold slaves to rich Americans. Poor parents sold their children to rich and some not so rich people all over America. Many, many small business would purchase a child from a destitute family or single parent with an end date such as 18 or 21, feed them, clothe them and house them til they reached such age as the original contract called for. If that child ran away law enforcement would track them and return them to the owner. We even have had a president who was a slave as a young man. He ran away and was tracked down and taken back to his owner. Johnson from Tenn.
Slavery killed the south and it's people and he effect of it made the south a poorer place even today. Rich industrialists, foreign rich and home grown rich bought up prime farm land and used slave labor instead of poor white share croppers. Then in 1862 Lincoln signed into law the Homestead act making anyone who has never fought against or worked against the US government entitled to prime farm and timber land west of the Miss. And some 20 million people became land owners. Damn few from the south.
Slavery killed the south and it's people and he effect of it made the south a poorer place even today. Rich industrialists, foreign rich and home grown rich bought up prime farm land and used slave labor instead of poor white share croppers. Then in 1862 Lincoln signed into law the Homestead act making anyone who has never fought against or worked against the US government entitled to prime farm and timber land west of the Miss. And some 20 million people became land owners. Damn few from the south.
5
Posted on 11/23/18 at 6:23 pm to jimdog
1. Andrew Johnson was never a slave. He was apprenticed to a tailor when he was a teenager but ran away from that job after 2 years. Apprenticeships were how young people learned a trade in those days.
2. Most people who came to English America 1607-1776 were not slaves or even indentured servants.
2. Most people who came to English America 1607-1776 were not slaves or even indentured servants.
Posted on 11/23/18 at 6:24 pm to GeorgeWest
3 what strain are you smoking right now? I want it
Posted on 11/23/18 at 6:29 pm to GeorgeWest
Andrew Johnson was legally bound to remain until 21, while he was not as bad off as slaves were, he was breaking the law by leaving, that’s not exactly being free.
Posted on 11/23/18 at 6:38 pm to LATIGERFAN
Hell, kids are legally bound to attend school til they are 17 in many states. That doesn't make them slaves.
The apprenticeship system was NOT slavery at all. The purpose of it was to train tradesmen. And poor kids got a form of scholarship with all expenses paid while they worked/trained.
And apprenticeship programs/contracts varied widely. And, by the 19th century, it was not unusual for kids to leave before the contract was over. And said kids were rarely found and prosecuted by that time.
The apprenticeship system was NOT slavery at all. The purpose of it was to train tradesmen. And poor kids got a form of scholarship with all expenses paid while they worked/trained.
And apprenticeship programs/contracts varied widely. And, by the 19th century, it was not unusual for kids to leave before the contract was over. And said kids were rarely found and prosecuted by that time.
Posted on 11/23/18 at 6:47 pm to GeorgeWest
WRONG!!!
A Johnson was sold by his destitute mother to a shop owner when he was young. He was owned by this man until he reached a certain age. That is classic slavery. And the man bought him to work in his shop. That is classic slavery. Young Johnson escaped and ran away and was tracked by law enforcement slave hunters who were commonly rewarded for returning escaped slaves. He was owned by another man. A slave. Not a student. Not an employee. A student or an employee won't have wanted posters posted looking for them and a reward for their return. By his own admission Johnson was a slave.
Show me where I said all people, half the people or whatever came to America from England as slaves. THE ENGLISH CLEARED THEIR PRISONS AND SENT THOSE PEOPLE TO AMERICA TO COLONIZE. FACT! AFTER THE REVOLUTION THEY SENT PRISONERS TO AUTRALIA TO COLONIZE ONE OF THEIR COLONIES THERE. THESE PEOPLE WERE INDENTURED SLAVES! WORKING FOR MASTERS TO SURVIVE AND IF THEY RAN AWAY THEY WERE HUNTED DOWN, PUNISHED AND PUT BACK TO WORK! THAT'S A SLAVE MISTER!
A Johnson was sold by his destitute mother to a shop owner when he was young. He was owned by this man until he reached a certain age. That is classic slavery. And the man bought him to work in his shop. That is classic slavery. Young Johnson escaped and ran away and was tracked by law enforcement slave hunters who were commonly rewarded for returning escaped slaves. He was owned by another man. A slave. Not a student. Not an employee. A student or an employee won't have wanted posters posted looking for them and a reward for their return. By his own admission Johnson was a slave.
Show me where I said all people, half the people or whatever came to America from England as slaves. THE ENGLISH CLEARED THEIR PRISONS AND SENT THOSE PEOPLE TO AMERICA TO COLONIZE. FACT! AFTER THE REVOLUTION THEY SENT PRISONERS TO AUTRALIA TO COLONIZE ONE OF THEIR COLONIES THERE. THESE PEOPLE WERE INDENTURED SLAVES! WORKING FOR MASTERS TO SURVIVE AND IF THEY RAN AWAY THEY WERE HUNTED DOWN, PUNISHED AND PUT BACK TO WORK! THAT'S A SLAVE MISTER!
Posted on 11/23/18 at 6:48 pm to jimdog
quote:
THE ENGLISH CLEARED THEIR PRISONS AND SENT THOSE PEOPLE TO AMERICA TO COLONIZE. FACT! AFTER THE REVOLUTION THEY SENT PRISONERS TO AUTRALIA TO COLONIZE ONE OF THEIR COLONIES THERE. THESE PEOPLE WERE INDENTURED SLAVES! WORKING FOR MASTERS TO SURVIVE AND IF THEY RAN AWAY THEY WERE HUNTED DOWN, PUNISHED AND PUT BACK TO WORK! THAT'S A SLAVE MISTER!
WHY ARE WE YELLING?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?
Posted on 11/23/18 at 6:51 pm to beerJeep
quote:
WHY ARE WE YELLING?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?
Posted on 11/23/18 at 6:54 pm to northshorebamaman
LOL...good one. And guilty as charged.
Posted on 11/23/18 at 7:00 pm to jimdog
someone does not understand the differences (and there are many) between (1) chattel slavery and (2) apprenticeships and indentures.
This post was edited on 11/23/18 at 7:15 pm
Posted on 11/23/18 at 7:02 pm to beerJeep
quote:Apparently yelling is a remedy for being really, really wrong.
WHY ARE WE YELLING?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?
Posted on 11/23/18 at 7:09 pm to jimdog
England, France and Belgium merchant ships and trade companies brought the African slaves to the US and Caribbean and sold them. England made the profits on the slave trade.
What not make EU pay reparations.
What not make EU pay reparations.
Posted on 11/23/18 at 7:33 pm to GeorgeWest
We still use a form of apprenticeship today. Internships
Posted on 11/23/18 at 7:47 pm to GeorgeWest
quote:
. Most people who came to English America 1607-1776 were not slaves or even indentured servants.
Define people. White, black or both? Because net white immigration to the US between 1650-1780 is estimated to be about 600,000 with more than half being indentured servants. I can’t imagine the prior 43 years really mattering that much.
Posted on 11/23/18 at 7:56 pm to jimdog
Something smells like revisionist history in here
Posted on 11/23/18 at 8:43 pm to GeorgeWest
quote:
Most people who came to English America 1607-1776 were not slaves or even indentured servants.
Depends on the region in question. New England was much different than Virginia. In New England you had the Puritans who were mostly middle class and did not bring many servants. In Virginia you had "younger sons" and the "Cavaliers" escaping Cromwell. They were descended from wealthy families back in England and were mostly royalists. They brought over many indentured servants.
Some of the wealthy "first families" of Virginia include: Berkeley, Bacon (Nat Bacon), Fairfax, Harrison, Lee (Robert's ancestors), Jefferson (Thomas' ancestors), Spencer, Payne. The Washingtons were also early settlers, but were middle class and definitely not one of the upper crust Virginian families. They didn't become wealthy until after John Washington married Col. Nathaniel Pope's daughter (who was his neighbor). The Pope money made the Washingtons wealthy by the time George was born.
The early Virginian ruling class were all interbred and had strong family ties with each other. Only about five families served in the Virginia House of Burgesses by the middle of the 1600's. That is, every seat could be traced to one of five families.
This post was edited on 11/23/18 at 8:49 pm
Posted on 11/24/18 at 12:12 am to AUstar
At no time (1607 to 1776) did the population of the 13 colonies in total consist of a majority of enslaved people. Yes there were areas where enslaved people outnumbered free people at one time or another. And there were slaves in all 13 colonies at one time or another though not in significant numbers in the North and NEngland. Indentured servitude gradually died out in the Colonies as slavery evolved and established itself in the mid-to-late 17th century.
1. I agree with the OP that slavery was an abomination and a disgrace on our ancestors. It was SLOWLY abolished (a process that sometimes took as a long as 50 years) starting in the 1790s by state after state and finally abolished by the 13th Amendment in late 1865.
2. A significant difference existed between slavery as it developed in the Colonies and indentured servitude and apprenticeship contracts. Neither indentured servants nor apprentices were OWNED by masters in the same sense that slaves came to be in the Colonies. I am not defending the use of indentured servants nor am I defending parents who contracted to apprentice their sons to tradesmen until those kids were 18-19-20 or 21. But those conditions were temporary (unless one was African!) and those people had some rights. Slaves had neither rights nor any real hope of bettering themselves. (OK, some slaves escaped or were manumitted or actually bought their own freedom but those were the exception not the rule.)
3. Andrew Johnson was never a slave. His family was destitute, so his mom and stepdad apprenticed him to a tailor when he was 14 I think. He learned to be a tailor as well as to read and write to some degree. He and his brother ran away from their apprenticeship in NCarolina and later became successful tailors in Tennessee.
4. Unless you were in Savannah and environs (Oglethorpe's dream) in the 1730s and 1740s, most English settlers in the Colonies were not people who had been simply turned out of English prisons.
1. I agree with the OP that slavery was an abomination and a disgrace on our ancestors. It was SLOWLY abolished (a process that sometimes took as a long as 50 years) starting in the 1790s by state after state and finally abolished by the 13th Amendment in late 1865.
2. A significant difference existed between slavery as it developed in the Colonies and indentured servitude and apprenticeship contracts. Neither indentured servants nor apprentices were OWNED by masters in the same sense that slaves came to be in the Colonies. I am not defending the use of indentured servants nor am I defending parents who contracted to apprentice their sons to tradesmen until those kids were 18-19-20 or 21. But those conditions were temporary (unless one was African!) and those people had some rights. Slaves had neither rights nor any real hope of bettering themselves. (OK, some slaves escaped or were manumitted or actually bought their own freedom but those were the exception not the rule.)
3. Andrew Johnson was never a slave. His family was destitute, so his mom and stepdad apprenticed him to a tailor when he was 14 I think. He learned to be a tailor as well as to read and write to some degree. He and his brother ran away from their apprenticeship in NCarolina and later became successful tailors in Tennessee.
4. Unless you were in Savannah and environs (Oglethorpe's dream) in the 1730s and 1740s, most English settlers in the Colonies were not people who had been simply turned out of English prisons.
This post was edited on 11/24/18 at 12:20 am
Posted on 11/24/18 at 12:29 am to jimdog
quote:
THE ENGLISH CLEARED THEIR PRISONS AND SENT THOSE PEOPLE TO AMERICA TO COLONIZE.
Sounds like they were given freedom.
Posted on 11/24/18 at 6:24 am to AggieHank86
quote:
someone does not understand the differences (and there are many) between (1) chattel slavery and (2) apprenticeships and indentures.
And there's a huge gray area inbetween.As late as the 1890's and early 1900's 100's of " orphan trains " were established to send children west from Eastern urban areas. Many of these children ended up being nothing more than free labor for their "sponsers" who were entitled to these children until they turned 21 and then were supposed to release them with $100 dollars and some new clothes.Free labor is free labor no matter what you want to call it.
Posted on 11/24/18 at 9:31 am to GeorgeWest
I was gonna say Andrew Johnson wasn’t ever a slave in the truest sense
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News