NFL QB National Anthem Protest

Yup! Also too many are looking for instant gratification. I have a friend that I grew up with who sits in a sweet position, financially. He's retired military, and has a clearance and gig with a federal contractor. I remember saying to him how I'd live decently while letting those military pension checks create a sweet nest egg (and college fund for his son). He actually looked at me as if I had asked him to throw out the money.

 

OK. Thinking I may need to meet up with y'all over a beer (may a few) to tap any trader potential within me

 

I got my CPA and really happy I did. Makes me more marketable and the time it took to get there taught me so much. It's not only important to make money but you gotta figure out how to hold onto that shit.

 

Well you apparently have a head for finance too bad your boy doesn't.
That short sighted thinking is so damn infuratng.
I really hope more black people get mental help because we as a people are so adverse to planning for tomorrow.
I'm sure a lot of that comes from having life spans that have historically been cut short but if I knew I was most likely going to die at 50 I'd still want to do everything I could to leave something behind for my family. Ego be damned

 

Who diminished Black Slavery? Why did you write that?

I did see TDK diminish "Irish" slaves in order to admit the poem and verse was actually towards the British enemy fighting against the U.S.
Why are you bringing White Supremists into this?
Explain.

 

Do you remember a male poster who enlightened us here with a Thread to the slave White women forced to make babies with Black slaves? It was really shocking to learn that happened and that it's never talked about.

Looking for it, l came across it here in this article as well..

The Irish slave trade began when 30,000 Irish prisoners were sold as slaves to the New World.
The King James I 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.
....

African slaves were very expensive during the late 1600s (50 Sterling). Irish slaves came cheap (no more than 5 Sterling).

If a planter whipped or branded or beat an Irish slave to death, it was never a crime. A death was a monetary setback, but far cheaper than killing a more expensive African. The English masters quickly began breeding the Irish women for both their own personal pleasure and for greater profit.

Children of slaves were themselves slaves, which increased the size of the master’s free workforce.

Even if an Irish woman somehow obtained her freedom, her kids would remain slaves of her master. Thus, Irish moms, even with this new found emancipation, would seldom abandon their kids and would remain in servitude.

In time, the English thought of a better way to use these women (in many cases, girls as young as 12) to increase their market share: The settlers began to breed Irish women and girls with African men to produce slaves with a distinct complexion. These new “mulatto” slaves brought a higher price than Irish livestock and, likewise, enabled the settlers to save money rather than purchase new African slaves. This practice of interbreeding Irish females with African men went on for several decades and was so widespread that, in 1681, legislation was passed “forbidding the practice of mating Irish slave women to African slave men for the purpose of producing slaves for sale.” In short, it was stopped only because it interfered with the profits of a large slave transport company.

England continued to ship tens of thousands of Irish slaves for more than a century.

Records state that, after the 1798 Irish Rebellion, thousands of Irish slaves were sold to both America and Australia. There were horrible abuses of both African and Irish captives. One British ship even dumped 1,302 slaves into the Atlantic Ocean so that the crew would have plenty of food to eat.

There is little question that the Irish experienced the horrors of slavery as much (if not more in the 17th Century) as the Africans did. There is, also, very little question that those brown, tanned faces you witness in your travels to the West Indies are very likely a combination of African and Irish ancestry. In 1839, Britain finally decided on its own to end its participation in Satan’s highway to hell and stopped transporting slaves. While their decision did not stop pirates from doing what they desired, the new law slowly concluded THIS chapter of nightmarish Irish misery.

But, if anyone, black or white, believes that slavery was only an African experience, then they’ve got it completely wrong.
Irish slavery is a subject worth remembering, not erasing from our memories.

 

How did I diminish them? Did you read what he wrote?
Your reading comprehension is amazing

 

And why must we remember Irish slaves? What is going on right now that connects them to that past?
Waiting for the obvious transparent nonsense.

 

It's really important. You have continuing education, but that isn't a bad thing. It makes me more marketable if I ever feel like going back to working for people (the only reason I would do that is if I needed margin, which I don't). I am really happy things are going well for all of us. Seeing black folks do well really lifts my spirits.

 

I think the article I posted clarifies it. But, to clarify any inaccurate information...

http://pictorial.jezebel.com/lets-squash-the-myth-that-the-irish-were-ever-american-1765491798

From the article


One such article, written by John Martin of Centre of Research on Globalization, states:

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.

But Irish historian Liam Hogan argues that Martin’s research (and articles based off it) are entirely lacking in accuracy.

“These articles have created an Irish slave trade timeline, ostensibly a fantasy, which runs from 1612 to 1839,” he tells Al Jazeera. “This is to make it appear that there was a concurrent transatlantic slave trade of Irish slaves that historians have covered up because of liberal bias.”

Hogan continues:

“Historically, the majority of Irish prisoners of war, vagrants and other victims of kidnapping and deception—thought to have numbered around 10,000 people—were forcibly sent to the West Indies in the 1650s. Those that survived were pardoned by Charles II in 1660.

“In contrast, the transatlantic slave trade lasted for four centuries, was the largest forced migration in world history, involving tens of millions of Africans who were completely dehumanized, and its poisonous legacy remains in the form of anti-black racism. So this neo-Nazi propaganda is false equivalency on an outrageous scale.”





It's normally white supremacists that try to pull this one along with the inaccurate information. It is what it is.

Check out the 5 part series of debunking these white supremacist generated myths.

https://medium.com/@Limerick1914/th...slaves-myth-dissected-143e70aa6e74#.ljczwxpgh

 

So only select history matters?

l never knew a thing about Irish Slavery. As a Greek woman, l'm enlightened to Greek slaves, knew about Roman slaves, African slaves... But just as l took a course in African American History in college, l would have also liked to have learned about this horrible history as well in a course. Nothing.

So instead, l learned about it from a male member here..Now looking further into it..l'm curious that you as a Jamaican...did you not know about it?
I ask because of the top comment on Amazon that comes from this Book's review...



My West Indian Heritage
ByNathanielon December 7, 2010

"This is a Great Book!
As a Boy from the Caribbean my Grandparents taught me about African slavery and Irish slavery and my ancestry. Being like many Afro-Caribbean people (especially people from Montserrat, the Virgin Islands, Trinidad, and Barbados) I have African ancestry as well as Irish and Scottish Ancestry just as Colin Powell, singer Rhianna and many others.
When I moved to the States I always wondered why they didn't Also teach Irish Slavery in school. I understand that African-Americans endured slavery for longer in addition the being treated as second class citizens but never understood why both are not taught. I assume since America was founded by the British the history books were "edited" not to mention this time in history or "edited" to use lighter language like "indentured servants" instead of slaves.
This is a must read for all history buffs."


These two are interesting as well..

"A Work Long Overdue
Byfruitloop

"The plight of millions of American slaves has been overlooked by historians for far too long. Slavery in the Americas was not limited to black Africans nor were the depredations inflicted on non-African slaves.

This well-documented, scholarly expose of white slavery is a must-read for historians and civil-rights advocates, many of whom will be surprised by how widespread this practice was. The practice of indenture was well-known, but the fact that bondage often lasted until the end of life is not. I found this work to be simultaneously heartbreaking, infuriating, and riveting in content.

My husband's sixth-great-grandmother and her son were sold on the block in Charleston, but whenever we tell this story, other people actually try to "correct" us with, "No, she was an indentured servant, not a slave." (Not true). This long-overdue work is a memorial to the nameless individuals who died in bondage as well as an expose of a practice too long forgotten and ignored by American history textbooks. Five stars."

AND...

White Slaves in America
ByAmazon Customer

"It is significant that two journalists wrote this extremely important book. Many professional historians don't want much attention paid to white slavery for fear that it will take something away from black slavery or make whites feel less compassion for black slaves. That is foolish. People must realize that anyone could (and still can) fall into bondage under whatever name if the circumstances are right. Other books that covered similar subject matter (but received little attention) are:

1) by Lawrence R. Tenzer. Shows that white slavery was present in the antebellum American South and played an important role in increasing the tensions between North and South that led to the American Civil War.

2) by Frank W. Sweet. Shows that American slave status was not truly based on "race" but on maternal descent from a female slave, regardless of race or color.

3) by Matthew Frye Jacobson. Shows how ruling planters created anti-black racism and white supremacy in order to divide the labor force and secure the help of lower class whites in putting down slave rebellions and fighting Indians." <-----

 

Hogan cites several writers—Sean O’Callaghan in To Hell or Barbados and Don Jordan and Michael Walsh in White Cargo: The Forgotten History of Britain’s White Slaves in America—who exaggerate poor treatment of Irish indentured servants and intentionally conflate their status with African slaves. Neither of the authors “bother to inform the reader, in a coherent manner, what the differences are between chattel slavery and indentured servitude or forced labor,” writes Hogan.

This is an important point. Indentured servitude was difficult, deadly work, and many indentured servants died before their terms were over. But indentured servitude was temporary, with a beginning and an end. Those who survived their terms received their freedom. Servants could even petition for early release due to mistreatment, and colonial lawmakers established different, often lesser, punishments for disobedient servants compared to disobedient slaves. Above all, indentured servitude wasn’t hereditary. The children of servants were free; the children of slaves were property. To elide this is to diminish the realities of chattel slavery, which—perhaps—is one reason the most vocal purveyors of the myth are neo-Confederate and white supremacist groups.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_..._and_irrelevancies_people_trot_out_about.html

 

Because it's not relevant Bliss. We as a country don't treat Irish people differently, it was never codified and lasted until as late as 1964. There aren't Irish hate groups there aren't cops killing Irish children while have to hear Americans justify the killings. No Irish person is winning gold medals at the Olympics and being criticized for their hair. Irish people didn't build this country you love so much on their backs while being told they are lazy and ungrateful. That's why we don't talk about it because their oppression isn't ongoing.
And honestly I don't know much about Jamaican history outside of my own family since I was raised here and went to school here. I'm sure the same goes for people of Irish descent. We're American so we focus more on the history of this country.

I'm curious what is the point of bringing Irish slavery up?
The only people on par with people of African descent are Native Americans. Talk about a kinship. Only group I've seen who as a culture don't hate people of African descent.

 

I actually didn't bring it up.. You did replying to my explaining the third verse was referencing the British occupiers. Then l guess meow got a little hysterical and started his campaign to dismiss and throw his deflective "that's just white supremacy" quota of the day and talk more of them. l was just responding to that. It's cool tho, lol.

 

So Collin's Jersey went from #33 to #1 this past week.
He said with all the cash(profits) he's raking in from the sales, he promises to donate it to various causes.

 

Ok Bliss. Well the point is further illustrates because they thoroughly understood the need and desire to be free but had no problem keeping other people as slaves. So why should anyone respect and stand for this hypocritical song?

 

It doesn't really matter at this point does it? There is only one person in this entire thread that has an issue with what happened. In addition to that, K let us know why so many women lurk as opposed to post in here these days. I find that if a non-black person goes off at the mouth with the same deflection and comments that most white supremacists use, then what is the point of arguing? I don't think there is a coincidence as to why this thread is so calm when Bliss isn't around. Anyone that uses rape to try to win an argument with a rape survivor, deflects at the same rate as a white supremacist, and comes forward with the same comments, almost verbatim, as many white supremacists in social media... You begin to understand what you are dealing with.

I put Bliss on ignore (unfortunately, I still end up seeing her silliness if I check a thread without logging in), you wouldn't believe how peaceful and calm this thread is without the name calling, deflecting, and so on. Everyone in this thread either agrees or is in the middle of the road on this subject. After looking at it through that lense, I realize that K wasn't exaggerating in the least.

Try ignore, you will be amazed at how wonderful, fun, and peaceful this forum is.

P.S. Our previous conversation reminded me of this

[YOUTUBE]DBfsgcswlYQ[/YOUTUBE]

 

Sure Meow...lol..your fangs are showing. Only one would say something like that and she stopped posting, but then quite a few women didn't get along with her.
I hear all the time from women who don't feel welcome here anymore... It's also well known who that person was who drove women away and a thread was even made a few years ago about it where women let him know..So now it's basically devoid if women. It's laughable that you even infer that this place is a sausage-fest because l dare to stand up for women here. :smt043:smt043 Whatever makes you feel better, kitten.

And being on ignore by you is a running joke. Last time before you ran off you had three of us on ignore at once. :smt048

It doesn't surprise me one bit that you in fact love the forum this unbalanced so you can continue your hatefest towards feminism and women's rights unchallenged.

 

Not everyone owned slaves though. They fought a war over it so the "no problem" part..not true.

 

Ok you're illustrating that you aren't really familiar with American history. A lot of Union soldiers were either conscripted or joined for personal reason like need of money or no other opportunity. They had very little interest in the cause just poor people forced into fighting for whatever area they ended up in.
In fact a lot of disgruntle whites forced to fight in the war took it out on the blacks for being the reason they had to go to war. Even though we all now know that was bullshit, Lincoln freed the slaves to disrupt the south economically and to preserve the Union. If he could have won keeping slavery in tact he would have. We aren't as moral as we are lead to believe.