THE TRUE HISTORY OF SLAVERY AND THE CIVIL WAR

https://youtu.be/EqPq1tY0764

BOOKS/RELATED LINKS/SOURCES:

SECRETS OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE by Eustace Mullins PDF

howardnema.com/exposing-the-federal-reserve-crime-syndicate

Edited, complied from listed sources with commentary by HN

THE INTENTIONAL SLANTS AND SKEWERS OF HISTORY

History is very slanted, or skewered. and it is not by accident.  There is a very intentional slant, or skewer of history. It is not by accident and it has not been done to “protect the innocent,” as in the Law And Order true crime detective TV show, but rather to protect the guilty and/or project them in a better light. 

THE TRUE HISTORY OF SLAVERY

The history of man enslaving other men is sadly as old as mankind itself.  This collection of facts from various sources about slavery should be quite illuminating, as many have been omitted from our popular culture and we were certainly not taught about in school, novels, Hollywood or even PBS.

BLACK SLAVE OWNERS IN THE US

Anthony Johnson was a black tobacco farmer. While he was not the first slave owner in American history, he was the first legal slave owner in American history, having been among the first to have his lifetime ownership of a servant legally sanctioned by a court.
A former indentured servant, Anthony Johnson was a “free negro” who owned a 250-acre farm in Virginia during the 1650s, with five indentured servants under contract to him.

Philip Burnham, in the article “Selling Poor Steven” published in the February/March 1993 issue of American Heritage, found that in the US Census of 1830 there were 3,775 free blacks who owned 12,740 black slaves.

Burnham wrote about the black slave John Casor, who was denied his freedom by his master Anthony Johnson:

“In the 1640s John Casor was brought from Africa to America, where he toiled as a servant for a Virginia landowner. In 1654 Casor filed a complaint in Northampton County Court, claiming that his master, Anthony Johnson, had unjustly extended the terms of his indenture with the intention of keeping Casor his slave for life. Johnson, insisting he knew nothing of any indenture, fought hard to retain what he regarded as his personal property.

After much wrangling, on March 8, 1655, the court ruled that “the said John Casor Negro shall forthwith be returned unto the service of his master Anthony Johnson,” consigning him to a bitter lifetime of bondage. Given the vulnerable legal status of servants – black and white – in colonial America, the decision was not surprising But the documents reveal one additional fact of interest: Anthony Johnson, like his chattel Casor, was black….”

One of these slaves was a black man named John Casor, who claimed that his term of service had expired years earlier and Johnson was holding him illegally.

In 1654, In one of the first known legal sanctions of slavery, other than as a punishment for crime, a civil court found that Anthony Johnson in fact owned Casor’s services for life.

William Ellison was one of North Carolina’s largest slave holder in 1860. He was also a very wealthy free black plantation owner and cotton gin manufacturer who lived in South Carolina (not North Carolina).

According to the 1860 census (in which his surname was listed as “Ellerson”), he owned 63 black slaves, making him the largest of the 171 black slaveholders in South Carolina, but far from the largest overall slave holder in the state.

American Indians also owned thousands of black slaves. Historian Tiya Miles provided this snapshot of the Native American ownership of black slaves at the turn of the 19th century for Slate magazine in January 2016:

Miles places the number of enslaved people held by Cherokees at around 600 at the start of the 19th century and around 1,500 at the time of westward removal in 1838-9. Creeks, Choctaws, and Chickasaws, she said, held around 3,500 slaves, across the three nations, as the 19th century began.

“Slavery inched its way slowly into Cherokee life. When a white man moved into a Native location, usually to work as a trader or as an Indian agent, he would own African slaves.” If such a person also had a child with a Native woman, as was not uncommon, the half-European, half-Native child would inherit the enslaved people (and their children) under white law, as well as the right to use tribal lands under tribal law. This combination put such people in a position to expand their wealth, eventually operating large farms and plantations.

In 1830 there were 3,775 free black people who owned 12,740 black slaves.  There were approximately 319,599 free blacks in the United States in 1830. Approximately 13.7 per cent of the total black population was free. A significant number of these free blacks were the owners of slaves. The census of 1830 lists 3,775 free Negroes who owned a total of 12,760 slaves.

Many black slaves were allowed to hold jobs, own businesses, and own real estate.
There were exceptions, but generally speaking — especially after 1750, by which time slave codes had been entered into the law books in most of the American colonies — black slaves were not legally permitted to own property or businesses. From the Oxford Companion to American Law (2002):

Under these early codes, slaves had virtually no legal rights IN most areas they could be executed for crimes that were not capital offenses for whites. Their testimony was restricted in legal cases and could not be used either for or against whites. Trials of slaves were usually by special courts. Slaves could not own property, move about without consent of their owners, or legally marry.

Brutal black-on-black slavery was common in Africa for thousands of years.
The phenomenon of human beings enslaving other human beings goes back millenia, but not just among blacks, and not just in Africa.

Most slaves brought to America from Africa were purchased from black slave owners.
Slavery was eliminated in America via the efforts of people of various ethnicities, including Caucasians, who took up the banner of the abolitionist movement.

The names of the white leaders of that movement tend to be better known than those of the black leaders, among whom were David Walker, Frederick Douglass, Dred Scott, Harriet Tubman, Sojourner Truth, Nat Turner, and many others.

When Congress passed (and the states ratified) the 13th Amendment in 1865, it was the culmination of many years of work by that multi-racial movement.

Little has been published regarding those Blacks who owned Black slaves in the USA, however, more research is bringing this little-known subject to light.  Carter G. Woodson, whose grandparents and father had been slaves, was one of the first to write about the Black slave owners.

In Free Negro Owners of Slaves in the United States in 1830 (published in 1924) Woodson gives the names and number of slaves owned by free blacks counted in the U. S. Census of 1830, listing them by name and the number of slaves owned.

Michael P. Tremoglie, in The Black Roots of Slavery also noted the issue of Black slave owners.

“There were many free blacks in the American colonies. They were enfranchised and as early as 1641, Mathias De Sousa, were elected to legislatures. These free blacks owned slaves – some for philanthropic reasons, as Carter G. Woodson suggests. However as John Hope Franklin wrote, “…free Negroes had a real economic interest in the institution of slavery and held slaves in order to improve their economic status.”

The census of 1830 lists 965 free black slave owners in Louisiana, owning 4,206 slaves. The state of South Carolina, lists 464 free blacks owning 2,715 slaves. How ironic it is that so many blacks owned so many slaves in South Carolina. Yet, no one seemed to mention this during the flag controversy.

Some blacks served in the Confederate army, which is another omission in our popular culture. The movie Glory did not happen to mention that blacks served in the Confederate army. It did give the impression that the black soldiers in the 54th Massachusetts were former slaves – which was not true.”

Harry Koger, in Black Slave Owners. Free Black Slave Masters in South Carolina, reported on the success of Black women in Charleston.

“By 1860, so many Black women in Charleston had inherited or been given slaves and other property by white men, and used their property to start successful businesses, that they owned 70% of the Black owned slaves in the city.”

From Kroger’s work, it is noted that free Black slave owners resided in states as north as New York and as far south as Florida, extending westward into Kentucky, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Missouri. According to the federal census of 1830, free blacks owned more than 10,000 slaves in Louisiana, Maryland, South Carolina, and Virginia. The majority of black slave owners lived in Louisiana and planted sugar cane.

John Hope Franklin and Loren Schweninger, in their book Runaway Slaves: Rebels on the Plantation, revealed that conditions under Black masters could be such that slaves would run away:

“The largest black slaveholder in the South, John Carruthers Stanly of North Carolina, faced a number of problems in the 1820s in dealing with a slave labor force on his three turpentine plantations in Craven County. With a total of 163 slaves, Stanly was a harsh, profit-minded taskmaster, and his field hands would run away.

Stanley dealt with this through his two white overseers and with a spy network that included a few trusted slaves. Brister, his slave barber in New Bern, was responsible for relaying to his owner rumors of planned escapes …Nor did Stanly have any pangs of conscience about selling children away from their parents or holding free blacks in bondage.

Free black slave owners who lived in urban areas – Charleston, Savannah, Mobile, Natchez, and New Orleans – also faced difficulties with their slave property. Free mulatto barber William Johnson of Natchez was not certain what had happened to his recently purchased slave, Walker, when he disappeared in 1835.

He had either been stolen or had run away to Kentucky to rejoin his wife. When on 4 July 1833, authorities in Ascension Parish, Louisiana, jailed the twelve- or fourteen-year-old black boy named Isaac taken off the steamer Watchman, he admitted he was owned by a ‘free woman of color in New Orleans named Jane’.”

In Dixie’s Censored Subject: Black Slaveowners, published in The Barnes Review, Robert M. Grooms furnished several examples of Black slave owners in the USA:

“In the rare instances when the ownership of slaves by free Negroes is acknowledged in the history books, justification centers on the claim that black slave masters were simply individuals who purchased the freedom of a spouse or child from a white slaveholder and had been unable to legally manumit them. Although this did indeed happen at times, it is a misrepresentation of the majority of instances, one which is debunked by records of the period on blacks who owned slaves. These include individuals such as Justus Angel and Mistress L. Horry, of Colleton District, South Carolina, who each owned 84 slaves in 1830.

In fact, in 1830 a fourth of the free Negro slave masters in South Carolina owned 10 or more slaves; eight owning 30 or more.

The majority of slaveholders, white and black, owned only one to five slaves. More often than not, and contrary to a century and a half of bullwhips-on-tortured-backs propaganda, black and white masters worked and ate alongside their charges; be it in house, field or workshop.

The few individuals who owned 50 or more slaves were confined to the top one percent, and have been defined as slave magnates.  In 1860 there were at least six Negroes in Louisiana who owned 65 or more slaves The largest number, 152 slaves, were owned by the widow C. Richards and her son P.C. Richards, who owned a large sugar cane plantation. Another Negro slave magnate in Louisiana, with over 100 slaves, was Antoine Dubuclet, a sugar planter whose estate was valued at (in 1860 dollars) $264,000. That year, the mean wealth of southern white men was $3,978.

Interestingly, considering today’s accounts of life under slavery, authors Johnson and Roak report instances where free Negroes petitioned to be allowed to become slaves; this because they were unable to support themselves. As with the slaves of his white counterparts, occasionally Black slave owner WIlliam Ellison’s slaves ran away.
The historians of Sumter District reported that from time to time Ellison advertised for the return of his runaways. On at least one occasion Ellison hired the services of a slave catcher.

Ellison hired a white man who had purchased a small hotel in Stateburg in the 1820s to run down “a valuable slave. Andrews caught the slave in Belleville, Virginia and stated: “I was paid on returning home $77.50 and $74 for expenses.

Following in their father’s footsteps, the Ellison family actively supported the Confederacy throughout the war. They converted nearly their entire plantation to the production of corn, fodder, bacon, corn shucks and cotton for the Confederate armies. They paid $5,000 in taxes during the war. They also invested more than $9,000 in Confederate bonds, treasury notes and certificates in addition to the Confederate currency they held.”

As an interesting sideline to Black slave owners in the South of the USA, is that there were also an estimated 65,000 Southern blacks in the Confederate military, including over 13,000 who fought against the North in battle.

A well-known novel, The Known World, by Black author Edward P. Jones, has tackled the issue of Black-owned slaves, much to the surprise of those readers who had never heard of Black slave owners. However, the interesting story of Blacks who owned slaves is largely ignored by the media and educators.

BLACK SLAVERY USED AS PROPAGANDA

The multiculturalists, dominant in media and education, continuously use the issue of Black Slavery as a psychological baton to beat over the heads of White people, children in particular, to damage any concept of ethnic pride that they have (while at the same time, encouraging ethnic pride amongst Blacks, Asians, etc.). Black slavery, amongst other issues, is used by multiculturalists as propaganda to discourage Whites from becoming so-called “racists”, and to encourage them (brainwash them) into becoming multiculturalists.

Kevin Alfred Strom, on the American Dissident Voices radio program, gave his views on multiculturalist propaganda in his broadcast “The Truth About Slavery”.

“By recounting and emphasizing again and again the real and imagined sufferings of Black people under slavery, the White student is made to feel that his ancestors were cruel, morally retarded, and evil. They are made to feel that they owe Black people a nearly infinite compensation, since, they are taught, Black people’s problems today are the legacy of hundreds of years of slavery for which White people are responsible. They are taught that the relative prosperity which we enjoy today was achieved largely by exploitation of Black slaves.

Is it any wonder that thousands of our young people join Jesse Jackson in chanting “Hey Hey Ho Ho, Western Culture’s Gotta Go”? Is it any wonder that they all too often reject our European cultural heritage and embrace all forms of alien styles of music, dancing, dress, grooming and slang, from Jamaican “rasta” to “gangsta rap”?

Is it any wonder that White teenagers are committing suicide in higher numbers every year? They have received, in our public schools and colleges, not a “liberal education,” but an education by liberals.

They have been taught, er- indoctrinated very well indeed, that they and their ancestors and their traditions and their natural feelings are worthless and an obstacle to be overcome.”

The blame for slavery should not be placed solely upon the consciences of Europeans, and that it was a practice carried out by all races. In fact, slavery is still practiced in Africa, by Africans.

It would be wrong, however to place the focus only on Europe, as the African slave trade with Arabia was of similar if not greater proportions. Even after the West abolished slavery, Arab countries continued with this atrocity.

Little was known of the methods by which the slaves were obtained, or of the raids and burning of villages and wholesale depopulation of large regions to supply slaves to the Mohammedan markets in the East, not to mention the demand for Africa itself.
The export of slaves from East Africa to Arabia, Iran, and India had been a lucrative trade for centuries until it was finally stopped by Britain in 1845.

Even as recently as 1953, several Saudi’s went to West Africa posing as Moslem missionaries and invited thousands of Africans on a pilgrimage to Mekka. On arrival the pilgrims were arrested for entering the country without visas and were sold as slaves.

In the late 1950’s there were between 500,000 and 700,000 slaves in Arabia. There are 30 millions slaves in the world today, mostly in Islamic countries where slavery is legal.

Slavery, as practiced in Africa, was even more horrendous and still continues on a large scale, even to this day. On 6 March 2002, the French TV channel TF1, reported in its main news bulletin how an estimated 15 000 children, abducted from Mali with promises of a better life, were sold as slaves to cotton plantations in the Ivory Coast.”

Child-slavery is a flourishing business in West Africa, in countries like Nigeria, Togo, Benin, and Gabon. However, despite the enormity of this modern slavery, the media still focus their tales of slavery on the issue of Black slavery in the old USA, not the current widespread immediate problem it still is today.

White Western societies are subjected to the constant multiculturalist media propaganda of Black slavery as main stories or as many passing references in movies, and TV shows – whether in fictional stories, “magazine” news items, or referred to in current news. This must change.

Dr. William Pierce, late leader of the American racial-nationalist organisation National Alliance, recognised that the modern mass media deliberately ignores the current modern slave trade in Africa:

“Businessmen in the coastal cities send buyers into the interior with buses, where they collect surplus children, in the seven- to 15-year-old age range, and bring them back in groups of 50 to 100 – in other words, a bus load – to the slave markets on the coast. Typically the buyers pay parents anywhere from 10 to 30 dollars per child.  In some areas, they simply bribe local officials to look the other way and kidnap the children.

Once in the coastal cities, the children are housed in large, supermarket-style buildings where shoppers can stroll through, select the children they want to buy, and pay for their merchandise at the door as they leave. Some of the purchasers send the children out on the streets to work as prostitutes. Others use them as house servants or as factory workers.

This is not a small-time thing or an occasional thing. This is a thriving business involving thousands of children bought and sold every year in dozens of slave markets in West African cities, in the region which used to be known as the “slave coast,” because that’s where the slave dealers, during the 18th and early 19th centuries, would buy ship loads of slaves to take to the West Indies and the Americas for plantation work.

After slavery was outlawed in Europe and America, it continued as an ongoing institution in Africa, just as it had for countless centuries before White men began buying African slaves.

The only reason Europeans and White Americans ever hear anything about this ongoing African slave trade is that there are a few tender-hearted White groups, such as Amnesty International and Anti-Slavery International. Otherwise, the issue has been until only recently completely ignored.

These groups try to arouse public opinion in America and Europe against slavery. They also work through politicians, trying to persuade them to put anti-slavery amendments into aid agreements with African countries.

As a result of such aid-agreement amendments most African countries recently have gone through the motions of enacting legislation outlawing slavery. All this means in practice is that the slave dealers must pay bribes to the politicians or the police in order to avoid interference with their business.

President Trump has stepped up actions against human trafficking, prosecuting thousands of cases that would otherwise not have seen the light of day here in America. For eight straight years Obama ignored the plight of human trafficking in America to focus on his Saul Alinsky inspired political agenda of dividing Our nation on racial and economic issues and targeting enemies, like Trump, the Republicans and the US Constitution.

Do you wonder why you don’t see more news about the slave trade? Do you wonder why the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, and the major television news networks have virtually nothing to say about it?
Can you imagine the outrage you would see in these controlled media, day after day and week after week, if White people were behind this trade in Black children?

Of course, you can! But news about Blacks in Africa, behaving the way Blacks always have behaved, whether it is buying and selling child slaves in Nigeria or engaging in ritual cannibalism in Liberia or communist mass murderer Nelson Mandela’s “necklacing” of political enemies and accused “witches” in South Africa, is news which doesn’t fit the political leftist narrative and is therefore deemed not newsworthy by the masters of the liberal controlled mainstream media.

In fact, the media masters consider such news positively harmful, because it conflicts with the image they have built in the minds of the White public: an image of virtuous, peaceable, freedom-loving, industrious, sensitive, and creative Blacks, essentially noble Blacks, who have failed to rise to the cultural level of Europe and America only because they have been enslaved and exploited by cruel, greedy White supremacists.

It’s important to maintain this deceptive image, because it reinforces the sense of White racial guilt.   Convincing Whites that they somehow owe something to non-Whites, that they must never think of their own racial interests or feel any sense of White racial solidarity, because that can only lead to terrible things like slavery and the oppression of noble Blacks.

Even though slavery ended in the USA well over a hundred years ago, in 1865, even though only 8% of American families owned slaves, even though many Blacks owned slaves, and even though no-one who was involved in that slavery is alive today, the whole of America’s White population is collectively blamed, and is never forgiven for slavery that occurred in the 1700s and 1800s, and that blame is extended to Whites in general across the world.

However, Arab and Black slave traders and slave owners, who have continued to practice slavery for hundreds of years, and who have enslaved millions of blacks, and continue the practice of slavery even to this day, are virtually ignored by the Western media.

The Arab and African countries who do very little about this practice, or turn a blind eye to it, are not subject to ongoing condemnation by the media or Western governments. Whereas pre-1994 South Africa was continually attacked and maligned for having a White-dominated society and an official policy of separate racial development, or apartheid; the countries that allow modern-day Black slavery are not subjected to continual media campaigns against them, nor international economic boycotts against them (as happened to White South Africa).

In fact, the human rights abuses are generally left untouched and ignored by the controlled mainstream media, who love the death cult of communism because they profit on fomenting propaganda and hate.    After all, if it bleeds it leads.

Why? Because the issue has never been about slavery as such – the issue has always been about how to find an excuse to condemn and denigrate White people, with the resulting White Guilt Complex and steady demolishing of White ethnic pride, all of which is ideologically conducive to the furthering of “multiculturalism”.

To lay the blame for slavery upon Whites in general (“Whites used Blacks as slaves”) rather than upon that small percentage who actually owned slaves (“plantation owners used Blacks as slaves”), or upon those few Africans who enslaved Blacks, or upon those few White ship owners who actually engaged in the slave trade, is an instinctive tactic by multiculturalists who wish to denigrate the White race as a whole.

The Marxist multiculturalists’ obsession with Black slavery has nothing to do with slavery, but everything to do with a hatred of the position of the White race in the world (including a self-hatred by those Whites, instilled by a White Guilt Complex and by the anti-White hatred of multiracialists in general).    Same goes for the labels of xenophobe, homophobe, transgender-phobe, misogynist, racist, yada, yada, yada.

And what of modern slavery?

Where are the movies, the mini-series productions, the constant side references in TV shows? Why doesn’t the Western media produce continuous television outpourings of rage against this horrendous practice? The reason is because modern slavery is a product of the Third World, overwhelmingly carried out by Blacks, and does not fit into the ideological parameters of their Marxist anti-White propaganda.

The United Nations Working Group on Contemporary Forms of Slavery estimated in 1999 that some 20 million people are held in bonded labor around the world. Another report, put together by Anti-Slavery International in 2002 claims that as many as 27 million people worldwide are held in one form of slavery or another, most of them children. Today 30 million people are enslaved world wide and that number is still rising.
The report highlighted the plight of bonded agricultural workers in Pakistan, forced labor in the Sudan, and the worldwide problem of child domestic servants and the sexual exploitation of children.

Other countries cited by the report as tolerating slavery included Brazil, Mauritania, and the United Arab Emirates. It has also been estimated that in India alone, forty million people, including fifteen million children, are working in slave-like conditions as bonded laborers.

Salim Muwakkil, writing in The Chicago Tribune, has noted the silence from America on the issue of modern-day slavery in Africa.

“The discussion about slavery in Africa has been raging just beneath the surface of public discourse for at least a decade. That conversation has focused primarily on the African nations of Mauritania and Sudan, where slavery is less a function of poverty than of tradition and war. What’s more, since both countries are “Islamic republics,” dominated by Arab rulers, the issue has been aggravated by religious antagonisms, race and cultural rivalries.

Further controversy has centered on the lack of protest from the African-American community, especially since condemnation of the transatlantic slave trade is so pivotal to black leadership’s critique of the West.”

Muwakkil has also noted the racial and ethnic aspects to this slavery.
“In Mauritania, the country’s leadership is dominated by ethnic Berbers who are racially distinct from the indigenous black population. In Sudan, however, the difference is mostly cultural or vaguely “ethnic”.

Serge Trifkovic, in The Sword of the Prophet: A Politically-Incorrect Guide to Islam, has revealed the racial nature of the Black slavery carried out by Arabs in Mauritania and Sudan.

“Contrary to the myth that Islam is a religion free from racial prejudice, slavery in the Muslim world has been, and remains, brutally racist in character. To find truly endemic, open, raw anti-Black racism and slavery today one needs to go to the two Islamic Republics in Africa: Mauritania and Sudan. Black people have been enslaved on such a scale that the term black has become synonymous with slave.

For the pure-black populations of Sudan and Mauritania, independence from colonial rule marked the end of a slavery-free respite. Slavery was “abolished” several times in Mauritania since independence, most recently on July 5, 1980.

Yet the Anti-Slavery Society’s findings (1982) and those of Africa Watch (1990) point to the existence of at least 100,000 “full-time” slaves and additional 300,000 half-slaves, all of them black, still being held by Arab-Mauritanians.

The Muslim world has yet to produce a serious indigenous movement to abolish slavery that was not the consequence of Western prompting.

The Arabian Peninsula in 1962 became the world’s penultimate region to officially abolish slavery, yet years later Saudi Arabia alone was estimated to contain a quarter of a million slaves. Thousands of miles away from Africa, in Pakistan’s Northwest Frontier Province, girls as young as five are auctioned off to highest bidders.

Afghan girls between the ages of 5 and 17 sell for $80 to $100. The price depends on the colors of their eyes and skin; if they are virgins, the price is higher. The girls are generally sold into prostitution or, if they are lucky, they may join harems in the Middle East. If they are lucky.”

Slaves in modern Africa miss out on the massive media propaganda that is devoted to Black slavery in pre-Civil War America, simply because their masters are the wrong colour – that is, their masters are Arab or African themselves.

If the slaves masters of modern Africa were Whites from South Africa or Rhodesia then the media outrage and propaganda would know no bounds, and – like the media propaganda hurled against the old South Africa – would be of such continuous high publicity that every citizen would be extremely aware of it, it would be an issue of “debate” in every school, it would be the subject of campaigns by multiculturalist and “progressive” organisations, boycotts would be organised, and governments would be forced into action.

If the multiculturalists were really so concerned about the cruelty of slavery, they would be protesting day and night against the modern-day countries that allow this practice to continue. Yet, on this current issue of slavery, they are virtually silent.

Multiculturalists are far more concerned with promoting their world-view than they are with condemning slavery. The fact is that the media outpourings on Black slavery are due more to their value as multiculturalist propaganda against “white racism” than for any particular concern about human suffering.

While the Arabs have been acknowledged as a prime force in the early usage of slaves from Africa, very little has been written about their usage of White slaves, whether they were part of the Russian slave trade or those kidnapped by Arab pirates. However, in recent years, the research of some authors has been bringing this issue to light.

David Brion Davis, in The New York Review of Books, explains that. “The origins of African slavery in the New World cannot be understood without some knowledge of the millennium of warfare between Christians and Muslims that took place in the Mediterranean and Atlantic and the piracy and kidnapping that went along with it. In 1627 pirates from the Barbary Coast of North Africa raided distant Iceland and enslaved nearly four hundred astonished residents.

In 1617 Muslim pirates, having long enslaved Christians along the coasts of Spain, France, Italy, and even Ireland, captured 1,200 men and women in Portuguese Madeira. Down to the 1640s, there were many more English slaves in Muslim North Africa than African slaves under English control in the Caribbean. Indeed, a 1624 parliamentary proclamation estimated that the Barbary states held at least 1,500 English slaves, mostly sailors captured in the Mediterranean or Atlantic.”

Professor Robert Davis, in his book Christian Slaves, Muslim Masters: White Slavery in the Mediterranean, the Barbary Coast, and Italy, 1500-1800, estimated that 1 million to 1.25 million White people were enslaved by North African pirates between 1530 and 1780. North African pirates abducted and enslaved more Europeans from coastal villages and towns.

Italy, Spain, Portugal and France were hardest hit but the raiders also seized people in Britain, Ireland and Iceland. They even captured 130 American seamen from ships that they boarded in the Atlantic and Mediterranean between 1785 and 1793.
Arab pirates and White Slaves

Interest in the Arab slaving of Europeans was rekindled in the 1990s by the discovery of the site of a Barbary Coast shipwreck at Moor Sands on the South Devon coast in England.  Icon Films produced a documentary on the subject here are their findings:

“For England after 1625 there were great periods, particularly in Devon and Cornwall, Dorset, even around Bristol, where ships couldn’t leave port. The first of the Muslims showed up in 1625 it caused enormous panic. It was the suddenness. It was a surprise, the fact that there was so many of them and the fact that the English had a coastline which was virtually unprotected.”

“After looking at some dozens of population estimates from a number of different kinds of sources we have an average, year in year out, especially between the years 1580 and 1680 of about 35,000, 34,000 slaves at any given time. Well, knowing this it then becomes a question of estimating simply how many slaves it would be necessary to be taken every year to keep that number. I’ve have estimated overall that between 1530 and 1780, that is about two and a half centuries, something of the order of a million to a million and quarter white Europeans were enslaved and taken to Barbary.”

“Arab pirates plagued the south west coast of England and Ireland throughout the seventeenth century, but the height of this activity was around the 1630s, when England’s navy was at its weakest. While anything of value was fair game, their main quarry was slaves.

In the beginning they targeted the crews of West Country fishing boats, but as the pirates grew bolder they came ashore to find victims, such as the entire congregation of a village church in Cornwall and most of the inhabitants of Baltimore in Southern Ireland. A successfully ransomed sailor reported “If the hands be smooth, they was ransomed, but if the hands be rough, they was sold as slaves”. He told that a slave would fetch £40, a ransomnable captive £80 and a fair maiden up to £300.

By 1629 west country merchants were losing so many ships that James 1st was forced to send a fleet to North Africa to demand the return of the captives. It failed completely, but Admiral Mansell stated on his return that he believed there were between 25 and 30,000 Christian slaves in captivity.”

WHITE SLAVES, AFRICAN MASTERS

Reviews have praised White Slaves, African Masters: An Anthology of American Barbary Captivity Narratives, a book that has revealed the slavery of North American colonists by Barbary privateers.

“Some of the most popular stories in nineteenth-century America were sensational tales of whites captured and enslaved in North Africa. White Slaves, African Masters for the first time gathers together a selection of these Barbary captivity narratives, which significantly influenced early American attitudes toward race, slavery, and nationalism.

Though Barbary privateers began to seize North American colonists as early as 1625, Barbary captivity narratives did not begin to flourish until after the American Revolution. During these years, stories of Barbary captivity forced the U.S. government to pay humiliating tributes to African rulers, stimulated the drive to create the U.S. Navy, and brought on America’s first post-revolutionary war. These tales also were used both to justify and to vilify slavery.”

SLAVERY UNDER ISLAM CONTINUES TO THIS DAY

Books such as Islam’s Black Slaves: The Other Black Diaspora by Ronald Segal and Race and Slavery in the Middle East: A Historical Enquiry by Bernard Lewis have made available a wider knowledge on Arab slavery.

Bernard Lewis, who is an authority on the Near and Middle East, connection of slavery and status, both in theory and practice in the Islamic world from the 7th century to the present day.

White slaves were imported until the late 19th Century, when the Russians closed the Caucasus route.    False idealized views have promulgated idealized guilt generated by Western perception of Islamic slavery as being more benign than its Western counterpart, which is simply not true.  Ask a slave in Libya waiting to be killed for his organs to be sold if Islamic slavery is more benign.

Arab rulers even had white eunuchs (slaves with their testicles cut off).   Nice, right.

In Islam’s Black Slaves, Ronald Segal reveals that the Caliph in Baghdad at the beginning of the tenth century had seven thousand black eunuchs and four thousand white ones in his palace. Ibn Hawqal, writing in the 970s, remarked that “among the most famous exports [from al-Andalus to other Muslim lands] are comely slaves, both male and female from Frankish and Galician regions” and that “all Slavic eunuchs on earth come from al-Andalus, because they are castrated in that region”.

These are just a few examples of information available on the Arab trade in White slaves; however, this information rarely comes to light in biased Multiculturalist education systems, as they prefer to concentrate on the issue of Black slavery to the exclusion of all other types of slavery. In pushing a guilt complex upon white children, as part of their ideological fight to promote Multiculturalism and attack “White racism”, activist teachers would be aware that telling the truth about widespread White slavery would not be helpful in their promotion of Multiculturalist propaganda.

WHITE SLAVERY IN WHITE COUNTRIES

The usage of White slaves in Europe has received little attention by the media or in academia, even though it was a widespread practice.  Juliet Gardiner and Neil Wenborn have given a broad background to the institution of slavery in Britain.

“Slavery has had an important position in the society and economy of the British Isles and of Britain’s imperial possessions from time imme衫orial until the relatively recent past. It was an integral institution in Roman society. It played a large part in Celtic societies, and was important in Irish society until the 12th century.

The Irish were particularly assiduous slave traders, while prisoners taken in battle were frequently enslaved; there was also a flourishing trade in slaves between Bristol and Dublin against which Wulfstan of Worcester preached. Slavery had been an important institution for the Anglo-Saxons in England; slaves could be bought and sold, and slavery was an inherited condition or could be imposed as a legal punishment. Ten per cent of the population recorded in Domesday Book [1086] were slaves. The disappearance of slavery in England in the early 12th century remains a mysterious process.”

In Britain, as in many other countries, prisoners of war and criminals could be sold into slavery; however, the trade in slaves also included the kidnapping of unsuspecting poor people. Snippets in history resources sometimes mention in passing this slave trade in White people. For example, in a history of the City of Bristol and its links with the Transatlantic Slave Trade, we find the following snippet of information:

“By the 12th century some Bristol traders were routinely selling English children to Ireland (especially young girls)”.

It was said of Malcolm III, King of Scotland, that when he invaded England in 1070 and ravaged Durham, that his forces carried off so many prisoners that for years after English slaves were found in every hamlet of Scotland.

When James II took the British throne in 1685, the Duke of Monmouth, bastard son of Charles II, raised a rebellion to claim the throne for himself. When his forces were crushed at Sedgemoor, the Duke was executed with 320 of his followers. However, hundreds more of the rebels were sentenced to slavery instead.

“Over 800 rebels, as well as young girls who had embroidered Monmouth’s standards at Taunton, were given over to persons who enjoyed favour of court to be sold into slavery in the plantations of the West Indies, there to be treated, in Samuel Pepys’s words, ‘according to their deserts’.”

Extracts from “The Truth About Slavery” are revealing of the nature of White slavery.
“According to Thomas Burton’s Parliamentary Diary 1656-1659, in 1659 the English parliament debated the practice of selling British Whites into slavery in the New World. In the debate, these Whites were referred to not as “indentured servants” but as “slaves.”
In the Calendar of State Papers, Colonial Series, America and West Indies of 1701, we read of a protest over the “encouragement to the spiriting away of Englishmen without their consent and selling them for slaves, which hath been a practice very frequent and known by the name of kidnapping.” In the British West Indies, plantation slavery was instituted as early as 1627. In Barbados by the 1640s there were an estimated 25,000 slaves, of whom 21,700 were White.

Historian Col. A. B. Ellis, writing in the British Newspaper Argosy for May 6, 1893, said: “Few, but readers of old colonial state papers and records, are aware that between the years 1649 to 1690 a lively trade was carried on between England and the plantations, as the colonies were then called, [a trade] in political prisoners… they were sold at auction… for various terms of years, sometimes for life, as slaves.”

Sir George Sandys’ 1618 plan for Virginia referred to bound Whites assigned to the treasurer’s office to “belong to said office forever.” The service of Whites bound to Berkeley’s Hundred was deemed “perpetual.”
https://www.abebooks.com/book-search/title/american-pageant/author/bailey-thomas-a-kennedy-david-m-cohen-lizabeth/

David M. Kennedy, Lizabeth Cohen, and Thomas A. Bailey, in The American Pageant, have noted the high numbers of “indentured servants” in Virginia and Maryland.

“Because of the massive amounts of tobacco crops planted by families, “indentured servants” were brought in from England to work on the farms. In exchange for working, they received transatlantic passage and eventual “freedom dues”, including a few barrels of corn, a suit of clothes, and possibly a small piece of land.

Virginia and Maryland employed the “headright” system to encourage the importation of servant workers. Under its terms, whoever paid the passage of a laborer received the right to acquire 50 acres of land.

Chesapeake planters brought some 100,000 indentured servants to the region by 1700. These “white slaves” represented more than 3/4 of all European immigrants to Virginia and Maryland in the 17th Century.”

Paul Heinegg, in his book, Free African Americans of North Carolina and Virginia, adds to the story.

“Most of the free African Americans of Virginia and North Carolina originated in Virginia where they became free in the 17th and 18th century before chattel slavery and racism fully developed in the United States.

When they arrived in Virginia, Africans joined a society which was divided between master and white servant…. They joined the same households with white servants – working, eating, sleeping, getting drunk, and running away together.

The replacement of white servants with African slaves, begun in earnest in 1660, continued for more than a century. African slaves had still not completely replaced white servants by 17 October 1773 when the jailer in Prince William County advertised in the Virginia Gazette that he had caught a runaway white servant man:

“Committed to Prince William was William Rawlings, who says he is the property of Francis Smith of Chesterfield. The owner is desired to pay charges, and take him away.”
And he advertised in the same edition that he had jailed a runaway white servant woman: “Committed to the goal of Prince William a servant woman about 26 years of age, named Mary Richardson; has on a short printed cotton gown, and striped Virginia cloth petticoat.”

Michael Hoffman, in his book They Were White and They Were Slaves, confirms the large numbers of White slaves in early America.

“From 1609 until the early 1800’s, between one half and two thirds of all the White colonists who came to the New World came as slaves. Of the passengers on the Mayflower, twelve were White slaves. White slaves cleared the forests, drained the swamps, built the roads. They worked and died in greater numbers than anyone else.”

British people were sentenced to transportation to the American colonies for petty crimes; and, as was the case with those transported to Australia, they were used as slaves by landowners. As well as which, orphaned children and other children of poor white families, from the slums of England, were kidnapped and transported to the colonies. A review of They Were White and They Were Slaves details some of the horrors of White slavery.

“To be ‘sentenced to transportation’ to the colonies was tantamount to being sentenced to slavery.

The notion that transportation was a merciful alternative to imprisonment or death in Britain is an erroneous one. In fact, a merciful judge was regarded as one who did not transport British people into slavery in America.

Transportation of the white individuals from England had higher losses of life than that of the Black slaves of Africa. It cost more to obtain Blacks from Africa and the Whites were cheaply obtained and were viewed as expendable. In the 17th and 18th century it was customary to keep the White slaves below deck for the entire nine to twelve week journey.  A white slave would be confined to a hole not more that sixteen feet long, chained with 50 other men to a board, with padlocked collars around their necks.

The death rate of white slaves to America was about 25% compared to 10% of black slaves. If a white slave was sold in advance to a Virginia planter, his well being and care was the responsibility of the Captain of the ship until they reached the halfway point of the voyage. After that the responsibility of costs of provisions went to the planter whether or not the slave survived the trip.  Captains became infamous for providing sufficient food for only the first half of the trip and virtually starving their captives until they arrived in America.

Upon arrival in America, the white kidnapped and convicts were displayed on an auction block, examined, then sold by the ship’s Captain. Once sold, the nightmare began. As many as 80% of a shipment of white slaves died their first year. Long hours and sun exposure were considered part of a first year ‘seasoning”. They would work from sunrise to sunset in the fields or lead mines and then would be put to work in a shed grinding corn until midnight.

Some expected to serve their time and obtain land, others to apprentice to learn a trade, but in most cases they were severely treated by beatings, etc. and did not survive. As their terms of indenture came to a close, many were beaten and tortured, in hopes they would try to flee. If they did flee and were caught, their indenture was extended another seven, ten or more years.

Also additional time would be added for the cost of their capture. They were branded on the cheek with the letter “R” and/or one or both ears were removed so they would not repeat their fleeing. One half of White “indentured servants” did not live to attain their freedom.

Young white females in bondage were denied the right to marry. A woman having a baby, out of wedlock, was an extension of two and a half years to her term. The baby was taken from her and sold. These children’s bondage was a “mere” 21 years for boys and 18 years for girls. By 1769, all children born to even free white women who were unmarried were also candidates for enslavement. Children were sold for a few pounds of tobacco to another master.”

Michael Hoffman noted that White slaves in Barbados were badly treated by the plantation owners.

“In Barbados by the 1640’s there were an estimated 25,000 slaves, of whom 21,700 were White. Cromwell’s conquest of Ireland in the middle of the seventeenth century made slaves as well as subjects of the Irish people. Over a hundred thousand men, women and children were seized by the English troops and shipped to the West Indies, where they were sold into slavery. In the British West Indies the torture visited upon White slaves by their masters was routine. Masters hung White slaves by their hands and set their hands afire as a means of punishment.

To end this barbarity, Colonel William Brayne wrote to English authorities in 1656 urging the importation of negro slaves on the grounds that, “as the planters would have to pay much for them, they would have an interest in preserving their lives, which was wanting in the case of whites”, many of whom, he charged, were killed by overwork and cruel treatment. Ten thousand Whites were kidnapped from England in the year 1670 alone.”
Noel Scott has also researched the little-known practice of the White slavery suffered by the White working class, using sources such as W.J. Cash, Jim Goad, Michael Hoffman, Gary B. Nash, Robert J. Steinfeld, and Howard Zinn.

Hoffman recounts the atrocities Oliver Cromwell and his Roundheads performed against the Irish peasantry and anyone that so much as disagreed with Cromwell’s despotic, puritanical reign of terror. Cromwell “Barbadosed” 100,000 of his foes. Being “Barbadosed” involved being enslaved and imported to Barbados, where the unlucky British, Scots and Irish were “seasoned” in hellish weather and malaria-conducive conditions. In the 1640s, over eighty five percent of the slaves in Barbados were white, and by 1653, fifty percent of white Barbadians were sent courtesy of Cromwell.

What is often omitted from history lectures and texts is that the majority of whites did not come to the New World seeking religious freedom. The majority of whites were “kid-nabbed,” drugged, knocked out or otherwise conned into coming to the Americas. “Drums” were the hired hands of wealthy businessmen that hit poor Londoners over the head and shipped them to the Americas; “crimps” and “spirits” either drugged victims or snatched them off the streets.

Indentured servitude contracts were often forged documents, and the majority of indentured servants stolen away to the Americas were children who lacked the capacity to enter into a legal contract, notes W.J. Cash, in “The Mind of the South.” Francis Trollope estimates that 200,000 British children were kidnapped and shipped to the Americas or forced into factory labor.

In the “Early Stuart Diaries,” a 1618 parliamentary bill is mentioned which allowed constables to kidnap orphans over eight years old, imprison them and then ship the orphans as slaves to colonial plantations. A 1652 commonwealth law permitted vagrants and beggars to be “schlepped in shackles to the colonies,” writes Goad. And following the English’s lead, the Scottish Privy Council also sought to export its poor white trash to the Americas, in 1669, notes Gary B. Nash in his book “Red, White, and Black: The Peoples of Early America.” The order issued by the Scottish Privy Council made it legal to capture “strong and idle beggars, vagabonds, Egyptians, common and notorious whores, thieves, and other dissolute and lousy persons.”

Another myth is the bold-faced lie that “only blacks suffered through a harrowing ‘middle passage’ across the Atlantic.” Goad shares the plight of a German Palatine, Gottlieb Mittelberger, who was duped by “newlanders” (the German equivalent of British “drums” or “spirits”). Mittelberger came willingly, in 1750, but soon realized he had been conned.

Water and food were scarce, dead women and babies were tossed overboard and German slaves had it even worse below deck, writes Howard Zinn, in “A People’s History of the United States.” In 1731, one German ship set sail with one hundred fifty German Palatines and lost one hundred sixteen, writes Goad. In Roger A. Ekirch’s “Bound for America,” he estimates that ten to fifteen percent of all white bondsmen perished before completing the “middle passage.”

Whites, like blacks, suffered the inhumanity of being separated from their families and sold like they were non-human animals on auction blocks. One such white slave woman describes it, in “Bound for America”: “We were driven through the country like cattle to a Smithfield market and exposed to sale in public fairs like so many brute beasts.” In Robert J. Steinfeld’s “The Invention of Free Labor,” he notes that West Florida’s 1766 law stated that an indentured servant was “the property of his [or her] Master.”

That sounds like slavery to me.

One might wonder why black slavery ever took root if white slaves were so abundant. Goad explains that it was business as usual: whites could easily blend into the general white population if they escaped slave owners’ clutches, but a black slave stood out more and was easily recaptured.

One might also argue that after black slavery took root, former white slaves and their progeny had it made in the shade, but Goad counters this by making an astute point: Why would plantation owners pay white workers when they had a new crop of slave laborers from Africa?”

A review of Jim Goad’s The Redneck Manifesto shows that an inkling of this research is starting to reach a wider audience.

“The thesis starts out in medieval Europe, with its ruling class and serfs. It gets more trenchant and further from liberal mythology in its analysis of indentured servitude. Try this on for size: “A study of Virginia from 1623 to 1637 showed that white servants outnumbered white freemen by three to one. In Maryland at one point in the 1600s, the ration was six to one.” Henry Cromwell, the Lord Protector’s son, issued an edict that forcibly seizing young Irish women and shipping them to the colonies was “so much to their own good.”

Sounds just like liberals, doesn’t it?

“So even though the popular belief is that NO whites were shipped to America against their will, it’s highly possible that MORE whites were bought here unwillingly than blacks.” And sold to the highest bidder. And, like a rental car, abused far more than the capital goods, like the black slaves. Since, Goad argues, his ancestors were among those white slaves, why should he pay reparations to anyone?”

It is odd to note that those who call for reparations for slavery from Whites, or demand an apology for slavery from Whites, are themselves guilty of a perverse kind of racism. Robert W. Tracinski recognised this weird hypocrisy.

“An apology for slavery on behalf of the American nation presumes that whites today, who predominantly oppose racism, and never owned slaves, and who bear no personal responsibility for slavery, still bear a collective responsibility – a guilt they bear simply by belonging to the same race as the slave-holders of the Old South. Such an apology promotes the very idea at the root of slavery: racial collectivism.

Those who owned slaves were certainly guilty of a grave injustice. But by what standards can other whites (many of whom are not even descendants of the slave-holders) be held responsible for their ideas and actions? The only justification for such an approach is the idea that each member of the race can be blamed for the actions of every other member, that we are all just interchangeable cells of the racial collective.

The ultimate result of this approach is not racial harmony or a color-blind society, but racial warfare. Under the premise of racial collectivism, an injustice committed against any member of your racial group entitles you to retaliate against any member of the perpetrator’s racial group.”

The issue of White slavery is receiving more attention nowadays, albeit only from minor researchers who are virtually ignored by the media and educational institutions.
However, they have made a start in countering the decades-long Multiculturalist propaganda over Black slavery and its associated push to induce a collective feeling of guilt in the general White population.

Propaganda regarding Black slavery, especially whilst ignoring White slavery, is nothing less than anti-White racism and therefore should be exposed and opposed. To counter the wrongs of Multiculturalist propaganda, it is high time that the issue of White slavery is prominently discussed in the media and in schools.

WHITE SLAVES BLACK SLAVE OWNERS IN AMERICA

Robert M. Grooms, in “The Johnson Family: African-American Owners of White and Black Slaves”, has revealed the fact that Blacks owned White slaves in America. He also notes that a legal precedent for life-long slavery in America was established by a Black slave owner with regard to one of his Black slaves.

“On April 10, 1606 the Virginia Company of London was granted a royal charter by King James I, awarding it a large tract of land in present day Virginia, Delaware and Maryland.

On May 13, 1607 three small ships, Susan Constant, Godspeed and Discovery, arrived at Cape Henry, sailed up the James River, and landed at present-day Jamestown (“James Towne”). Following a 131-day voyage crowded in damp, cold, foul smelling holds in the darkness beneath the decks, 104 settlers, including twelve servants, disembarked and established a rough log fortress.

In August 1619, more than a year before the landing of the ship Mayflower, a captured Dutch man-of-war, with a Spanish captain name Jope and an English pilot named Marmaduke, anchored in the James River near Jamestown. On board were “20 and odd” men and women of African descent.

The Virginia colony was in need of laborers, while the captain and his crew were in need of supplies. A bargain was struck and twenty Negroes, the first of their race in the colonies, were sold to the colonists, fresh food and water was brought aboard, and the ship sailed away.

According to the African-American Chairman of President William Clinton’s Commission on Race, Duke University professor John Hope Franklin:

These newcomers, who happened to be black, were simply more indentured servants. They were listed in the census counts of 1623 and 1624; and as late as 1651, Negroes whose period of service had expired were also being assigned land much the same way that it was being assigned to whites who had completed their indenture. During the first-half century of existence Virginia had many Negroes as servants; and the record reveals an increasing numbers of free Negroes.

Franklin wrongly designated the first twenty Negroes in the colonies as indentured servants, instead of redemptioners. Indentured servants, in return for paying the cost of their passage to the New World, entered into a written contract while still in Europe to work for a specified owner, for a specified number of years, under determined conditions.

The length of the bound servitude, be it an extendable set number of years or durante vite (servitude for life) has no bearing on whether an individual is deemed a slave. The vast majority of whites and all blacks arrived in the colonies as redemptioners. They were generally of the underclass, including orphans, who were rounded up (often involuntarily) while still in their native country and transported to the New World.

Whites were frequently transported in the same ships that were used for Africans.
One redemptioner who came to American in 1750 recalled his trip with horror: “To keep from starving, we had to eat rats and mice. We paid from eight pence to two shilling for a mouse, four pence for a quart of water.”

Gittlieb Mittelburger in, Journey to Pennsylvania, recorded in 1750 that: The sale of human beings at the market on board the ship is carried on thus: …Every day Englishmen, Dutchmen, and High German people come from the city of Philadelphia and other places in part from a great distance, say twenty, thirty, or forty hours away, and go on board the newly-arrived ship that has brought and offers for sale passengers from Europe, and select among the healthy persons such as they deem suitable for their business

White and black servants joined the same households – working, eating, sleeping and running away together. Their terms of service could be extended for a large number of minor offenses, including marrying or having children without permission. As a result of extensions, many whites served their whole life as a “servant.”

A child born to a female redemptioner could become the property of her owner and the mother’s term extended. For example, George Cummins had the indenture of his white servant woman named Christian Finney extended by a year and her child bound for thirty-one years by order of the Carteret County Count on December 7, 1736.

When she applied to the court for her freedom on June 9, 1744, the court ruled that she serve another five months to pay for the cost incurred by her owner to bring the earlier action. When she applied again 6 months later, she was ordered to serve an additional year for having a “Mulatto Child in the time of her servitude.”

Before 1643 servants without indentures generally became freemen after a term of service varying from two to eight years. After 1643, the terms of servants “brought into the colony without indentures or covenants to testify to their agreement” were fixed at four to seven years, the period varying somewhat with the age of the servant. It was the custom and later the law that a redemptioner, white or black, received from his master at the time of his discharge a certain amount of property called “freedom dues.” In 1660 Virginia custom was to give each new freeman “3 barrels of corn and suit of clothes.”

In 1651 Anthony Johnson [a negro] was given 250 acres as “head rights” for purchasing five incoming white redemptioners.

In 1652 John Johnson, Anthony Johnson’s eldest son, purchased eleven incoming white males and females, and received 550 acres adjacent to his father.

There were a number of additional Virginia land patents representing grants to free blacks of from fifty to 550 acres for purchasing white redemptioners. For example, on

April 18, 1667 Emanuel Cabew received fifty acres in James City County, and in 1668 fifty acres were deed to John Harris of Queen’s Creek. Francis Payne paid for his freedom in 1650 by purchasing three incoming whites for his master’s use.
White slavery in the Industrial Revolution

Michael A. Hoffman II has explained that even whilst not encumbered by the institution of slavery, White people were subjected to slave-like conditions.

“In the 18th century in Britain and America, the Industrial Revolution spawned the factory system whose first laborers were miserably oppressed White children as young as six years of age.

They were locked in the factories for sixteen hours a day and mangled by the primitive machinery. Hands and arms were regularly ripped to pieces. Little girls often had their hair caught in the machinery and were scalped from their foreheads to the back of their necks.

White Children wounded and crippled in the factories were turned out without compensation of any kind and left to die of their injuries. Children late to work or who fell asleep were beaten with iron bars. Lest we imagine these horrors were limited to only the early years of the Industrial Revolution, eight and ten year old White children throughout America were hard at work in miserable factories and mines as late as 1920.”
The awful conditions suffered by the child chimney sweeps are alluded to in the poem

“The Sweep Boys Lament” (London, 1824):

I’m weak and young and frightened oft,
when the dark flue I see;
by blows and threats forced up aloft,
where nobody loves me.

My master beats me with a rope,
a cruel master he:
But I have neither friends nor hope;
For nobody loves me.

They loved the negro ‘oer the wave,
they strove to set him free;
But though I am a little slave,
there’s nobody loves me.

Another example of child slavery in Britain can be found in A Memoir of Robert Blincoe, An Orphan Boy, Sent from the Workhouse at St. Pancras, London at 7 Years of Age to Endure the Horrors of a Cotton Mill.

“Being too short of stature to reach his work standing on the floor, he was placed on a block; but this expedient only remedied a part of the evil, for he was not able by any possible exertion to keep pace with the machinery. In vain the …child declared it was not in his power to move quicker. He was beaten by the overlooker with great severity and cursed and reviled from morning ’till night, ’till his life became a burthen to him and his body discoloured with bruises.”

Men would be typically hired for heavy duty or labouring jobs, whilst women would carry out more intricate work. Women were paid less than men, and children were paid even less, and therefore employers liked to hire children as a source of cheap labour.
Chapman Cohen, in Christianity, Slavery and Labour, made note of these practices.Sir Samuel Romily [1757 – 1818] says:

It is a very common practice with the great populous parishes in London to bind children in large numbers to the proprietors of cotton-mills in Lancashire and Yorkshire, at a distance of 200 miles. The children who are sent off by wagon loads at a time, are as much lost for ever to their parents as if they were shipped off for the West Indies. The parishes that bind them, by procuring a settlement for the children at the end of forty days, get rid of them for ever; and the poor children have not a human being in the world to whom they can look up for redress against the wrongs they may be exposed to from these wholesale dealers in them, whose object it is to get everything they can possibly wring from their excessive labour and fatigue.

CHILDREN WORKING IN THE MINES

In the mines the conditions were, if possible, still worse. In 1842, there was presented to both Houses of Parliament a Report from the Children’s Employment Commissioners. From a summary of this report, published in the Westminster Review for October, 1842, and extending over fifty pages, I take the following: Of the extent of child labor in mines, we are told:

“Children are taken at the earliest ages, if only to be used as living and waving candlesticks, or to keep rats from a dinner; and it is in pits of this worst character, too, in which most female children are employed. It would appear from the practical returns obtained by the Commissioner, that about one-third of the persons employed in coal mines are under eighteen years of age, and that much more than one-third of this proportion are under thirteen years of age.”

In Shropshire we learn “there are very few under six or seven who are employed to draw weights with a girdle round the body; and those only when the roof of the pit is so low for short distances as to prevent horses of the smallest size from being employed.” Of a Yorkshire pit, in describing the way the children draw the trucks of coal–from two to five cwt. [hundred weight (has varied: 100-120 pounds)], “they buckle round their naked person a broad leather strap, to which is attached in front a broad ring and about four feet of chain, terminating in a hook.” No wonder the Commissioners speak of these human beasts of burden, chained, fettered, and harnessed, as “presenting an appearance indescribably disgusting and unnatural.”

In the West Riding there was no distinction of sex so far as underground labor was concerned. “The men work in a state of perfect nakedness, and are in this state assisted in their labors by females of all ages, from girls of six years old up to women of twenty-one, these females being quite naked down to the waist.” Pages might be filled with similar descriptions of pits in England, Scotland and Wales. The whole forms a striking comment on Canon Brownlow’s statement that “One of the most remarkable effects of Christianity was.the rehabilitation of manual labor in public estimation.

One ought to say a word or two on the employment of boys in sweeping chimneys – a practice unknown outside the British Isles – before leaving this aspect of the subject. Children of six or seven were employed at this task, although an Act was passed in 1817 ordering that no boy should be employed under eight years of age.

Most of these boys were either sold outright to the employers by callous parents, or apprenticed from the parish. They were set to climbing chimneys, and often straw was lit behind them to encourage quickness of movement. Some masters washed their boys once a week, others just left them alone. The boys were stunted in growth, blear-eyed from the soot, and “flapper-kneed” from climbing. Deaths from suffocation were common. Yet, when in 1803, a very mild Bill was brought before the House of Lords, regulating the trade, it was rejected by a House consisting of one Archbishop, five Bishops, three Dukes, five Earls, one Viscount, and ten Barons.”

The chronic overworking of Whites was rampant in Western societies. The fact that England had campaigned for an end to Black slavey while ignoring conditions at home that were equivalent to White slavery was a source of anger to many working class people and trade unionists.

In 1837, George Loveless, the leading figure of the Tolpuddle Martyrs (the six Dorset labourers who had been sent to the penal colony of New South Wales for their Trades Union activity), made a speech to his fellow labourers:

“England has for many years been lifting her voice against the abominable practice of negro slavery. Numbers of great men have talked, have laboured and have struggled until at length emancipation has been granted to the black slaves in the West Indies. When will they dream of advocating the cause of England’s white slaves?”
At the height of the anti-slavery campaign, William Cobbett wrote to Wilberforce:

“You seem to have great affection for the negroes… I feel for the hard-pinched, the ill-treated, the beaten down labouring classes of England, Scotland and Ireland, to whom you do all the mischief that it is in your power to do; because you describe their situation as good, and because you do, in some degree, at any rate, draw the public attention away from their sufferings.”

In an impassioned letter to the Leeds Mercury in 1830, a social reformer, Richard Oastler, wrote:

“Thousands of our fellow creatures are existing in a state of slavery more horrid than are the victims of that hellish system, colonial slavery… The very streets which receive the droppings of the Anti-Slavery Society are every morning wet by the tears of innocent victims at the accursed shrine of avarice, who are compelled, not by the cart whip of the negro slave driver, but by the equally appalling thong or strap of the overlooker, to hasten, half-dressed, but NOT half-fed, to those magazines of British infantile slavery – the worsted mills in the town of Bradford.”

Advocates of social justice, such as Loveless, Cobbett, and Oastler, campaigned hard to alleviate the conditions of the working people of those times. In the 1890s, Rev. Louis Albert Banks of Boston wrote the book White Slaves Or The Oppressions Of The Worthy Poor to expose the awful conditions of the poor people that he had witnessed in his work.

SLAVE GIRLS

Chapman Cohen, in Christianity, Slavery and Labor, has revealed instances of White slavery in Britain in the seventeenth century and beyond.

“In the seventeenth century thousands of Irish-men, women, and children were seized by the order, or under the licence of the English Government, and sold as slaves for use in the West Indies. In the Calendar of State Papers, under various dates, between 1653-6, the following entries occur: “For a licence to Sir John Clotworthy to transport to America 500 natural Irishmen.” A slave dealer, named Sellick, is granted a licence to take 400 children from Ireland for New England and Virginia. Later “1,000 Irish girls and the like number of youths” are sold to the planters in Jamaica.

In Scotland the Parliament passed, in 1606, an Act binding all workmen engaged in coal mines and at salt works to perpetual service. For over a century and a half later whenever coal mines or salt works changed owners those employed were sold with the estates. They were emancipated in 1775 by an Act of the British Parliament, but with certain special conditions that made the Act almost a dead letter. It was not until 1799 that the colliers [coal miners] and salt-workers of Scotland became free men.”

The Heritage League has also revealed some of the horrendous working conditions suffered by White people in Britain during the nineteenth century.

“Campaigning by a few radicals, and several of the more humane factory owners, led to a Factory Inquiry Commission being set up by Parliament in 1833. Reports to the Commission showed that children as young as 5, but more often 7, were employed in a working day of 14-16 hours, exclusive of intervals and meals. It was also reported that factory owners permitted overseers to flog and maltreat children and often took an active part themselves. In many factories children were employed on 12-hour night shifts. Medical reports to the Commission showed that thousands of children were maimed and deformed by factory work, lack of sleep often leading to accidents involving several children and adults.

“The Secret Of England’s Greatness, 5 pence Per Hour”
[The Bulletin, August 1889]

Shop assistants were notoriously overworked, and campaigners eventually secured the passage of the Shop Hours Act in 1886. The Act imposed a limit of hours worked per week of 74 hours, however, this remained ineffectual until the enforcement of the regulations was handed over to the local authorities in 1912. One has to wonder how many hours a week shop assistants were forced to work, if a reduction to 74 hours a week was thought to be “reasonable”. It is little wonder that such conditions have been referred to as “White slavery” or “wage slavery”.

In such times, Black slaves in America were often treated better than White employees, as the slaves could be quite expensive to buy, and therefore were looked after as an economic asset. The Economist has estimated that in 1753 an African slave from the Gold Coast would cost £16 (about UK£1,000 or US$1,650 in today’s money), and in the West Indies would fetch up to £35.”[104] On the other hand, White labourers were simply hired by the hour or by the day, and – in a era without Workers’ Compensation laws – could be used in reckless and dangerous ways without economic liability to their bosses.

An example of this can be seen in the observations of Frederic Olmsted.
“In 1855, Frederic Law Olmsted, the landscape architect who designed New York’s Central Park, was in Alabama on a pleasure trip and saw bales of cotton being thrown from a considerable height into a cargo ship’s hold. The men tossing the bales somewhat recklessly into the hold were Negroes, the men in the hold were Irish. Olmsted inquired about this to a shipworker. “Oh,” said the worker, “the niggers are worth too much to be risked here; if the Paddies are knocked overboard or get their backs broke, nobody loses anything.”

In light of the “White slavery” conditions suffered by the British working class, the Heritage League has attacked those “bleeding hearts” who have for so long tried to place the yoke of a “White guilt complex” upon the shoulders of White people worldwide.

“The cause of African slavery was championed, whilst that of the child slaves of Britain was virtually ignored, because of an early form of political correctness. The “bleeding hearts” of the day preferred to campaign for abolition of slavery because it was more socially acceptable: because it was taking place somewhere else. Considering the attitudes of their ilk today, it is unsurprising that they would campaign for one but ignore the other.

When one reflects and considers the suffering of our ancestors, our kith and kin, and the way their plight was ignored, then you have to say that we are the ones who should be angry. Conquerors have enslaved their enemies since before the dawn of time, the native Britons were enslaved by the Romans, then by the Saxons who, in turn, were enslaved by the Normans. We move on. And it is the mark of a civilized and mature folk that they accept that what was done in the past was done in the context of the age in which it took place.”

For those who did not know about these things, and sadly there are a great number, I hope that you will now be better equipped to resist attempts to make you feel guilty about your past. And perhaps you will educate others who are ignorant of the truth.

WHITE SLAVERY AND THE MODERN MEDIA

Michael Hoffman has revealed the double standards of the media when it comes to slavery and mistreatment of those in servitude. This double standard is also applied in the schools and universities of Multiculturalist education.

“The wealthy, educated White elite in America are the sick heirs of what Charles Dickens in Bleak House termed “telescopic philanthropy” – the concern for the condition of distant peoples while the plight of kindred in one’s own backyard are ignored.
Today much of what we see on “Turner Television” and Pat Robertson’s misnamed “Family Channel,” are TV films depicting Blacks in chains, Blacks being whipped, Blacks oppressed. Nowhere can we find a cinematic chronicle of the Whites who were beaten and killed in White slavery. Four-fifths of the White slaves sent to Britain’s sugar colonies in the West Indies did not survive their first year.

Soldiers in the American Revolution and sailors impressed into the American navy received upwards of two hundred whiplashes for minor infractions. But no TV show lifts the shirt of these White yeoman to reveal the scars on their backs.

The Establishment would rather weep over the poor persecuted Negroes, but leave the White working class “rednecks” and “crackers” (both of these terms of derision were first applied to White slaves), to live next door to the Blacks.

Little has changed since the early 1800s when the men of property and station of the English Parliament outlawed Black slavery throughout the Empire. While this Parliament was in session to enact this law, ragged five year old White orphan boys, beaten, starved and whipped, were being forced up the chimneys of the English parliament, to clean them. Sometimes the chimney masonry collapsed on these boys. Other times they suffocated to death inside their narrow smoke channels.

Long after Blacks were free throughout the British Empire, the British House of Lords refused to abolish chimney-sweeping by White children under the age of ten. The Lords contended that to do so would interfere with “property rights.” The lives of the White children were not worth a farthing and were considered no subject for humanitarian concern.

The chronicle of White slavery in America comprises the dustiest shelf in the darkest corner of suppressed American history. Should the truth about that epoch ever emerge into the public consciousness of Americans, the whole basis for the swindle of “Affirmative action,” “minority set-asides” and proposed “Reparations to African-Americans” will be swept away. The fact is, the White working people of this country owe no one. They are themselves the descendants, as Congressman Wilmot so aptly said, of “the sons of toil.”

There will only be racial peace when knowledge of radical historical truths are widespread and both sides negotiate from positions of strength and not from fantasies of White working class guilt and the uniqueness of Black suffering.

Let it be said, in many cases Blacks in slavery had it better than poor Whites in the antebellum South. This is why there was such strong resistance to the Confederacy in the poverty-stricken areas of the mountain south, such as Winston County in Alabama and the Beech mountains of North Carolina. Those poor Whites could not imagine why any White laborer would want to die for the slave-owning plutocracy that more often than not, gave better care and attention to their Black servants than they did to the free white labor they scorned as “trash.”

To this day, the White ruling class denigrates the White poor and patronizes Blacks.  This is simply to have the means to control both groups and keep them divided and at each others throats by fomenting racial hatred.

We must also not forget that the Bolsheviks and Nazis both used slave labor to further their “cause”.    Communism itself is a form or indentured servitude, as one cannot live life on their own terms, but rather under the “collective.”

I argue that communism IS slavery. – HN

PLEASE SHARE THIS INFORMATION WIDELY!

TRUTH TALK NEWS
“Where truth the mainstream media ignores is the top story!”

http://www.youtube.com/TruthTalkNewsChannel2

http://www.youtube.com/TruthTalkNews

http://www.youtube.com/TruthTalkNews

http://www.TruthTalkNews.blogspot.com

http://truthtalknewschannel2.blogspot.com

Feel free to share and download this FAIR USE content.

Do the research.

Find your own truth.

There is only one truth.

Seek and you will find it.

If you seek truth and want to help restore Our Constitutional Republic as intended, please subscribe and share the valuable information contained on this site.

Thank you for your continued support.

All information reported on TRUTH TALK NEWS and HowardNema.com is sourced and verifiable and for the purposes of FAIR USE.  All content herein can be used by anyone in accordance with U.S. Copyright law.

Share on Facebook

Tweet

Save