Talk:Irish slaves myth

NPOV

This article lacks an impartial tone. FrunkSpace (talk) 10:33, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

You will need to be a lot more specific. I also recommend reading this talkpage and its archives before commenting.Acroterion (talk) 12:17, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Seconded, this is an extremely biased article on a complex topic. Just because the Irish slaves were allegedly not treated as badly as African slaves does not make it a "myth". I think the entire article needs a rewrite, beginning with the Title. Or at least cite some sources with opposing pov. --Jingle38 (talk) 04:55, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

This is missing the point entirely. It's not about how the "Irish slaves" were treated as compared to African slaves, it's how chattel slavery in America is conflated with indentured servitude. For starters. This has been gone over many times, as the archives will attest - Alison ^talk 19:00, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Slavery is slavery it's disgusting that you're trying to compare the two and invalidate grievances that non-Africans might also have. Disgraceful Dan27032 (talk) 15:10, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Slavery is slavery, and indentured servitude isn't it. I suggest reading the article. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 15:17, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Many of these "indentured servants" had the terms and conditions of their indenture constantly altered with additional cost's such as food, water, clothing and living accommodation tacked onto the terms extending the length of their service by years and in some case's for life, as life in the colonies was generally nasty & short. They where slaves in all but name and this entire article is utter drivel ignoring well known historic facts sacrificing them on the alter of modern politics.

The article should be removed or at the very least edited to be impartial.

MRWH359 (talk) 20:30, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

It does not appear like you have bothered to read anything. If you think coverage of Irish indentured servitude needs improvement go to that article and discuss it there. This is just not the place to disappear other information, because you don't like what sources say, we are not here to write down (or not write down) things based on what you want to think about. Alanscottwalker (talk) 17:18, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi Alan, I was responding to the comments specifically not the article though it also mentions "indentured servants" I was clarifying how indentured servitude smells an awful lot like slavery to me and most likely to be people who sufferer through it.

Kind regards,

MRWH359 (talk) 04:45, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

What it smells like to you is just not relevant on this page, but factoids may also be turned to pseudo-history when shorn of specificity, context, and employed as rhetoric. Alanscottwalker (talk) 14:13, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi Alan,

By that logic your opinion on it's relevance doesn't matter either. It's not pseudo-history just history, every race and nation where slaves at one point either in antiquity or more recently it doesn't detract from it just because a bit of time has passed. Countless civilizations have tried to justify their actions by calling it various things (when they had a mind to of course) the fact still remains a slave is still a slave whether it's for a day or for life whether it's today or 10,000 years ago (you forget that slaves in Rome were often freed after a length service or the death of an owner so by the logic of this article they were "indentured servants and they were just helping to colonize Rome on behalf of the Gauls, Britons, Thracians etc" - obviously they weren't they were slaves.) This article reeks of revisionism to suit a modern political agenda, Wikipedia is supposed to be an encyclopedia not a political blog all articles are to be written according to Wikipedia:Neutral point of view standards this one clearly is not there is no point arguing it is clearly in breach of how the articles are to written. Shifting from a centralist rational point of view alienates many and leads the site into irrelevance and eventually obscurity. It doesn't matter how either of us feel about it the article doesn't meet the standards of NPOV, so no point arguing with me I just thought I'd throw in my two cent's because I'm sick of seeing articles like this written with such a bias (left or right) sowing further division.

Kind regards,

MRWH359 (talk) 19:13, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

No. NPOV is not false balance, nor false equivalency. Just read the sources. Indeed, "slave" can be used in a variety of ways, for example in the phrase, "slaves to a myth", by one of the Irish professors in the sources, it is just that in the pseudo-history documented in this Wikipedia article, it is used for a rhetoric of conflation and false equivalence. --Alanscottwalker (talk) 21:05, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

Indentured Servitude/Slavery

All of the articles I’ve read on Irish Slavery seem to only be able to dispute that the Irish weren’t the “first” slaves or that they were “Indentured Servants”. Which, as we all know, was tantamount to slavery itself. There were no regulations or consequences for how the Irish were treated or what types of labors were allowed. They were sold, they were shipped and they were used like any other slave of the time. Many profited from their sale. Many except for themselves. So, if you say that that the claim of the Irish being slaves is “false” because they weren’t the “first” slaves as the meme says or they were actually “indentured servants”… you are part of the problem in regards to the history and plight of the Irish in the 17th century. The1Kraken (talk) 03:55, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Well indentured servitude was in no way limited to the Irish, indeed by numbers there were probably more English or Welsh or Scottish or German. And, no the Irish were not first, nor the first apprentices, nor child laborers, nor work-house debt workers, nor unpaid women's work, etc. all these unfair systems inflicted across nations of poor people. But you are missing the point entirely, they were still not in hereditary chattel slavery, generation upon generation. Alanscottwalker (talk) 21:53, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

You're missing the point entirely. A comparison to chattel slavery is not assumed when looking at the Irish experience. The article title is factually incorrect and it assumes an argument that only you are making. Reduce it to the core issue: irish slavery and servitude. The article should then discuss the degrees and conditions faced by the Irish. Irish people exist as more than just a tool by which to measure other people's pain. 2601:601:8581:2E20:ECB8:129B:EAA:E6B (talk) 04:01, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

It's been interesting listening to someone who's a self-professed 4th generation American of Irish heritage, attempt to speak for actual Irish people. And refer to an actual person from Ireland as <checks notes> an "old white bidd[y]". Biddy, as you likely know, is a derogatory term for an Irish woman, specifically. Hard to have a serious dialogue around that, eh? - Alison ^talk 06:15, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Wiki page should be renamed

"Irish people exist as more than just a tool by which to measure other people's pain." Article dismisses evidence for irish slavery with opinion. 70.40.80.40 (talk) 22:13, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Feel free to read the 56 references. Acroterion (talk) 22:34, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

It's been explained ad nauseam on this talk page (see history) that we are not talking about "slavery" or claiming the Irish were never enslaved. This subject specifically addresses the conflation of indentured servitude (which is technically a form of slavery) with racial chattel slavery, and how American race activists (ie white supremacists) use this false equivalence to trivialize the Atlantic slave trade.

Try to stop clogging up this page with vague references to "Irish slavery" -unless you have reliable sources stating that the Irish suffered racial chattel slavery, then it doesn't matter how many Irish were enslaved by Vikings, North Africans, or were sent to the Caribbean as indentured servants by Cromwell. Jonathan f1 (talk) 02:48, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Indentured servitude is slavery with extra steps. To claim otherwise is disingenuous. 173.216.18.56 (talk) 14:47, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

The treatment of the Irish in the Cromwellian times predates the foundation of the United States and even the English Colonies in North America! So it is not a question of conflating Irish ' slaves' -indentured servants' or whatever you may call them with the much later chattel slavery in the US. If you want to conflate African slavery conflate it with the Islamic Slave Trade which predated the Atlantic Trade by aboit 700 years and continued upmto the present!

The smaller colonies of the Carriban Plantations had obviously smaller populations but at the time Irish 'slaves' or whatever youncall them outnumbered the sum total of English, French , spanish, Puertoguese, Dutch and black african slaves in the region. In fact only the native American population outnumbered the Irish.

Furthermore the article depicts Irish as criminals doing penal servitude. In a war like WWI OR Wwii you migght suffer a 5% population loss inplaces. Covid might in ppaces reach 1%. Sources are difficult to come by but in the Cromwellian period min a decade in Ireland between 20% and 40% of the entire population disappeared. People,were slaughtered, starved and forcefully deported. To brand them all as criminals is ridiculous. On Bloody Sunday in Derry British Paratroopers opened fire on unarmed civilians. It took almost 50 years for the British governemt to,admit they were wrong. The day they did it there were maybr 4 IRA members in Derry. The next day there were over 400! Why is this relevant? Branding Irish deporteed into a life of forces, plantation work k no matter what you care to call them ) as 'criminals' is the actual myth here!

There are many forms of slavery. Wiping out 40% of a population in a decade was not a nice thing to do! Forced deportation was part of it. Tens of thousands to the carribean! Isaw (talk) 21:33, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

The Cromwellian repression in Ireland is an interesting topic, but not the topic of this page. This page talks about the false equivalency made between indentured servitude and African chattel slavery. The article describes the considerable differences in this treatment and the political uses of denying their difference. It doesn't seem to make clear that indentured servitude was suffered by poor people from all three kingdoms that were ruled by the early British state, though it probably should. Boynamedsue (talk) 05:28, 8 September 2024 (UTC)