(The pilgrims didn't flee persecution, they left so they could persecute :P)
(Don't mention what happened to the previous inhabitants)
Wrong, readsettlers.org
The mythology of the white masses holds that those early settlers were the poor of England, convicts and workers, who came to North Amerika in search of "freedom" or "a better way of life". Factually, that's all nonsense.
...
A study of roughly 10,000 settlers who left Bristol from 1654-85 shows that less than 15% were proletarian. Most were youth from the lower-middle classes; Gentlemen & Professionals 1%; Yeomen & Husbandmen 48%; Artisans & Tradesmen 29%. The typical age was 22-24 years. In other words, the sons and daughters of the middle class, with experience at agriculture and craft skills, were the ones who thought they had a practical chance in Amerika.
...
It was this alone that drew so many Europeans to colonial North Amerika: the dream in the settler mind of each man becoming a petty lord of his own land. Thus, the tradition of individualism and egalitarianism in Amerika was rooted in the poisoned concept of equal privileges for a new nation of European conquerors.
Edit: this seemed to confound a lot of people, so maybe a bit more explanation. When people say that immigrants to the US were looking for "a better way of life" it suggests that they are fleeing a life of hardship and poverty. This is wrong when talking about the "early" white settler immigrants to the US, a period which still spans a couple centuries. And the later, white working class immigrants still looked for ways to profit off slavery and genocide, the "better life" for them was built on stolen land and labor. It's nothing like the current immigrants to the US which the GOP loudly and the Dems quietly look to oppress.
your text seems to agree 100% with one of the examples in the original posts text: ”[…] immigrants who […] simply sought better lives for themselves and their descendants“.
could you elaborate why you think it is wrong?
They didnt flee persecution. Also the "better life" was built on the back of slaves, which seems a bit disingenous phrasing.
Edit I guess the point is that the people coming to steal land and genocide peoples aren't like the immigrants today, its a false equivalence
Edit2 also the first line literally disagrees with that
1654-85? Really? And you honestly think that timeframe gives a representative sample of European immigrants to North America? Really? That's the stupidest thing I've read all day. Mass immigration didn't even start until the 19th century for fucks sake, nearly 200 years later. Sometimes Lemmy really sucks ass.
Wtf is a Yeomen Husbandmen? Some sort of gay Beowolf? Maybe something to do with Kanye?
Husbandry. The art of matching up young people into blessed relationships.
A Yeoman was a type of anime cosplay popular at the time.
seriously tho LMGTFY:
In general, a husbandman is someone who manages a farm, particularly in terms of the crops and livestock. The term has been around since the Middle Ages and was commonly used in England. On the other hand, a yeoman is someone who owns and cultivates a small farm. The term originated in feudal England and was used to describe a social class between the gentry and the laborers.
Small land-holder. Not a titled lord, but also not a peasant per se.
Being of middle-class standing doesn't invalidate that they were seeking adventure, opportunity, or freedom. What a strange conclusion to arrive at.
What kind of adventure though? Freedom to do what exactly? What they were seeking is a bit different from what the current immigrants are seeking dont you think?
Edit it does invalidate the narrative that the early settlers were impoverished or convicted people fleeing an oppressive feudal england, which the tweet seems to suggest.
Found the troll. 🤦🏽♂️
Or came as conquers. ¬_¬
That's my preferred method.
Wise words from the Grandfather of Dropout.tv
Still, you spit your venom, demonising immigrants
When really, you're an immigrant
'Cause all of us are immigrants
Or descended from immigrants
The irony is imminent, I'll shed the light on immigrants
America was colonised by Britain
Britain, it was colonised by Rome
Also, colonised by the Saxons
They were German, by the way
You know how people throw shade upon the Germans
'Cause of history's pain
And yet we make the same mistakes all again
Demonise a whole people, Jewish or Muslim the same and the same
Old situations play on repeat
The same old TV shows repeat
Yeah, we worship the bleak
Our opinions aren't our own and we follow like sheep
There's no left, there's no right
In the middle we sleep
~Ren, Money Game Pt.1
not to forget that muslims too were invaders and the Jews, thanks to Israel, are finally able to take their place in the monsters list.
Even what we call "indigenous people" were colonizers at one time. it's the idea of property that seems to be the problem. The earth belongs to nobody.
"Since the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, nuclear weapons have been detonated over 2,000 times for testing and demonstration." 🤷
Zionism and Israel were part of the Nazi plan to tie Judaism to a nationality. The "stateless Jew" problem is really an allegiance to authority problem. It comes down to national identity over spiritual gnosis in every conflict where people resist power. Even Jesus was crucified for threatening the authority of the Roman empire, and in mere decades they claimed ownership over his followers and used the Gospels to justify nationalist conquest.
Last name checks out...
