this post was submitted on 14 Jan 2024
596 points (96.4% liked)

People Twitter

5230 readers
1156 users here now

People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.

RULES:

  1. Mark NSFW content.
  2. No doxxing people.
  3. Must be a tweet or similar
  4. No bullying or international politcs
  5. Be excellent to each other.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] mathemachristian@lemm.ee 26 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (5 children)

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.

[–] user134450@feddit.de 24 points 10 months ago (2 children)

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?

[–] TheGreenGolem@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 10 months ago (3 children)

They cannot really comprehend the glaring "OR"s in the sentence.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] mathemachristian@lemm.ee 0 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (4 children)

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

[–] TomSelleck@lemm.ee 9 points 10 months ago (2 children)
[–] TheSanSabaSongbird@lemdro.id 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

The entire comment is unmitigated bullshit. Think about it; it uses the years 1654-85 as a representative sample of European immigrants to North America, but that's absurd because we know for a fact that mass immigration from Europe didn't really start until the 19th century so it can't be even remotely true that most white Americans are descendants of the immigrants they use in their sample. It's shoddy and intellectually dishonest scholarship that's obviously and almost comically pushing an agenda. As such it doesn't deserve to be taken seriously.

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

Everything they've said is blatant propaganda word salad that they're regurgitating completely out of context.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] 800XL@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago

The problem isn't the immigrants themselves that are coming to steal land or kill people, it's their children. One that comes to mind is Donald Trump whose mother was an immigrant.

[–] thetreesaysbark@sh.itjust.works 5 points 10 months ago (3 children)

So, one part of what the original post is wrong according to your source. Not the whole thing.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] barsoap@lemm.ee 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

They didnt flee persecution.

Some surely did. Among those who definitely did not flee persecution were the Pilgrims, those flew from not being able to persecute.

[–] mathemachristian@lemm.ee 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

"some" sure, but definitely not "almost all" as the post says.

[–] barsoap@lemm.ee 2 points 10 months ago (26 children)
load more comments (26 replies)
[–] TheSanSabaSongbird@lemdro.id 15 points 10 months ago (5 children)

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.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] ULS@lemmy.ml 7 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

Wtf is a Yeomen Husbandmen? Some sort of gay Beowolf? Maybe something to do with Kanye?

[–] 800XL@lemmy.world 13 points 10 months ago

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.

[–] TheSanSabaSongbird@lemdro.id 2 points 10 months ago

Small land-holder. Not a titled lord, but also not a peasant per se.

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago (3 children)

Being of middle-class standing doesn't invalidate that they were seeking adventure, opportunity, or freedom. What a strange conclusion to arrive at.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] littlebluespark@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

Found the troll. 🤦🏽‍♂️