Black communities in Britain, 1600s

[janewilliams20]

This may give some insight into why the "race problem" is rather different in our two countries

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-18903391

Comments

[sollersuk]

Could you give some references for that?

[madwitch]

Not that common within Britain. Yes, many indentured servants came from here, but they usually went to the colonies. Servants actually living in Britain were less likely to be indentured during that period, though I'm sure some were.

[sollersuk]

Indenturing in England was basically for apprentices. I've never seen any references to servants being indentured - it would make it too hard to get rid of them.

In the colonies the situation was very different; on the one hand there was the problem of crossing the Atlantic without any capital or means of support, and on the other there was the shipping out of criminals and rebels and others that the authorities a) wanted to get rid of and b) keep in a position of subordination when they reached their destination.

[otana]

I'm finding the wording of "race problem" is rubbing me the wrong way.

Glad it wasn't just me.

[blessedrelease]

"There were always free people of African descent in pre-Civil War America, of course mostly in the North. But they were always there."

Yes, but the fact that you could legally enslave them, have them as your property, tends to change the way you think. And you couldn't intermarry, which makes a big difference.

[janewilliams20]

Also, I'm a little surprised by the word "always". SA far as I know, they only came to Britain with the Romans, and 2000 years is nowhere near "always". How did they get to the USA even earlier?

[angelchrome]

I think there's a bit of interesting history there, but I don't think there's any new insight into why today's cultural climate towards the issues around race relations differ in the US and the UK. Too many things have happened in the ensuing 400 odd years in each country. In the last 50 years, even. Interesting though.

[blessedrelease]

But there are only 150 years separating us from slavery in the US, so the ensuing 400 years included a lot of slavery in one place and not the other. And while it may have less and less impact, it's still a pretty big thing. In my opinion.

[dustyfro]

So you're saying there were no "slaves" in England? William Wilberforce was just working on the rest of the British Empire?

[sollersuk]

Yes. The issue had been settled for England in the Somerset case, which declared not that slaves were to be freed but that there could not be a slave in England, and effectively that anybody in England who thought they owned someone in England was totally mistaken.

[sollersuk]

ETA now that I've had my first coffee of the day: this is the case: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somersett%27s_Case

And what Wilberforce campaigned for was the abolition of the slave trade.

[unfortunatetypo]

The "race problem" is the same in both countries. It is caused by people being racist.

[janewilliams20]

Indeed. But it manifests rather differently, and this may give some partial explanation why.

[sollersuk]

I'm not sure that it is. In England it is an extreme manifestation of distrust of foreigners and incomers, and has happened to group after group throughout history. It's worth noting that in my childhood the notices in houses with rooms to let that said "No coloureds" also usually said "No Irish"; until the Windrush era, they only said "No Irish".

[janewilliams20]

Both of which are being racist, though, surely? The difference is that we're equal-opportunity racists :) Has it ever said "No Americans"?