Pirates and slaves

manoflinux

manoflinux
Historically pirates were not proponents of slavery(the exception being the Barbary pirates and even then you could have your family buy your way to freedom because they turned rich people they captured into slaves, a little different than what you might think), in fact some people think that pirates crews were 90% freed/escaped slaves.
So I think you sully the good name of pirates by making them all slavers in elite dangerous.
Slavers and pirates are very different people.
To quote a fictional pirate "people aint cargo mate" so I think that pirates bases should be where slaves can run to instead of being slave markets.
Both of the main powers in the game are slave based societies so why do the pirates need to be slavers? they have their own.

Also I think they should be friendly to any anti slavery groups(see my next thread)
 

anikaiful

anikaiful
Slaves are more a hassle to handle than worth... so yea, in that accord I guess what you're saying is correct. Although, I don't think any pirate whatsoever is very "ethical" - they go for the profit margin. In fiction, sure, but otherwise - it's profit that makes them tick, be it slaves or gold.
 

carlisle

C
The term 'pirate' has come to refer to a broad range of people engaged in commercial activity outside the law, so I don't think Elite pirates especially have to be comparable to any particular group of historic pirates. That said they should have different opinions from each other so some of them should consider slavery abhorrent.
 
Last edited:

fw190a8

fw190a8
Technically you'd be a pirate if you were to download an mp3 you didn't own (don't do this), so yeah a very broad definition! Lots of words change meaning over time, like hacking, which usually has negative connotations now but didn't start that way. Terrible and terrific started from the same root but often have opposite meanings.

I think the point is it's possible to have a variety of definitions of a pirate, not just the Johnny Depp arrrrr type we all conjure up! A pirate could be a slaver, have no involvement with but no opposition to slavery, or be staunchly anti slavery. I think it's down to the pirates to set their own definitions. :)
 

manoflinux

manoflinux
AgentGB said:
John Hawkins and the sea dogs did.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_Dogs
Click to expand...




It is known that Blackbeard had at least 40% freed slaves on his ship and that nearly 21 members of Bartholomew Roberts were put back into slavery after he was killed and the crew captured.
Pirates would describe themselves as Maroons, using the same name as the escaped Jamaican slave gangs. In fact, the freed black slaves were considered as much of the crew as anyone else and was to receive the same shares, rewards, compensation and experiences as their white counterparts under the pirate code.


As one story goes, a slave ship captain once found himself back in command of his ship after pirates had freed all the slaves onboard and given them weapons. This was pirate justice on the high seas. As much as pirates were the victim of a massive PR smear campaign by the Imperial powers at the time, pirates were probably the most democratic and egalitarian groups on the planet at the time.
- See more at: http://www.golden-age-of-piracy.com/pirate-lifestyle/pirates-and-slavery.php

http://thepirateempire.blogspot.com/2013/11/pirates-and-slavery-in-new-world.html

"It has been estimated that as many as 90 percent of pirates were former slaves."

"In fact, many Caribbean islands had communities of escaped, warlike slaves. Jamaica, for instance, had a population living deep in the mountains. They called themselves the Maroons, and were so successful at raiding plantations that they were often in danger of taking over the island. And there is some evidence that pirates helped to arm these groups… for a price. Other European traders believed that rebelling slaves were evil and unnatural. But since pirates had sworn to uphold their own personal freedom, they were sympathetic to other groups fighting for the same thing."

https://web.archive.org/web/2008051....com/pdf_other/WRF_BlackPirates_Long_4Web.pdf

You want history, I got history.
 
Last edited:

snotface

snotface
manoflinux said:
Historically pirates were not proponents of slavery(the exception being the Barbary pirates and even then you could have your family buy your way to freedom because they turned rich people they captured into slaves, a little different than what you might think), in fact some people think that pirates crews were 90% freed/escaped slaves.
So I think you sully the good name of pirates by making them all slavers in elite dangerous.
Slavers and pirates are very different people.
To quote a fictional pirate "people aint cargo mate" so I think that pirates bases should be where slaves can run to instead of being slave markets.
Both of the main powers in the game are slave based societies so why do the pirates need to be slavers? they have their own.

Also I think they should be friendly to any anti slavery groups(see my next thread)
Click to expand...

I like what you have said, but the first slavers lived long before the slavery times you are referring to.
Pirates, from the dawn of time were thieves on the sea's. They would enslave their enemies and free slaves. If you go back to the way this game is set up, Rome being the Empire e.t.c Pirates in those times would slave Romans and free the Roman's slaves. This all happened on the high seas. But out here in the cold of space, as we all know life is cheap and coin comes at a price. If you are a slaver, and you also do acts of piracy then you will be a pirate no matter what.

Pirates sold people into slavery and freed people from it as well, It all depended on which side of the world you were on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom