jeffersondem quoting Declaration:
"He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes, and conditions.” We have covered this ground before and jeffersondem insists the words, "domestic insurrections" can only refer to slave revolts, nothing else and therefore our Founders were primarily, even exclusively, worried about Brits "freeing the slaves" in their Declaration of Independence.
It's nonsense, of course, because there were no slave revolts in 1776, or later, but there were many "domestic insurrections" -- attacks by British loyalists against American patriots -- and that is the true meaning of this Declaration item.
As ProgressingAmerica points out, slave revolts could just as easily attack slaveholder Loyalists as Patriots and so that is not what Lord Dunmore called for in November, 1775.
Rather, Dunmore called for, in effect, Patriots' slaves to sneak off and join the British army, offering them freedom in exchange.
But Dunmore's & Clinton's proclamations did not help win the war for the Brits because, unlike insane Confederates of the 1860s, during the Revolutionary War Gen. George Washington also offered slaves freedom in exchange for military service.
One result was that at the surrender of Yorktown in 1781, a British observer noted that roughly one in four of US troops was African American, serving in integrated units.
So our Revolutionary War was not about Brits threatening to free American slaves, but rather was about Americans offering slaves freedom in exchange for military service, and that proved to be one of the margins of our victory.
“It's nonsense, of course, because there were no slave revolts in 1776, or later, but there were many “domestic insurrections” — attacks by British loyalists against American patriots — and that is the true meaning of this Declaration item.”
You, and your internet connection to Wikipedia, have repeatedly ran circles around Thomas Jefferson, the Virginia Convention, and all 13 of the original slaves states.
By your account, they didn't know what they were thinking, or what they were doing. It is probably only a coincidence that your explanation of their thinking matches your preferences.
Your problem now is that you have run right smack dab into an equally knowledgeable contemporary historian with access to Wikipedia.
ProgressingAmerica found the smoking gun you claim doesn't exist when he introduced and vouched for the link below. It avers Dunmore’s Proclamation is tied to grievance 27 which begins “He has excited domestic insurrection amonst us . . .”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grievances_of_the_United_States_Declaration_of_Independence
Incidentally, like the signed DOI, it does not mention “he has incited treasonable insurrections of our fellow-citizens . . .”
I don't think Brother ProgressingAmerica will be as easy for you to bulldoze as Thomas Jefferson; for one thing he is still alive.
Either you or he has been putting forward bad information. Now that you have rejected his offering, I expect we'll see a classic clash between two titans of blue state culture.
[jeffersndem #76]
One of the reasons that the 13 slave states rebelled was because the King was threatening to “free the slaves.” [jeffersondem #88] “He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes, and conditions.”
[ProgressingAmerica #89] I'm looking for the "free the slaves" part. I don't see it. If you mean the domestic insurrections part, no, that's not what that is referring to.
[BroJoeK #97]
We have covered this ground before and jeffersondem insists the words, "domestic insurrections" can only refer to slave revolts, nothing else and therefore our Founders were primarily, even exclusively, worried about Brits "freeing the slaves" in their Declaration of Independence.It's nonsense, of course, because there were no slave revolts in 1776, or later, but there were many "domestic insurrections" -- attacks by British loyalists against American patriots -- and that is the true meaning of this Declaration item.
As ProgressingAmerica points out, slave revolts could just as easily attack slaveholder Loyalists as Patriots and so that is not what Lord Dunmore called for in November, 1775.
Strangely, Dunmore's Declaration does not mention Loyalists rising up against the Rebels. Anyone not coming to the aid of the Crown was to suffer a penalty such as death or loss of land. It declared martial law and told all to bend the knee, and declared "all indentured Servants, Negroes, or others, (appertaining to Rebels,) free that are able and willing to bear Arms, they joining His Majesty’s Troops as soon as may be, for the more speedily reducing this Colony to a proper Sense of their Duty, to his Majesty’s Crown and Dignity."
Lord Dunsmore called for slaves to take up arms against their masters. Their masters were to suffer a penalty such as loss of life or land. For freedom, the slaves were to be required to join the British forces to help make that happen. For some reason the masters took umbrage.
Can you point out the part about Loyalists rising up against Rebels?
https://encyclopediavirginia.org/entries/lord-dunmores-proclamation-1775/
Declaration of John Murray, Earl of Dunmore, the governor of Virginia, November 7, 1775
By his Excellency the Right Honorable JOHN Earl of DUNMORE, His Majesty’s Lieutenant and Governor General of the Colony and Dominion of Virginia, and Vice Admiral of the same. A PROCLAMATION.
As I have ever entertained Hopes that an Accommodation might have taken Place between Great-Britain and this Colony, without being compelled by my Duty to this most disagreeable but now absolutely necessary Step, rendered so by a Body of armed Men unlawfully assembled, firing on His Majesty’s Tenders, and the Formation of an Army, and that Army now on their March to attack his Majesty’s Troops and destroy the well disposed Subjects of this Colony. To defeat such treasonable Purposes, and that all such Traitors, and their Abettors, may be brought to Justice, and that the Peace, and good Order of this Colony may be again restored, which the ordinary Course of the Civil Law is unable to effect; I have thought fit to issue this my Proclamation, hereby declaring, that until the aforesaid good Purposes can be obtained, I do, in Virtue of the Power and Authority to ME given, by his Majesty, determine to execute Martial Law, and cause the same to be executed throughout this Colony: and to the end that Peace and good Order may the sooner be restored, I do require every Person capable of bearing Arms to resort to his Majesty’s STANDARD, or be looked upon as Traitors to his Majesty’s Crown and Government, and thereby become liable to the Penalty the Law inflicts upon such Offences; such as forfeiture of Life, confiscation of Lands, &c. &c. And I do hereby farther declare all indentured Servants, Negroes, or others, (appertaining to Rebels,) free that are able and willing to bear Arms, they joining His Majesty’s Troops as soon as may be, for the more speedily reducing this Colony to a proper Sense of their Duty, to his Majesty’s Crown and Dignity. I do further order, and require, all his Majesty’s Liege Subjects, to retain their Quitrents, or any other Taxes due or that may become due, in their own Custody, till such Time as Peace may be again restored to this at present most unhappy Country, or demanded of them for their former salutary Purposes, by Officers properly authorised to receive the same.
GIVEN under my Hand on Board the Ship WILLIAM, off Norfolk, the 7th Day of November, in the sixteenth Year of his Majesty’s Reign.
DUNMORE.
(GOD save the KING.)
https://www.nps.gov/fost/blogs/the-declaration-of-independence-what-were-they-thinking.htm
The Declaration of Independence: What Were They Thinking? "...A unanimous Declaration..."
Oftentimes we know a document is important, and may understand why the document is important, but the details of the message are lost as decades (and even centuries) grow between us and the past. How many of you have listened to or read the Declaration of Independence and wondered exactly what each of the grievances (or complaints) were referencing? What were Thomas Jefferson and the Declaration Committee referencing as they created this document, which ultimately was an incredible act of treason against their King and country. As you read this, you'll see history through their eyes as you discover the meaning behind the words.
[...]
Grievance 27
While this is often interpreted as one grievance it is actually two separate grievances combined into one. The “domestic insurrections” brought on by the British refers primarily to Lord Dunmore’s proclamation that any slaves that ran away from their rebel masters to join him to fight the rebels would be granted their freedom. A significant part of his force that had attacked the Virginia coast was composed of runaway slaves. The “Founding Fathers” were painfully aware of how hypocritical they were being in stating that “all men are created equal” while maintaining slavery in the colonies, so the reference is very veiled, but the threat of large scale slave revolts was a great fear for many in the colonies. The use of various Indian allies by the British all throughout the war was looked upon with as much horror by many members of Parliament as it was by the colonists.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/02/americas-twofold-original-sin/606163/
The 27th grievance raises two issues. The first, the king’s incitement of “domestic insurrections,” refers to slave revolts and reveals a hard truth recently brought to the public’s attention by The New York Times Magazine’s 1619 Project: Some of those who sought independence aimed to protect the institution of slavery. This was particularly true for Virginia slave owners, who were deeply disturbed by a proclamation issued in November 1775 by Virginia Governor Lord Dunmore, which promised enslaved people held by revolutionaries freedom in exchange for joining the British army. Virginians and other southerners feared that it would provoke widespread slave revolts.
https://allthingsliberty.com/2019/07/the-declaration-of-independence-the-twenty-seven-grievances/
Journal of the American Revolution [...]
Grievance: “He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.”
[...]
Eric Sterner: The vast bulk of the reasons for declaring independence relate to political thought and self-government. The last one, however, deals with “domestic insurrection.” The Declaration’s reference to “domestic insurrection” began as a protest against Virginia Gov. John Murray’s promise of freedom to slaves who took up arms for the British.
https://founding.com/he-has-excited-domestic-insurrections-amongst-us-and-has-endeavoured-to-bring-on-the-inhabitants-of-our-frontiers-the-merciless-indian-savages-whose-known-rule-of-warfare-is-an-undistinguished-des/
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions. The British had encouraged slave and Indian revolts against the colonists. For example, in 1775, Lord Dunmore of Virginia, swore to members of the Virginia House of Burgesses that if "any Injury or insult were offered to himself" he would "declare Freedom to the Slaves, and reduce the City of Williamsburg to Ashes." The governors of North and South Carolina also were planning similar uprisings. General Gage, commander in chief of the British army in America, tried to persuade various of the Indian tribes to attack the colonists.
Do you perhaps have a quote from one of your fellow inmates who has adopted your delusional interpretation?