A Look at Thomas Jefferson's Egregious Hypocrisy

Scientific American ^ | 7/1 | John Horgan

[TangledUpInBlue]

I once admired Jefferson, seeing him as an essentially good, no, great man with one tragic flaw: The writer of the inspiring words “all men are created equal” owned slaves. Now, I see Jefferson as an egregious hypocrite, who willfully betrayed the ideals he espoused.

I reached this conclusion only after visiting Monticello, Jefferson’s famous Virginia estate, last month. Previously, I didn't realize the extent of Jefferson’s slave ownership, and I lazily—and ignorantly--excused it as a common ethical blind spot of his time.

*Jefferson often denounced slavery. He wrote in 1774, "The abolition of domestic slavery is the great object of desire in those colonies where it was unhappily introduced in their infant state.” Yet over the course of his life he owned a total of 600 slaves, who worked on his Monticello farm and other holdings.

[equaviator]

What’s the real motive for all of the heavy scrutinizing of our founding fathers? The scrutinizers ought to be focused on the Clintons and the Obamas because they would have the ability, however involuntary, to answer to some well-deserved scrutiny.

[Ohioan]

But an insulting piece by a confused writer. Jefferson's recital of self-evident truths in the Declaration was never intended as a call for Egalitarianism. What the writer quotes was intended to justify the compact theory of Government, and the purpose in forming a Government. Jefferson was, among other foundational concerns, refuting the concept of the "Divine Right of Kings."

For a more detailed response, see Declaration Of Independence--With Study Guide.

The writer is endeavoring to tear down Jefferson, and others of the Founding Fathers, because he like Jefferson, Madison and many of the others, is critical of the labor system at that time in America, and thoughout much of history world-wide. Recognizing flaws in a system, does not translate into determining how to correct those flaws.

The current obsession with slavery in America reflects a deliberate effort to disparage our heritage. That it is seldom put in context; virtually never put in the perspective of being similar to what existed and was accepted in Biblical times, and from Biblical times onward; never, discussed in the context of how much more humanely the system was administered in America, as compared to other places in the world at the same time or over the millennia, etc., all tell us that it is not genuine analysis, but a deliberate effort to disparage the greatest generation of Americans.

[notdownwidems]

I used to love reading it, but I abandoned it about two decades ago. Even back then, it was losing its way.

Very similar to Time, Newsweek, U.S. News & World Report, National Geographic, Popular Mechanics, etc. etc. etc.; they suck, all of them. I do like Astronomy, it is still pretty good.

[Fiddlstix]

Scientific American used to be a decent publication years ago. These days it’s just one more liberal propaganda rag.

[wac3rd]

Yes, he is an unhinged Liberal liar. SA comes to our house from the last owners, it hits the mailbox and within 1 minute it hits the garbage.

[Cecily]

President Grant want to annex the island of Santo Domingo and make it a refuge for American blacks, but of course that never happened. I wonder if too many whites still wanted their labor, and that is why more was not done to give them the option to get away from white society and settle on the Western frontier.

[rlmorel]

First off, I detest Scientific American. I had an ongoing subscription for many years, and they jumped on the AGW bandwagon early on, among other things.

Secondly, it really irritates me when pompous crapholes like this author want to apply the mores of today to people who lived hundreds of years ago, and doing it in a vacuum, no less.

[NonValueAdded]

The RevWar/Colonial History/General Washington ping list.

Please FreepMail me if you want to be added or removed from this low volume ping list. Ping requests gladly accepted.

Recessional of the Sons of the American Revolution:
“Until we meet again, let us remember our obligations to our
forefathers who gave us our Constitution, the Bill of Rights,
an independent Supreme Court and a nation of free men.”

As an aside, I just happen to be reading Ketchum's "Victory at Yorktown" and TJ did a lousy job as Virginia Governor preparing his state's militia for the battles swirling around it.

[rlmorel]

Good post.

[GraceG]

[ How is this a Scientific American article? ]

This whole article is akin to calling Sir Issac Newton a blithering idiot because he couldn’t figure out the theory of relativity....

They fail to mention that the slavery system was SET UP by the British when they setup the BRITISH COLONIES, and it took a while and lot of American blood to eventually unwind it.

If anyone can SHARE a large part of the blame of the “Original American Sin” it is the BRITISH!

Funny how these idiot political ideological slanted science nerds can excuse other cultural sins if they are located ELSEWHERE in the world, but if that sin is in OUR OWN country but located ELSEWHEN, the prospect of excusing it using the academia tool of “Cultural Relativism” becomes an impossible task.

[wac3rd]

Why confuse today with 240 years ago when a self-hating Liberal white guy can write bullshit about how he despises his own country. Where are all the uplifting stories from Tehran or Mogidiahu?

[binreadin]

Okay—and lets not forget that there were a significant number of BLACK slave owners here in the US as well. As I’ve heard it, Jefferson could not have freed his slaves if he wanted to due to prevailing laws at the time.

What I find most interesting, having read early works on Lincoln and Jefferson’s biography is that neither man thought that the slaves, once freed, should remain in the US. They did not believe that constructive integration was possible. Instead, they believed in repatriating the slaves to their original homelands. These books are available for the e-readers, and are uncensored by contemporary, politically-correct censorship. They are free, and well worth a look. Frederick Douglass’s and Booker T. Washington’s autobiographies are available as well, and also worth the read.

[bert]

Revisionist Yankee bandwagon drivel

[Fightin Whitey]

Unscientific UnAmerican.

[Da Bilge Troll]

This author is ignorant of the details involved at the time.

Slaves could not be paid or taught to read or educated in any way, so they were in fact, completely helpless.

These were not random, faceless black people to him. Jefferson grew up with them, played with them as a child and knew every one personally and felt his responsibility fully.

He did what he could. He knew the Constitution virtually guaranteed the civil eventually and that change would come.

This kind of gratuitous attack burns my butt.

[GraceG]

Yes, interesting in the unbounded arrogance of the writer.

I recommend tweeting this a-hole and giving him a history lesson:

https://twitter.com/@Horganism

[Carry me back]

The modern day man and his touchy feelings. Very sissy.

[aquila48]

Scientific American is no longer either scientific or American - hasn’t been for a long time.

It’s just another leftist propaganda rag.

[Carry me back]

I agree, only without paying them.

[TangledUpInBlue]

Not to mention the fact that I believe I’ve read that Jefferson had no ability to free his slaves because he actually didn’t own them outright.

They were mortgaged chattel. He had no right to let them go. A major point missed by the author.