School defends slavery booklet (Critic says text is 'window dressing')

News Observer ^ | Dec 9, 2004 | T. KEUNG HUI

[mac_truck]

Students at one of the area's largest Christian schools are reading a controversial booklet that critics say whitewashes Southern slavery with its view that slaves lived "a life of plenty, of simple pleasures." Leaders at Cary Christian School say they are not condoning slavery by using "Southern Slavery, As It Was," a booklet that attempts to provide a biblical justification for slavery and asserts that slaves weren't treated as badly as people think.

Principal Larry Stephenson said the school is only exposing students to different ideas, such as how the South justified slavery. He said the booklet is used because it is hard to find writings that are both sympathetic to the South and explore what the Bible says about slavery.

"You can have two different sides, a Northern perspective and a Southern perspective," he said.

'SOUTHERN SLAVERY, AS IT WAS' Here are some excerpts from the booklet:

* "To say the least, it is strange that the thing the Bible condemns (slave-trading) brings very little opprobrium upon the North, yet that which the Bible allows (slave-ownership) has brought down all manner of condemnation upon the South." (page 22)

* "As we have already mentioned, the 'peculiar institution' of slavery was not perfect or sinless, but the reality was a far cry from the horrific descriptions given to us in modern histories." (page 22)

* "Slavery as it existed in the South was not an adversarial relationship with pervasive racial animosity. Because of its dominantly patriarchal character, it was a relationship based upon mutual affection and confidence." (page 24)

* "Slave life was to them a life of plenty, of simple pleasures, of food, clothes, and good medical care." (page 25)

[Mark in the Old South]

Please note my post #26 and #36. Have you seen the books I mention? You may find them interesting. I got very interested in black history when I lived in Petersburg Virginia. That city has a very interesting black history. Up until the Civil War the city was 50% black with about 1/3 free persons of color. Many of the "slaves" had very strange relationships with their owners. They would pay their owners a small fee (rent themselves out to use the terminology of the day) then work for themselves. I don't know if the situation was an antebellum form of extortion or a precursor to our relationship with the government today.

[Mark in the Old South]

I grew up hearing Stowe never was in the South but she lived in Ohio across the river from Kentucky. It seems it was common practice to send slaves across the river to run errands for their masters, including caring money to pay accounts, pick up provisions etc. The more you read on the day to day relationship of master and slave the more you have to scratch your head. 21st century man thinks he knows what he has not the foggiest, but don't try telling him.
Slavery was evil but most have no clue why therefore they are at risk for falling for the same evil but not in the form of slavery. (Everyone should be thinking socialism right about now)(I try to be helpful with my brackets)

[SedVictaCatoni]

Slave life was to them a life of plenty, of simple pleasures

Happy indeed is he who sees the cotton harvest and the lash as simple pleasures.

[SedVictaCatoni]

Sherman did his best, but some people really can't take a hint.

[Michael.SF.]

In discussions such as this it is difficult to point out the 'other side' w/o sounding like you are defending the indefensiable. But slavery was a fact at the time. There are a couple of things that can be pointed out:

A stong high quality slave was an expensive asset from the perspective of the slave owner. As such a smart business man used those assets wisely in order to maximize his return in his investment. I would suspect that the treatment of slaves was in many cases proportional to their cost to the owner and this owners business acumen.

When a slave owner had particularly dangerous tasks that needed to be done, rather then risk a costly asset, he would sub contract this task out to others, who were less valuable then his own slaves. Much of this type of work fell to new immigrants, many of which were Irish, at this time.

[Mark in the Old South]

Oh yes I just remembered another old South story. Your point about Legree being a yankee (remember he was a fictional character) reminded me.

In New Orleans there was a wealthy doctor and his wife who lived in a large mansion in the French Quarter (it still stands, but is a private home) They lived secretive lives but there were all sorts of rumors, people would hear screams and cries coming for the home. One night a slave in the dungeon managed to start a fire. The French Quarter being a tightly packed city (and having burned once before) people rushed in to put out the fire, thereby saving their own homes. The site they found shocked them (I wonder if this story was the inspiration for Legree) It so enraged the WHITE community there was a riot. The doctor and his wife barely escaped with their lives. In fact they had to leave the country that very night.

Of course people had a sense of outrage then. They lived with slavery, even promoted it but there were limits. I wonder what they would have done to an abortion doctor?

[SedVictaCatoni]

They lived with slavery, even promoted it but there were limits.

Fortunately, tens of thousands of emissaries from civilization finally fought their way down to Louisiana and reset the "limits" to "if nobody has slaves, nobody has dungeons."

[Mark in the Old South]

Re: "A stong high quality slave was an expensive asset from the perspective of the slave owner. As such a smart business man used those assets wisely in order to maximize his return in his investment."

An interesting point, one I used to use myself but there is a flaw. Not everyone is a smart business man. By this logic there would never be reckless driving of expensive automobiles nor would there be poorly maintained vehicles. There will always be stupid people but with slavery it was a human being that would pay for the neglect. Still more slaves were left alone more than we commonly think.

[LibertarianInExile]

I can't remember ever reading an article about a similar incident in an Islamic school. Of course, that's unlikely to happen, either. Most Islamic schools wouldn't present the PC side of things, I'm sure.

I'm glad this article is written so fairly, without any hint of bias, and a completely fair treatment. And of course, it's convenient that the principal probably has loads of experience with the media cherrypicking-a-damning-sound-bite approach. /sarcasm

[Mark in the Old South]

Re: "...to "if nobody has slaves, nobody has dungeons.""

Don't kid yourself for one second. You should never expect the solution of one problem (legal slavery) puts an end to mans depravity and cruelty to his fellow man.

Consider our more enlightened times:

The prostitution industry, here and abroad, where exploitation rivals any Old South crime.

The abortion mills. This country 40-50 million babies, that is in little babies. World wide since it became legal, and even enforced it may be as high as 600 million babies. Luck us to live in such compassionate times.

The illegal immigration racket that often is slavery by another name. And yes here in this country too.

Like I said before slavery is evil but most have no clue why so they do not see the same evil by a different name. You have given a good example of what I mean. But heah the South lost, slavery is gone, problem solved right?

[marron]

Slavery was a Democrat institution, as was Jim Crow repression for the century following it.

Republicans should never let themselves be put in the position of defending the indefensible. Let Democrats defend Democrat history. We're Republicans. We are the party founded to end slavery, we ended it, and we should never apologize for it.

American conservatism isn't the traditionalist conservatism of the rest of the world, it is the simple John Lockean, Jeffersonian belief in limited government, individual liberty, individual responsibility. That is the tradition we seek to "conserve". We should never be put in the position of defending a culture that only imperfectly manifests our ideals, but understand that we are in a fight to the end to transform that culture. To defend it when it merits defending, and to transform it as it falls short.

You can tell me all day long that there were noble men who lived in the South and fought for its cause, and I will tell you that this only proves one of history's most tragic truths. The greatest evils are not committed by evil men, as we all know who they are and can defend ourselves against them. The greatest evils are committed by good men who don't see the damage they do. The greatest evils are committed by people who put clan loyalty ahead of moral right. The noble southerners who died in that war, died themselves for a cause that was not worthy of their sacrifice, and they died to defend men who were themselves not worthy.

It is true that we are talking about another time, when people did not understand things in the way they do now, and you would be right. But the fact remains that some men did understand, some men did find the courage to stand up against evil, many of these men paid the price for it, and it is these men whose lives and deaths we should celebrate.

Let Democrats defend Democrat history.

[cyborg]

amen

[PeterPrinciple]

"Osnabrucks"

I believe "bruck" is dutch/german for pants. What the osan would be I don't know.

We had neighbors names Stuckenbruck. Was always told this meant stuck in pants. There are a lot of unusual dutch names because the catholic church required new names and the reformed dutch had a sense of humor in the "retaliation".

[processing please hold]

A lot of people saw the movie "ROOTS" and that is how they perceive the way it was in the South.

[cyborg]

If someone relies on a movie that's based on a book that's more fiction than non-fiction for historical truth then that's sad.

[Arpege92]

"What a crock. Nothing defensible about slavery."

I agree.....slavery is wrong and nothing will every justify it!

[processing please hold]

And just how many voted for kerry again.......

[netmilsmom]

>>The site they found shocked them <<

I must have missed it. What was it????

[cyborg]

?

[Mark in the Old South]

Fiction or not, Roots was not entirely in error. It was a story and a plausible one with some fact in it (how much I do not know) The point I have been trying to make is the vast canvas that was Southern slavery. Any blind man feeling the elephant can point to the tail and say it was like a snake while another can feel the side and declare it is like a sturdy wall. Both are right and both are wrong as far as it goes. They can argue till they are purple it does not change the fact it is an elephant.