[Nowhere Man]

And perhaps they weren't. But the system was. And to deny that a system that enslaved human beings was not monstrous or evil is, in my mind, as reprehensible as those who deny the holocaust.

This reminds me of a little bit from David Gerrold's 1973 book, "The Making of Star Trek" where he made the point where "Star Trek" was bascially "1966 men" in a 23rd Century world meaning thatm any of the episodes were mirrors of what were were dealing with at the time such as "A Private Little War" was a critique on Vietnam. He went on where "Bonanza," which was running at the same time "Star Trek" was is much the same thing, albeit in reverse, a 1966 viewpoint in the world of the 1870's. I do agree that in the Grand Scheme of Things, slavery is evil, let's face it, I doubt anyone would want to be one although I'm sure there are a few who might trade freedom for goodies. Still though, if we judge the slaveholders with a 2004 mind or even a 1966 mind, they would be evil but if we were part of the culture of 1850, we might not see it as such unless we were Abolitionists. In 1850 and before, it was seen as normal, today we know better and have progressed beyond it, I hope, but we have to see that we are judging 1850 people by the values of the latter half of the 20th Century and/or early 21st.

[saquin]

...but we have to see that we are judging 1850 people by the values of the latter half of the 20th Century and/or early 21st.

Agreed.

But some things are right or wrong no matter what the century and I'd think "human beings should not be owned like cattle" would be one of those basic things. Especially in a country whose founding document asserts that all men are created equal. So no one can argue that people in that time period just didn't understand the moral questions. And I'm amazed by the attitude of so many here who usually lambast "moral relativism" when practiced by the left.

[x]

Still though, if we judge the slaveholders with a 2004 mind or even a 1966 mind, they would be evil but if we were part of the culture of 1850, we might not see it as such unless we were Abolitionists. In 1850 and before, it was seen as normal, today we know better and have progressed beyond it, I hope, but we have to see that we are judging 1850 people by the values of the latter half of the 20th Century and/or early 21st.

Up to a point, I agree and would like to see the bad and good on both sides, but plenty of people out there have such a skewed view of things that the abolitionists and unionists turn out to be the "bad guys" and the slaveowners and secessionists the "good guys." The logical slight of hand is pretty astounding and if you get exposed to enough of that, and you won't have any problem condemning the slaveowners for their crimes.

Some people assume that "eventually" Southerners would realize that slavery was wrong and "get around" to abolishing it themselves, so that the true crime was the suppression of the rebellion. Leaving aside for the moment the very weighty and disputed question of whether unilateral secession was legal, such a point of view basically gives slaveowners and Southerners a "free ride" based on what one expects they would have done "at some point" and condemns Northerners for what they actually did do. I hope we can agree that that is a skewed way of looking at things.

The abolitionists certainly were often abrasive and sometimes hypocritical, but they do deserve some credit for their insight and courage. Northerners who fought for the union, their country, and the form of constitutional and representative government they grew up with may not have been modern racial egalitarians or 21st century radical libertarians, but they don't deserve the kind of abuse directed against them by those who would whitewash Southern slavery.

We ought to be able to agree that slavery and racism have been American (indeed, global) offenses, that can't be blamed all on one part of the country. But in doing so, we don't have to pretend that slavery was an especially benign institution or that those who supported it were "really" against it in some way, and those who opposed it "really" in favor of some form of slavery or tyranny.