Posted on 07/19/2017 8:54:28 AM PDT by Kaslin
Too many people believe that slavery is a "peculiar institution." That's what Kenneth Stampp called slavery in his book, "Peculiar Institution: Slavery in the Ante-Bellum South." But slavery is by no means peculiar, odd or unusual. It was common among ancient peoples such as the Egyptians, Babylonians, Assyrians, Hittites, Greeks, Persians, Armenians and many others. Large numbers of Christians were enslaved during the Ottoman wars in Europe. White slaves were common in Europe from the Dark Ages to the Middle Ages. It was only after A.D. 1600 that Europeans joined with Arabs and Africans and started the Atlantic slave trade. As David P. Forsythe wrote in his book, "The Globalist," "The fact remained that at the beginning of the nineteenth century an estimated three-quarters of all people alive were trapped in bondage against their will either in some form of slavery or serfdom."
While slavery constitutes one of the grossest encroachments on human liberty, it is by no means unique or restricted to the Western world or United States, as many liberal academics would have us believe. Much of their indoctrination of our young people, at all levels of education, paints our nation's founders as racist adherents to slavery, but the story is not so simple.
At the time of the 1787 Constitutional Convention, slaves were about 40 percent of the population of the Southern colonies. Apportionment in the House of Representatives and the number of electoral votes each state would have in presidential elections would be based upon population. Southern delegates to the convention wanted slaves to be counted as one person. Northern delegates to the convention, and those opposed to slavery, wanted only free persons of each state to be counted for the purposes of apportionment in the House of Representatives and the Electoral College. The compromise reached was that each slave would be counted as only three-fifths of a person.
Many criticize this compromise as proof of racism. My question to these grossly uninformed critics is whether they would have found it more preferable for slaves to be counted as whole persons. Slaves counted as whole persons would have given slave holding Southern states much more political power. Or, would the critics of the founders prefer that the Northern delegates not compromise and not allow slaves to be counted at all. If they did, it is likely that the Constitution would have not been ratified. Thus, the question emerges is whether blacks would be better off with Northern states having gone their way and Southern states having gone theirs, resulting in no U.S. Constitution and no Union? Unlike today's pseudointellectuals, black abolitionist Frederick Douglass understood the compromise, saying that the three-fifths clause was "a downright disability laid upon the slave holding states" that deprived them of "two-fifths of their natural basis of representation."
Douglass' vision was shared by Patrick Henry and others. Henry said, expressing the reality of the three-fifths compromise, "As much as I deplore slavery, I see that prudence forbids its abolition." With this union, Congress at least had the power to abolish slave trade by 1808. According to delegate James Wilson, many believed the anti-slave-trade clause laid "the foundation for banishing slavery out of this country." Many of the founders abhorred slavery. Their statements can be read on my website, walterewilliams.com.
The most unique aspect of slavery in the Western world was the moral outrage against it, which began to emerge in the 18th century and led to massive elimination efforts. It was Britain's military sea power that put an end to the slave trade. And our country fought a costly war that brought an end to slavery. Unfortunately, these facts about slavery are not in the lessons taught in our schools and colleges. Instead, there is gross misrepresentation and suggestion that slavery was a uniquely American practice.
In regards to slavery in America, I shall point out that slavery was not just those of a certain color. I lived on the Mainline. The grand railroad interconnecting the suburbs to Philadelphia. Every so often markers would appear. Many are unmarked and may be mass graves I looked into it and found that the laborers who helped build the railroad were indentured and consisted of Chinese,Irish, Scots and Blacks among others.
0bama’s Kenyan ancestors were slave traders, and his mother’s ancestors were slave holders.
Yeah they do, but slavery has been around for thousands of years. The Egyptians for example enslaved the Jews, the ancient Greeks had slaves and the Romans made the Christians their slaves.
As an example of how liberalism overpowers logic, I was having dinner with Jewish friends when they went into a tirade about how Americans institutionalized slavery, presenting it as an exclusively American sin. I asked them about Jews being slaves in Egypt, suggesting that slavery has existed about as long as humans have. They left in a huff and ended our relationship. Sad.
Excellent post.
I just bookmarked it on my FR homepage.
What an incredibly stupid post...Forcibly (violence) taken away from their families and people, whipped, brutalized (raped), stuffed in a ship, sold, forced to work...
You honestly think that was good for them???
Dude you are seriously warped...
You honestly think that was good for them???
Dude you are seriously warped...
Don’t even argue with it, its sick. I have been to the third world many a time, not to Africa. I work for an organization that works in Africa (the largest christian child development ministry), and I will be there in two years. Please spare me it was good for them. IT IS SICK!!! Absolutely the dumbest argument I have ever heard on FR and I have seen quite a few...
It didn’t show up in my search and the reason was because the poster added the author to the title
I was reluctantly in a Music Appreciation class in college - required for graduation. It was many years ago but I have always remembered the professor say something to the effect that every generation leaves a clue as to their mental and physical condition in their music. He went through various time periods explaining his point. Then he noted that negro music in the days of American slavery was about hard work, getting in trouble and that sort of thing, but does not include words that would lead one to believe there was a lot of torture and cruelty. I really don’t know much about the subject matter, but I remember his words and it sounds reasonable to me.
Not I. What benefit was it for the slave to have “representatives” not answerable to them?The sum of the matter is that slaves could not vote, and they were better served by antislavery Congressmen in the North than by their political proslavery opposition. The more southern Congressmen, the worse it was for slaves.
Long article, but very good, written by a New York City rabbi in 1861
http://www.jewish-history.com/civilwar/raphall.html
The Bible View of Slavery
By: Rabbi Dr. M.J. Raphall
Congregation B’nai Jeshurun
New York City
1861
The subject of my investigation falls into three parts:—
First, How far back can we trace the existence of slavery?
Secondly, Is slaveholding condemned as a sin in sacred Scripture?
Thirdly, What was the condition of the slave in Biblical times, and among the Hebrews; and saying with our Father Jacob, “for Thy help, I hope, O L-rd!”
“This, indeed, is the great distinction which the Bible view of slavery derives from its divine source. The slave is a person in whom the dignity of human nature is to be respected; he has rights. Whereas, the heathen view of slavery which prevailed at Rome, and which, I am sorry to say, is adopted in the South, reduces the slave to a thing, and a thing can have no rights. The result to which the Bible view of slavery leads us, is—1st. That slavery has existed since the earliest time; 2d. That slaveholding is no sin, and that slave property is expressly placed under the protection of the Ten Commandments; 3d. That the slave is a person, and has rights not conflicting with the lawful exercise of the rights of his owner. If our Northern fellow-citizens, content with following the word of G-d, would not insist on being “righteous overmuch,” or denouncing “sin” which the Bible knows not, but which is plainly taught by the precepts of men—they would entertain more equity and less ill feeling towards their Southern brethren. And if our Southern fellow-citizens would adopt the Bible view of slavery, and discard the heathen slave code, which permits a few bad men to indulge in an abuse of power that throws a stigma and disgrace on the whole body of slaveholders—if both North and South would do what is right, then “G-d would see their works and that they turned from the evil of their ways;” and in their case, as in that of the people of Nineveh, would mercifully avert the impending evil, for with Him alone is the power to do so. Therefore let us pray.”
I don't know. I put the word slavery in the search box, select titles, and both threads are found.
ML/NJ
Nobody mentioned the Constitution. So nothing.
“0bama’s Kenyan ancestors were slave traders, and his mother’s ancestors were slave holders.”
Maybe that’s why his mother was a mudshark?
Absolutely the dumbest argument I have ever heard on FR and I have seen quite a few...
if you go to the other thread on this subject, you’ll see a couple more similar gems...
but does not include words that would lead one to believe there was a lot of torture and cruelty.
not the least bit surprising when you consider the cost and value of a strong slave...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.