Posted on 01/02/2020 12:12:09 PM PST by DeweyCA
The clueless "Progressive Regressives" often claim that Thomas Jefferson and other Founders were "slave owners."
When countering the implications of that claim, it is well to ask those know-it-all 21st Century "elitists" to consider the historical context within which those Founders found themselves, as well as the enormous contributions they and their generations made toward eradicating slavery from these shores and creating a constitutional republic which could, ultimately, affirm and protect the rights of ALL people:
Of special interest in that regard is Jefferson's “Autobiography,” especially that portion which states:
"The first establishment in Virginia which became permanent was made in 1607. I have found no mention of negroes in the colony until about 1650. The first brought here as slaves were by a Dutch ship; after which the English commenced the trade and continued it until the revolutionary war. That suspended...their future importation for the present, and the business of the war pressing constantly on the (Virginia) legislature, this subject was not acted on finally until the year 1778, when I brought a bill to prevent their further importation. This passed without opposition, leaving to future efforts its final eradication."
Jefferson also observed:
"Where the disease [slavery] is most deeply seated, there it will be slowest in eradication. In the northern States, it was merely superficial and easily corrected. In the southern, it is incorporated with the whole system and requires time, patience, and perseverance in the curative process."
He explained that,
"In 1769, I became a member of the legislature by the choice of the county in which I live [Albemarle County, Virginia], and so continued until it was closed by the Revolution. I made one effort in that body for the permission of the emancipation of slaves, which was rejected: and indeed, during the regal [crown] government, nothing [like this] could expect success."Below is another quotation, cited in David Barton's work on the subject of the Founders and slavery, which also cites the fact that there were laws in the State of Virginia which prevented citizens from emancipating slaves:
"The whole commerce between master and slave is a perpetual exercise of the most boisterous passions, the most unremitting despotism on the one part, and degrading submissions on the other. Our children see this and learn to imitate it; for man is an imitative animal. This quality is the germ of all education in him. From his cradle to his grave he is learning to do what he sees others do. If a parent could find no motive either in his philanthropy or his self-love for restraining the intemperance of passion towards his slave, it should always be a sufficient one that his child is present. But generally it is not sufficient. . . . The man must be a prodigy who can retain his manners and morals undepraved by such circumstances. And with what execration should the statesman be loaded who permits one half the citizens thus to trample on the rights of the other. . . . And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are of the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath? Indeed, I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that His justice cannot sleep for ever. . . . The Almighty has no attribute which can take side with us in such a contest. . . . [T]he way, I hone [is] preparing under the auspices of Heaven for a total emancipation."A visit to David Barton’s web site (www.wallbuilders.com) provides an essential, excellent and factual written record of the Founders' views on the matter of slavery. One source he does not quote, I believe, is the famous 1775 Edmund Burke "Speech on Conciliation" before the British Parliament, wherein he admonished the Parliament for its Proposal to declare a general enfranchisement of the slaves in America.
Burke rather sarcastically observed that should the Parliament carry through with the Proposal before it: "Slaves as these unfortunate black people are, and dull as all men are from slavery, must they not a little suspect the offer of freedom from that very nation (England) which has sold them to their present masters? from that nation, one of whose causes of quarrel with those masters is their refusal to deal any more in that inhuman traffic?"
He continued: "An offer of freedom from England would come rather oddly, shipped to them in an African vessel, which is refused an entry into the ports of Virginia or Carolina, with a cargo of three hundred Angola negroes. It would be curious to see the Guinea captain attempting at the same instant to publish his proclamation of liberty and to advertise his sale of slaves." Ahhh, how knowledge of the facts can alter one's opinion of the revisionist history that has been taught for generations in American schools (including its so-called "law schools"!!)
Human beings are allotted ONLY A TINY SLIVER OF TIME ON THIS EARTH. (Pardon shouting) Each finds the world and his/her own community/nation existing as it is.
If lawyers and judges cared enough to educate themselves (in this day of the Internet) on the history of civilization and America's real history, and if they used that knowledge and the resulting understanding, to do as much on behalf of liberty for ALL people as did Thomas Jefferson and America's other Founders, the world in the next century would be a better place.
Remember: Thomas Jefferson was only 33 years old when he penned our Declaration of Independence which capsulized a truly revolutionary idea into a simple statement that survives to this day to inspire people all over the world to strive for liberty!
The clueless “Progressive Regressives” often claim that Thomas Jefferson and other Founders were “slave owners.”
It i9s a historical fact Jefferson and washington were slave owners. In Fact Washington’s will frees his soaves but not his wife’s.
There was a National Geographic story 5-10 years ago showing plenty evidence of slaves at Jefferson’s plantation and describing what kind of owner he was.
Regardless of their philosophies and genius, they were indeed slave owners, no quotations necessary.
Now that we are in a new year, what will they pick as the most important thing to celebrate in 2020? Can it be anything else than the 150th birthday of Vladimir Lenin?
George Washington could not free Martha’s slaves...they were entailed to her estate. By his will his slaves were to become free on Martha’s death, but Martha gave them their freedom earlier (she didn’t want one of the slaves to decide to hurry things along by killing her).
I am only addressing the other posters’ point in which he tried to weaken the case that they actually held slaves.
Thanx.
This is an internecine battle within the left, between those who see history as a continuous progression towards our communist future and those who see only remitting oppression and white racism everywhere all the time forever.
A complete misreading of the economics and history of the United States.
Slave labor contributed very little to the economy of the United States.
The Slave states were economic backwaters.
One of the huge problem with a slave economy was its horrible inefficiency.
One of the main problems of doing away with slavery, was how to provide for the care of the ex-slaves.
An excellent post.
If only this country had never been suitable for cotton or rice, our status quo would very likely be much different today.
The vast vast majority of southern (& northern) whites had nothing whatsoever to do with slavery.
“Slave labor contributed very little to the economy of the United States.”
In 1860 eleven states in the South produced 5.3 million bales of cotton. The vast majority grown by slave labor. Cotton was the largest export of the United States. Banks in the North made big money supporting cotton agriculture with loans, insurance and shipping. The vast majority of railroads in the South were built and maintained by slave labor. Tredegar Iron Works in Richmond (3 largest iron works in U.S.) 40% of the work force were slaves. Up until 1860, slavery was a very important part of the Southern Economy. The North made plenty of money off of that cotton agriculture. That agriculture rested on slave labor.
The vast vast majority of southern (& northern) whites had nothing whatsoever to do with slavery.
Up North this is true. Slavery was illegal in most of the Northern states.
In the South, a different Story. Based on the 1860 census.
Free white families owning slaves as a percentage of the States population: MS 49%, SC 45%, GA 37%, AL 35%, FL 34%,
LA 29%, TX 28%, VA 26%, TN 25%, KY 23%, AR 20% MO, 12%,
MD 12%, DE 3%.
The number of slave owners in the South was of such a large number that they had a virtual lock on Southern political power. In the border states, MO, KY, MD, and DE, slave ownership is much lower and the slave owners do not have the political power their counterparts in the deeper South have.
If true, I stand corrected.
Link to those figures ?
these figures are derived from the 1860 census of the United States.
https://www2.census.gov/library/publications/decennial/1860/
Thanks, will check it out.
I’ve never seen conservative historians cite David Barton. Probably for good reason. Not because Barton isn’t conservative, but because he plays fast and loose with history, omitting what doesn’t fit his preferred story.
George Washington may well have had the largest slave holding of his time. Jefferson was no slouch either. The current fad of equating American slavery with Nazism has a lot of people attempting to exempt their favorite antebellum slave owners from the condemnation that they routinely heap on the slaveowners of 1860. Good luck with that. Sow the wind, reap the whirlwind.
A very selective reading of the facts.
The Southern railroads were virtually destroyed in the Civil war, and had to be rebuilt.
The Tregedar Iron works only introduced slave labor in 1847.
They were the only major iron works in the South.
They may have been the third largest in the nation, but the South, in total, produced about 10% of the industrial production of the North.
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.