Definitely can’t argue with pretty much everything you said Phillip. But if we’re dedicated to uncovering the truth, I think it’s necessary to concede the op-ed was fairly accurate on a few points, with the Origins of the slave trade from the Dahomey people and how modern scholarship has untruthfully revised certain parts of history’s mo…
Definitely can’t argue with pretty much everything you said Phillip. But if we’re dedicated to uncovering the truth, I think it’s necessary to concede the op-ed was fairly accurate on a few points, with the Origins of the slave trade from the Dahomey people and how modern scholarship has untruthfully revised certain parts of history’s more recent events being a few examples.
As an avid student student of the subject, you would most likely be aware of this more than most people, but the entire history of this issue is so much more complex than what most people realize, or may even want to admit.
For example, while the South as a whole may have just adapted and further utilized a slave trade that existed long before them, it’s also very obvious from reading first hand accounts that racial politics and antiquated thoughts on certain races being inferior played a MAJOR role in defining the politics of the day. And almost every one, anti-slavery & proslavery alike, was guilty of thinking that way: from Washington to Jefferson to Lincoln.
The pre-war South may not have invented it but, due to the environment they found themselves in, no one can deny that they wished to perpetuate the Peculiar Institution for economic reasons (as you well stated). Feelings of superiority over another race was the next ‘logical’ (and beyond terrible) step.
But like I mentioned at the beginning, it’s even way more complicated than that.
Yes it's complicated, and there are aspects to it that most people don't know. For instance, before they started importing Africans, they would use white people as slaves. There was a market for them, people who were kidnapped right off the docks in the UK or Europe. Thing is, white people could easily escape and disappear into the crowds. Having black African slaves took care of that problem. They couldn't escape and blend in. Also there were slaves who were so interbred with the whites that they looked as white as any Caucasian, yet were still kept as slaves, and talked like slaves and thought of themselves as slaves. One of the truly disturbing features of slavery in the American South was the fact that the slave owners or other whites (such as a caretaker or overseer) would have children with the blacks, and these children were the half-brothers and sisters of the fully white offspring, and these kids wouldn't even see what was coming until a certain age when the "black" ones were were forced to work in the fields while their white half-siblings didn't. Just so F*#!ed up.
Definitely can’t argue with pretty much everything you said Phillip. But if we’re dedicated to uncovering the truth, I think it’s necessary to concede the op-ed was fairly accurate on a few points, with the Origins of the slave trade from the Dahomey people and how modern scholarship has untruthfully revised certain parts of history’s more recent events being a few examples.
As an avid student student of the subject, you would most likely be aware of this more than most people, but the entire history of this issue is so much more complex than what most people realize, or may even want to admit.
For example, while the South as a whole may have just adapted and further utilized a slave trade that existed long before them, it’s also very obvious from reading first hand accounts that racial politics and antiquated thoughts on certain races being inferior played a MAJOR role in defining the politics of the day. And almost every one, anti-slavery & proslavery alike, was guilty of thinking that way: from Washington to Jefferson to Lincoln.
The pre-war South may not have invented it but, due to the environment they found themselves in, no one can deny that they wished to perpetuate the Peculiar Institution for economic reasons (as you well stated). Feelings of superiority over another race was the next ‘logical’ (and beyond terrible) step.
But like I mentioned at the beginning, it’s even way more complicated than that.
Yes it's complicated, and there are aspects to it that most people don't know. For instance, before they started importing Africans, they would use white people as slaves. There was a market for them, people who were kidnapped right off the docks in the UK or Europe. Thing is, white people could easily escape and disappear into the crowds. Having black African slaves took care of that problem. They couldn't escape and blend in. Also there were slaves who were so interbred with the whites that they looked as white as any Caucasian, yet were still kept as slaves, and talked like slaves and thought of themselves as slaves. One of the truly disturbing features of slavery in the American South was the fact that the slave owners or other whites (such as a caretaker or overseer) would have children with the blacks, and these children were the half-brothers and sisters of the fully white offspring, and these kids wouldn't even see what was coming until a certain age when the "black" ones were were forced to work in the fields while their white half-siblings didn't. Just so F*#!ed up.
Also in some cities such as Charleston, there were free black business owners who owned black slaves. Kind of awkward, no?