Figure 1.--

The American scholarly discussion of slavery was until the 1960s and the Civil Rights Movement, warped by the prominance of the Last Cause historians. We now know much more about slavey in America. Thus the basis exists for an informed discussion forthe first time in our history. And you often hear modern Civil Rights leaders promote the new nor a national discussion of the lingering impact of slavery. And along with that idea often comes the complaint that white people don't want that discussion. This is partially true, but in truthbecause many Afro-Americans do not want a wide-open discussion of race in America. They want to discuss slavery and its lingering impact. They want to only discuss, as Mrs. Obama phrases it, why America is a 'mean' country. When the discussion of race veres away from victimization, many Afro-Americans, especially modern Civil Rights leaders like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton are much less interested in the discussion they so ardently advocate. When individuals suggest that the difficulties that Afro-Americans encounter in America are also the result of personal behavior (illegitimate babies, drug usage, limited effort at school, crime, popular culture, etc.) they are often outraged. The reaction to Bill Crosby's statements is a good example. But no other example makes this point more strongly than Jesse Jackon's statement that Senator Obama should be castrated because he dares raise the issue of behavior. That is hardly the words of an indivual who wants a discussion. It is not hard to see why many Americans choose to simply avoid any discussion of race. That it is a shame because it is a national discussion worth having. And we encourage our readers share their thoughts on this important issue.

Fundamental Betrayal

Sorry, I got busy! I agree with you about the loss of civility. People who shout and call names are only displaying the weakness of their argument and their own personal insecurity. Here's my point about slavery in the USA (not anywhere else): it was a fundamental betrayal of the Declaration of Independence. Slavery deformed the Republic at birth. Jefferson knew it when he wrote it. I recommend Henry Wiencek on Jefferson and Washington (two aristocrats, in relative terms, in British North America at the time) for perspectives on how they each were riven by regret over that deformed birth. Washington - perhaps the greatest American and easily one of the 10 most important figures of the last 500 years globally - tried to reckon a way out of it. As for the scope and global repercussions of the entire system of slavery capitalism which was catalyzed by Jefferson's Louisiana Purchase, I highly recommend Sven Beckert's Empire of Cotton: A Global History. That global economic empire was predominantly a British-spawned empire, of which the USA was a pivotal part, but a part. Empires are vampires and the British Crown plays Dracula too well. But the legacy of British political thought and action, from the Magna Carta to the English Civil War to the First American Civil War (as we Loyalists call the War of Independence, for which the French King is due a best supporting actor award) to the Second American Civil War, is that the idea of a head of state being subject to a legislature with a common franchise is the most important invention in human history. It's in constant need of improvement and re-invention. Frederick Douglass, who I think is on par with Washington as perhaps the greatest American, is the embodiment of how free speech can empower even the lowliest born man to use words - not swords - to transform and re-invent democracy. Democracy is worth taking up the sword for, in any case, in any place, at any price - as President Zelensky is reminding the world today. As to your point 1, on Lend Lease - today we are all moving far too slowly to effect the same kind of Arsenal of Democracy that Roosevelt armed to Churchill, to arm Zelensky. I think by August 2023 we will be back in Poland again. In August 1941, at the height of the Battle of the Atlantic, Churchill said to Roosevelt that it was time to finish the job begun in August 1914. It's still unfinished. Tyrannical militarism is still a real threat to our democracy and Western democrats who think it can be contained are deluded. Empires are vampires. There's a vampire in Moscow, and another in Beijing. -- Georgeevideo

Moral Objections

Slavery divided America. This developed slowly, alyhjough even berfore the Constitution was ratified states began abolishing slavery. Eventually America was divided betweem free and slave states. And the driver of the anti-slaverybmovement was the Anolitionist Movement. This was at first beyond the cultural mainstream, but had become by the mid-19th century a powerful movement. The British Abolitionist Movement is probably the better known of the two, buit not well publicized is the fact that the British and American Abolitionist Movements were the only two such movement of any importance. And the primcipal argument made by the American abolitionist Movement was moraln-- that slavery was a huge infringement of basic human rights. And the hear of the movement was Protestant churches in northern states. (At the time of the Civil War (1861-65), America was still a largely Proterstant nation. The Irish fleeing the Potato Famine were the only imprtant Catholic group.

Economic Issues

Economic issues were not important in the debate over slavery that led to the Civil War. Economic issues dus not rise to the surtfacr at Consitutional Convention (1787). They were, howver, largely unsaid. But one of the reasons the delegates could side-step the issue is that many delegates from both Northrn and Southern states believed that slavery was a dying institution. Slavery was important in classical Greece and Rome, but this was not the case in most ancient civilizations. This was the case bcauee slave aabor was not very efficent. Rather the primary work force in mot ancient more modern econoies was a landless peasantry. Ad for that same reason, slavery was not widespread as a percentage of the labor force around the world because that it was sinply not as efficent as free labor. In that regard the genius of America, at least in he North was in land ownership. The United States would be the first important counry in which the people who farmed the land actually onned it. And this system was about to be turned loose on an enyire continent. The inefficeny of slavery would be born out in the Civil War. The Southern slave econmy simply could not compete wih the highly productive robust Northern industrial economy based on free labor. Delegates believe that slavery wuld die out on its own. Tragically, twi developments occured at about the same time. the Unites States became indepdent just as Britain was inventing the industrial Revolution at first based on textiles. This crerated an enormous demand for raw material. This was for millennia mostly wool, but wool was notbavaialble for the new industrial mills. Second, Eli Witnety invented the coytton jin (1793). This ceate d a way of easily removing the seed from cotton bolls. As a result, cotton production exploded in the South. Ans plantation slave agriculture was given a new lease on life. While little discussed by Abolitionists, economic issues, today are very imoprtant in the modern historucal debate over slavery.

Sources

Magness, Phil. The 1619 Project Myth.

Created: 8:55 PM 3/16/2022
Last updated: 9:41 AM 7/19/2026