the point is, does it matter? they were SLAVES.
Good News
- Thread starter Cancel 2016.11
- Start date
the point is, does it matter? they were SLAVES.
Taft2016
Verified User
Here are some historical anecdotes of Robert E. Lee to show the depth of complexity in the issue.
He himself had no slaves, but his wife brought some along with her in their marriage. One slave ran away, who Lee had savagely whipped for the very reason I cited earlier. Such behavior demonstrated that a man could not control his household. Which would be especially damaging for a man whose job was controlling other men as a military officer.
On the other hand, Lee was always looking to free the slaves his wife brought with her. One he apprenticed to blacksmith in Pennsylvania. Before he left, the man asked is he could bring along his simple-minded brother. Lee told the freed slave to establish himself as a blacksmith and then they could talk about his brother.
The blacksmith returned a few years later seeking to buy his brother's freedom. Lee informed him (paraphrased), "I will not sell you your brother. You may take him with you. It was my responsibility to ensure that you would be able to establish yourself and financially take care of your brother. I see now that you can and are free to take him with you."
So like I said earlier, both stories (good and bad) were true in the south. Here, they were both true in a single man.
He himself had no slaves, but his wife brought some along with her in their marriage. One slave ran away, who Lee had savagely whipped for the very reason I cited earlier. Such behavior demonstrated that a man could not control his household. Which would be especially damaging for a man whose job was controlling other men as a military officer.
On the other hand, Lee was always looking to free the slaves his wife brought with her. One he apprenticed to blacksmith in Pennsylvania. Before he left, the man asked is he could bring along his simple-minded brother. Lee told the freed slave to establish himself as a blacksmith and then they could talk about his brother.
The blacksmith returned a few years later seeking to buy his brother's freedom. Lee informed him (paraphrased), "I will not sell you your brother. You may take him with you. It was my responsibility to ensure that you would be able to establish yourself and financially take care of your brother. I see now that you can and are free to take him with you."
So like I said earlier, both stories (good and bad) were true in the south. Here, they were both true in a single man.
Taft2016
Verified User
Did anyone dispute that they were slaves?
Does historical accuracy matter?
Or is history merely a tool to exploit a contemporary political agenda?
cancel2 2022
Canceled
That book was a finalist for a Pulitzer Prize so are you going to dismiss it out of hand because I'm damn sure that you've not read it. Nobody is saying that slaves weren't mistreated that would be just bloody crazy. Why are you deliberately trying to misrepresent what people say?
canceled.2021.1
#AMERICAISDEAD
So the fact that slavery was a horrible thing does that mean people can assign any horrible thing to it even if it isn't true?
Yes slavery was bad, but saying that they weren't mistreated in the sense that they weren't beaten doesn't mean one is diminishing the horror that was slavery. Slavery was nothing more or less than an economic venture. Of course it was easier to think of them as less than human in order to justify the practice. It has been done all throughout humankind. It is part of the wonder that is cognitive dissonance. It is no different than how Desh looks at her political opponents
cancel2 2022
Canceled
Holy shit, I am damned sure it was no fun being a slave on a plantation just as it wasn't too pleasant being a worker in a Lancashire cotton mill. Let's face it, life was pretty fucking miserable for most people in the 19th century.
i think it's more about one's motives than what one is actually saying. One is putting all their energy into basically saying "hey... it wasn't THAT bad. Like tom said how they at least weren't freezing or working in factories. that just comes off as fucking stupid.
Now If someone is like "hello, I would like to know the full scope of slavery and how it was," then tom and taft's comments would be relevant. But when discussing slavery as a general thing, it comes off really petty and pedantic to be all like "yeah but.. some slaves actually had nice masters. they didn't break up their families or anything!"
if you had to quantify it, how many times worse do you think it was being a slave vs. a factory worker? 2x? 3x?
There is no circumstance where I would ever think being a slave is better than being free. I get almost ill thinking I'm forced to purchase insurance products that I don't want, don't need, and are four times more expensive than my already awesome coverage... think how I would feel in slavery! Fascistic government insurance programs notwithstanding, there is nothing that I could ever see that would make me want to be a slave over freedom or would make me thankful to be enslaved rather than having to face life in hardship.
I don't understand anybody who would say "well at least some of them had better owners..." and think they made a salient argument about the benevolence of slavery.
I don't understand anybody who would say "well at least some of them had better owners..." and think they made a salient argument about the benevolence of slavery.
cancel2 2022
Canceled
You think that is being flippant, do you know how cold it got in the winter in 19th century England? Bear in my mind that it was just getting out of the Little Ice Age and many people died from the cold and lung diseases. Most industrial cities had a almost permanent smog in winter which claimed many people lives. Do you really think that those people were any better than slaves just because they weren't officially owned by somebody?
maybe given that you are from a far more totalitarian society you are accustomed to the idea of being controlled and a slave. I personally would rather be free and in hardship than property. I think you are ridiculous conflating the two.
Yes, absolutely. I'd rather face hardships in freedom than in slavery.
cancel2 2022
Canceled
Stupid question, you are better than that.
Taft2016
Verified User
I don't how to quantify it.
Let me ask you a question in response; if you were an immigrant factory worker who had your arm ripped off in a machinery accident, would you rather return to your master's home and know you'd have a home and will be taken care of for the rest of your life? Or be turned out of the hospital to a life on the streets?
Do you have an easy answer? I sure don't.
cancel2 2022
Canceled
What freedom? Those people didn't have any freedom they lived and died in the same place, were permanently tired, hungry and disease ridden. They were lucky if they lived to the age of forty.
/MSG/
Uwaa OmO
You two are wasting your time. The English have no concept of freedom anymore.
Factory worker. The invisible hand of the free market would provide you with your needs.
cancel2 2022
Canceled
To be honest, I don't know the answer to that question but then again neither do any of these people either. There are so many myths about 19th century America anyway. I read the other day that up to one third of all cowboys were black but do you see that in films or on TV?
Taft2016
Verified User
That's true too. And while dad was slaving away in the factory seven days a week, mom and the kids were back in the squalid tenement doing piece work, or taking in laundry.