Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I've often wondered why an AA checker at the grocery store sometimes looks at me with such overt hatred while she rings up my purchases. From the vitriol from some of the Black women here, I'm thinking my local situation is due to the checkers blaming me for slavery.
I do know that no one knows for certain what each and every slave thought. If someone makes an absolute statement as to what is true or untrue, they don't know what they're talking about. KathrynAragon tells of her family and also stories based on significant research. Far as I can tell, she hasn't come in acting like a wild person saying whatever is written is a lie. It's too bad there are some who can't discuss in a civil manner. Do they spend their life bent out of shape over something that was done by no one who is alive today. I am not responsible for what was done about slaves.
This is a very interesting thread due to several posters.
The real truth is that even those who supported abolition had never really planned what to do with the freed slaves, and thus largely they were left to be used by the inevitable users who would follow. [.quote]
Since the war itself wasn't exactly all that "planned" I don't think that it is surprising that the federal didn't have a "plan" of what to do with the freed slaves, just as there was never a "plan" regarding whether there would even be an end to slavery. As for the abolitionist, there were "plans", in fact as many plans as their were abolitionist who didn't all share the same idea about what was to be done.
It is indeed a great series.
That's true about any war, at least modern ones which specifically target civilian populations. Refugees have been in the way and a strategic challenge since modern wars reversed the usual european policy of leaving towns alone and simple surrounding them. And the Civil War is considered the first modern war as the tactics used parallel those used in later wars where striking at the civilian population was used to strategically disrupt military conditions. But refugees, ie, escaped or abandoned slaves, were a greater problem then because unlike most they weren't running from armies but running to them.
With the abolitionists, it comes down to too many ideas, none well considered. Reformers of all stripes of the time tended to look at those needing to be reformed in their own world view. Reformers had ideas about managing other problem populations as well, but this tended to reflect the reformers world view first. Nobody really asked those to be reformed how they'd like it to be. The patterns resulting from other disruptions in the normal order and the resulting 'excess/lost/displaced' population tended to find solutions which preserved the status quo while sufficently amending a wrong.
Managing a population sent adrift is a lot harder than it sounds, though, and often the practical takes over. The classic example is when school was mandated for all British children, an idea born of a reform. It did help the children, who were fed better and grew up with more than survival. But it also fed the factory system where after school was done at perhaps ten, children went to be servants if they qualified or were religated to factories if they didn't. Just as the old system had been based on tending the strips which now ran with sheep, and gave enough to everyone to make it work, but not necessarily what they'd choose.
The freeing of slaves while there were plans was the opposite, for while there were ideas nothing was really done but to allow power to shape the solution over time. The ending of slavery was a good idea, but just carried out without any *one* plan about what came after that might work. Lincoln's death further made it worse, since he had ideas which never were put into effect and we'll never know what sort of difference through time it would have made.
Some abolitionists, including Lincoln, had a plan. Liberia.
I prefer Thaddeous Stevens who planned for full freedom and equal citizens in the Republic and was instrumental in Lincoln's abandonment of the liberia gimmick.
I prefer Thaddeous Stevens who planned for full freedom and equal citizens in the Republic and was instrumental in Lincoln's abandonment of the liberia gimmick.
Thaddeus Stevens was a very interesting person with some very progressive ideas about 100 years ahead of his time.
Liberia was a hell hole. Still pretty much is. Unfair to everyone - the native Africans and the "resettled" ex slaves. I think much of the support for such a crazy idea stemmed from many people wanting former slaves to be "out of sight, out of mind." Many people wanted them freed, but they sure didn't want them living next door!
Such a sad era in our history as a country - and one whose ramifications are still felt today. I always thought it was interesting that the Civil Rights movement reached a peak a full ONE HUNDRED YEARS after the end of the Civil War. That's a long time for a people to linger in a state of "semi freedom."
Thank God for those brave abolishonists and civil rights leaders who carried that work forward.
What source do you have for your claim that many black women willingly had sex with their master?
I was thinking the same thing. Why in the hell would someone want to have sex with a person that beat your children, raped your daughters and humilated your husband and other family members?
I was thinking the same thing. Why in the hell would someone want to have sex with a person that beat your children, raped your daughters and humilated your husband and other family members?
I think you're over-generalizing. I'm sure there were all different types of relationships between slaves and owners. Personalities and interactions were just as complex and varied then as they are now.
I think you're over-generalizing. I'm sure there were all different types of relationships between slaves and owners. Personalities and interactions were just as complex and varied then as they are now.
The relationship was about violence, intimidation, and control. The personalities of the slave masters were evil, along with their interactions with those they owned. The interactions were abusive and inhumane.
And then there were the military leaders who found the newly uncontrolled slaves who followed the armies to be a huge problem, since they were hungry and the army could barely feed their own. Some of the generals had no interest in freeing slaves, just stopping the rebellion. That the slaves leaving their plantations meant further disruption for the southern cause was a plus. That they followed the armies was a often a hinderance to the war as they got in the way. It wasn't until later in the war that freed slaves were used as part of the war itself.
The real truth is that even those who supported abolition had never really planned what to do with the freed slaves, and thus largely they were left to be used by the inevitable users who would follow.
There is a new series on PBS called the Abolitionists, three parts. The first was very interesting, especially the diversity in approach, from the ultra radical who believed if blacks weren't allowed to vote they wouldn't either to those with more practical ideas. But what (so far at least) none had really though of was what happened to the individuals themselves after.
[quote=ovcatto;27734148]
Quote:
Originally Posted by nightbird47
The real truth is that even those who supported abolition had never really planned what to do with the freed slaves, and thus largely they were left to be used by the inevitable users who would follow. [.quote]
Since the war itself wasn't exactly all that "planned" I don't think that it is surprising that the federal didn't have a "plan" of what to do with the freed slaves, just as there was never a "plan" regarding whether there would even be an end to slavery. As for the abolitionist, there were "plans", in fact as many plans as their were abolitionist who didn't all share the same idea about what was to be done.
It is indeed a great series.
Thank you, guys, I went back earlier and found the first part available On Demand and watched it. Can't wait to see Part 2, on Tuesday.
The relationship was about violence, intimidation, and control. The personalities of the slave masters were evil, along with their interactions with those they owned. The interactions were abusive and inhumane.
Such blanket statements lack credibility.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
