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.
slaves were given the opportunity to make craft items and sell the the items i.e. seagrove pottery, carpentry work, furniture etc . The owner kept a portion of the sale as did the slave. Slaves then saved the money to free themselves and gradually bought their wives and children. At least in my home state.
So it was possible,. Just not easy
All of the above was entirely at your owner's discretion. There was no set formula....follow these rules, save this much money, and you are guaranteed freedom. It was up to the master whether or not you would be allowed to earn money. It was up to the master to sell you your freedom or not, even if you had the money.
Why are you defending slavery? Would you wish to have been a slave under any conditions at any time in history?
Simply to counter your absolute statement that is inaccurate.
As to slavery, I am more concerned about slavery going on today. Can't get into the way back machine and change things but we can stand up for what is right today
All of the above was entirely at your owner's discretion. There was no set formula....follow these rules, save this much money, and you are guaranteed freedom. It was up to the master whether or not you would be allowed to earn money. It was up to the master to sell you your freedom or not, even if you had the money.
Why are you defending slavery? Would you wish to have been a slave under any conditions at any time in history?
I think what modern people forget is there were far worse fates for people back in the day. Today in this country we're obsessed with upward mobility, or at least the ability to be upwardly mobile. Historically people were more concerned with survival as most of the non western world is today. Being born to poor coal miners 150 years ago didn't necessarily mean you had a better life or fate than a house slave in charge of kitchen staff. You can't control what life you're born into. Do you think people were doing dangerous jobs for $1 a week just because they enjoyed that line of work?
Not saying slavery was good, but in context with life in general hundreds of years ago it wasn't the worse possible thing that could happen. When you're dying of starvation, the idea of being "free" becomes meaningless.
Simply to counter your absolute statement that is inaccurate.
As to slavery, I am more concerned about slavery going on today. Can't get into the way back machine and change things but we can stand up for what is right today
You can try to rectify the long term ongoing effects slavery has had in our nation as well... In fact I would posit that it is our responsibility to at least try.
straight from the horse's mouth. States rights. didn't like slavery. didn't like the Republican party as it gained power. had no hatred for President Lincoln and thought kindly of GEN Grant for the way he had treated GEN Lee.
Did he say in the beginning that his father was black? It takes a while to get into the rhythm of his accent so I may have misunderstood. went back and listened again and he said "my father's nigras" not my "father is nigra".
Historical context is key here. Many southerns changed their tune after the war. Primarily because slavery was gone and never coming back, and they had to move on from slavery if they wanted the economic benefits of reuniting with the North. But make no mistake, the war was fought to defend slavery. But once it was determined to be a bad thing, Southerners basically pulled the "Well, I never liked it anyway" argument. Like when someone gets dumped and says "I never liked him anyway." And also, you'd be hard-pressed to find an old man admit to his grandchildren who live in a society where slavery was deemed horrible that you fought for it.
It's also telling that immediately after the war their one and primary concern was re-establishing slavery under another name, by witholding pay from their black laborers, getting laws passed that required black people to work their former owner's plantations, and limited their movement. If they weren't defending slavery, why fight so hard to preserve it under a different name AFTER the war?
Context, again, is key. You can't take what a veteran said later in life when the social climate has changed and assume it reflects what he was thinking in 1860.
You can try to rectify the long term ongoing effects slavery has had in our nation as well... In fact I would posit that it is our responsibility to at least try.
I'll bite...
If slavery never existed in the US, the US would have had a hard time earning foreign currency as the slavery based economy provided exports that brought in foreign investment. We'd probably only be limited to East of the Mississippi while the Brits, Russians and Mexicans owned the western US.
Black people wouldn't live in the US at all. So no Jazz, Blues, Hip Hop or Rap, and indirectly Rock, Southern Rock and Southern Rap, nor most of the popular "American Foods".
Liberia wouldn't have existed.
Jim Crow wouldn't have existed because black people wouldn't be here in the first place.
No Civil War, which means at least 600K more people would have had babies and by now America would have had at least more than 600K people. There probably be no cultural differences between the Southern and Northern US aside from weather.
Slavery sounds terrible, but it's safe to say for better or worse, our country would be different today.
When looking back at history and discussing your heritage, it is FAR more acceptable to talk about "state's rights" than it is to discuss why negros should be shackled and owned like property.
I'd be curious what other rights they were fighting for and why they didn't release their blacks from slavery if it wasn't a big deal. The average solider likely had little choice in fighting in the war war and even less knowledge of why they were fighting other than the propaganda of the day.
Abolishing Slavery was the last thing on either sides mind at the beginning of the war. PERIOD. It is used as an excuse TODAY because its the only good thing to come out of the war. Slavery was in no danger of being abolished in 1861... none, Lincoln said so himself! So why would the SOUTH secede and endure a 4 year war to keep slavery in tact when no one was trying to end it outside a few abolitionist.. one of which the GOVERNMENT hung for treason.. imagine that!
The National Government and the NORTH had no desire to end Slavery and they certainly were not going to fight a war to end slavery, that's silly and that never happened... The North fought and won the Civil War for one reason and one reason only... to keep the nation whole! End of Story...
The South seceded not to keep slavery, slavery was in no danger.. Lincoln said so! The South seceded and fought for independence, no different than what the colonies did in 1776..
Abolishing Slavery was the last thing on either sides mind at the beginning of the war. PERIOD. It is used as an excuse TODAY because its the only good thing to come out of the war. Slavery was in no danger of being abolished in 1861... none, Lincoln said so himself! So why would the SOUTH secede and endure a 4 year war to keep slavery in tact when no one was trying to end it outside a few abolitionist.. one of which the GOVERNMENT hung for treason.. imagine that!
The National Government and the NORTH had no desire to end Slavery and they certainly were not going to fight a war to end slavery, that's silly and that never happened... The North fought and won the Civil War for one reason and one reason only... to keep the nation whole! End of Story...
The South seceded not to keep slavery, slavery was in no danger.. Lincoln said so! The South seceded and fought for independence, no different than what the colonies did in 1776..
New here in the History forum?
John Brown was tried, convicted, and hung by the state of Virginia on the charges of treason against the Commonwealth of Virginia, several counts of murder, and inciting servile insurrection. The GOVERNMENT, which I take you mean the national government, only apprehended John Brown and his followers
The entire point of the Republican platform was the containment of slavery to those states where it already existed. Southern states seceded, not because slavery was being outlawed, but because the federal government would no longer let it expand into new areas, including both US territories and northern states.
Point of fact, Lincoln was willing to wait out the fever of Southern secession, and hoped for an eventual and peaceful return of the southern states back into the Union, but the hotheads in South Carolina just had to go and attack and capture a federal installation. Sort of like what John Brown was trying to do at federal armory at Harper's Ferry.
The South seceded and fought for independence, no different than what the colonies did in 1776..
First let me suggest that you post without all the capital letters and exclamation points. It makes you appear to come across as a screaming hysteric. Is that how you wish to be perceived?
There was a great deal of difference between the colonial revolt and the southern rebellion. The status of the colonies to Great Britain was one of subordination, not equality. The colonies were governed by charters issued by the crown, charters which could be revoked at the crown's pleasure, and thus there were no guaranteed rights within the colony. The colonials lacked representation in that royal government and had no say so as to the acts of Parliament.
The southern states were equal to any other states in legal status within the US. They had representation in the government and were guaranteed certain rights by the constitution, although secession was not one of those rights, the Constitution was silent on that issue.
By ratifying the Constitution, the southern states had voluntarily joined a union of states and had agreed to respect the results of national elections as part of that admission to the US.
So, as you can see, you are incorrect when claiming that there was no difference.
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.
