Slavery and the beginings of USA.

[AlphaMale]

I'm currently reading a book called Founding Brothers. It's a up close up account of the key figures in the founding of our Republic. One of the things that struck me as particulary interesting is the silent agreement that slavery was an issue never to be brought up by the first politicians. It was understood to be a necessity to the infant nation, but some where internally conflicted with the ideas of keeping slaves in a country that was founded on the idea of freedom. Some believed that slavery would be eroded away with the passage of time while others demanded its immediate eradication.

Here's the moral dilema. Without the free labor provided by slavery, the country would never have gotten off its feet. BUT, is a country that is dependent on the forced servitude of others really worth preserving? Knowing what we know now, that America is the most wealthy and powerful nation on the planet and that the desendants of the American slaves now experience a quality of life far better than what most of the world experiences, did the necessity of slavery justify its existence; or should it have been wiped out immediately crippling the budding American country. Tough call I think.

[Xzengrim]

Without getting into a huge long answer here, I'm going to say that what happened happened and I wouldn't change a thing. Not that America didn't do some reprehensible things, but I would rather keep the slaves than risk losing what we have today. Slavery is abominable, but it IS justifiable. That was the way of the world back then. It was considered okay to do such a thing. No use in complaining about it now.

That, and I'm going to play the German card here. My family had nothing to do with slavery, because we did not arrive from Germany until after the turn ofthe 20th century. I don't owe nobody nothing.

[AlphaMale]

Slavery is abominable, but it IS justifiable.

What moral principle are you using to justify it? The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few?

[Xzengrim]

I don't justify it morally. I'm looking at more of a historical social perspective. Slavery was acceptable for that society at that time, so it's not exactly as though they were doing anything illegal or wrong. We consider it wrong today and rightfully so, but that was the way the world worked back then, so I don't think it's right to hold the past accountable for the shifts in moral relativism in the present.

Besides, it was the Christian Bible that justified slavery in the first place.

[Wraywolf]

Slavery sucked, but notice how I speak in the past tense. People keep bringing it up, and while it was awful, they are just using the race card to look for ways to weasel out of giving someone a creditable explination or reason. You were never a slave, I was never a slave master. Something my forefathers did decades ago doesn’t mean anything now, so shut up and get your ass in the kitchen! I want my pancakes, biatch!

Also, it’s pointless to wonder about what to change in the past. We can all agree that WWII sucked, but it brought the world out of a depression that might have reduced all the major powers into dust. The world might have executed a giant reboot from the middle ages, and we’d all be taking candels to the outdoor privies instead of having indoor plumbing right now. If Hitler had been assasinated by a rightous Time Traveler, who knows how the world would turn out today? The Gays might have the world in a limpwristed iron grip for all we know! Life would be horribly pink and considerably more fragrant, that’s for sure.

But I digress.

Anyway, what I think my point is, what happens, stays happened, and bugger anyone who thinks otherwise.

I wonder how the Gays would salute their führer? A limp wristed slap of the air and a chorus of “Heil mein Fabulous!” maybe?

[WhiteCrowUK]

Interesting topic - following from the "were werewolves slaves of vampires" topic on another section, I wanted to post something a little more serious on the issue of slavery myself.

Obviously slavery has been around for an age. But what is slavery really?

In the early days of America a "lower class" (slaves) were shipped in from the third world. These people could be treated appallingly, but did work for basic subsidence, and so turned a huge profit.

Now in the golden age of capitalism, we now run large factories in many third world countries. Why there and not at home? Because people who work in factories over there can be treated appallingly, working for a meagre wage, turning a huge profit.

Is then the age of slavery really at an end?

[phantomroller]

obviously, slavery technically isn't over. as White Crow mentioned, there's so many people working in terrible conditions for little to no pay. people work in sweatshops where it's not safe at all and at high risks to get hurt and work 12 hours at a time and don't get enough money to take care of their families. but I guess the only thing that's really changed is slavery based on race (which is what America was doing as well as other cultures were doing too).
but yes, slavery in a sense is still very much around here in america and very prominet (sp?) other countries. and that should definitley be stopped just as slavery based on race needed to be stopped.

[Darth Cluich]

obviously, slavery technically isn't over. as White Crow mentioned, there's so many people working in terrible conditions for little to no pay. people work in sweatshops where it's not safe at all and at high risks to get hurt and work 12 hours at a time and don't get enough money to take care of their families.

That's not slavery. There is still true slavery in some parts of the world -- in Sudan, for instance.

[WhiteCrowUK]

That's not slavery. There is still true slavery in some parts of the world -- in Sudan, for instance.

Whilst I accept there is still "slavery" as we think of it in classic terms, I am kind of asking how do you define slavery.

I would argue that the sweat shops used by places like Nike, are a kind of slavery. It would be worrying to think that whereas we like to think the age of slavery is behind us, big buisness still applies it (all be it slightly more humanely).

Anyway, if you disagree, you're welcome to your opinion.

[Darth Cluich]

Whilst I accept there is still "slavery" as we think of it in classic terms, I am kind of asking how do you define slavery.

I would argue that the sweat shops used by places like Nike, are a kind of slavery. It would be worrying to think that whereas we like to think the age of slavery is behind us, big buisness still applies it (all be it slightly more humanely).

Anyway, if you disagree, you're welcome to your opinion.


By definition, slavery involves ownership of a worker. The folks working in the "sweat shops" are not owned by Nike and are getting paid for their labor -- albeit very little, but they're still getting paid. Ergo, not slavery.

[Xzengrim]

There are 26 million slaves in the world today. We were talking about that in class earlier last week, so I would know. Most of them are in Africa, the Middle East, India, and parts of South America. Africa still engages in capturing rival tribes and selling them, while in India, generations of a family may get wrapped up in inherited cumulative debt that they can never work off; hence are they slaves.

>turns to salute Wray< Jawhol, mein fabulough!< And what do you mean what IF Hitler was gay? He WAS gay! (Or, that's the current theory). Besides, look at all the leather and goosestepping and fruitery! Terrible, just terrible...

That, and I have no sympathy for sweatshops. Nobody forces them to work for $2 an hour. Nobody forces them to dance for that US dollar. It's not my fault that their economy is propped up on foreign interests. If they demanded more money, or went to get other jobs, or worked for their own country, we wouldn't be ABLE to exploit them. I get jeans for $15 because those people are working. I don't care about any of them personally.

[AlphaMale]

Slavery (not webster, just off the top of my head)-
using the power of force to compell another human being into servitude.

I don't justify it morally. I'm looking at more of a historical social perspective. Slavery was acceptable for that society at that time, so it's not exactly as though they were doing anything illegal or wrong.


Yes Xzengrim, but WHY was it acceptable at the time. And don't think that everybody thought it was ok. Even before the Civil War many of the first American politicians were disgusted with the practice, but they lost to the argument that they slaves were "needed". Hence the question, do the needs of the majority justify the enslaving of the minority?

But I do agree with your sweatshop stance.

[Wraywolf]

Morality is a conceptual ideal, things like the Bible and basic life experience pins it down as a shaky list of laws for an individual to abide by. And, in my opinion, morality is no more real then Psychology. It exists, but not in a way you can see or touch.



So, taking this perspective, I say yes, it was justified. I, personally, think slavery is horrible, but they were a necessary part of the economy and whatnot. Can't be helped.

[WhiteCrowUK]

It's not my fault that their economy is propped up on foreign interests. If they demanded more money, or went to get other jobs, or worked for their own country, we wouldn't be ABLE to exploit them. I get jeans for $15 because those people are working. I don't care about any of them personally.

My particular problem is many manufacturers use this kind of labour. Nike clothes are made abroad at a pitance, but sold for big dollars. All the mega revenue made goes into a few pockets.

Obviously a lot of people must feel the way you do X, which is why the practise continues ...

[LV426]

I have to interject and point out that Slavery wasn't even the first atrocity this country was built upon. This country was stolen from those who lived here before. American Indians were slaughtered and their land taken and then we decided to bring indentured servants and slavery. Oh joy. But with the birth of anything there is always some blood shed. As long as we as a country learn from our mistakes and keep from repeating them then the sacrifice was not in vain.

[phantomroller]

the people who work in those sweatshops aren't being forced to work there. that's true. but they do work there because in certain countries there is no other way to make a living. these sweatshops are really the only jobs many of these countries have and if the people don't work, then they can't support themselves or their families. they have really no other choice. in many first world countires, there are vast amounts of jobs ranging from maual labor to office work. but a lot of these third world and second world countries, only have manual labor sweatshops. and then they only pay them 1$ and then sell the products in other countries for over 60$ and make them work in the world's worst conditions....

[AlphaMale]

It's interesting to see that a general consensus is that slavery was horrific, but justifiable.

Are there any other instances (real or hypothetical) where the lives of a minority are justifiably at the disposal to the needs of the majority?

[Xzengrim]

Lot's of terrible stuff used to be justifiable! And surely not everyone agreed with these things, but at the time, historical, societal, and cultural forces were set in a way that allowed these things to continue without people having to grossly violate precedent in order to accomplish them. We shouldn't blame the people who did these things, because in many cases, they didn't know any better. Some other examples are:

killing Native Americans
Corporal punishment
Letting the church melt people
Segregation
Work camps
Pogroms
and stealing from less advanced peoples

There are more I'm sure, but I can't think of any right now.

[AlphaMale]

We shouldn't blame the people who did these things, because in many cases, they didn't know any better.

And what about those that did know better? I'm not buying the picture that the post-revloutionary war Americans just didn't know slavery was wrong because the record shows that it just isn't so. Many Americans back then felt the glaring contradiction in fighting for a country of freemen while keeping others as slaves. (I'm going back to the example of slavery only because that's what I'm currently reading about, not becuase I have some agenda to push).

So the debate is more pertinent to those people who did know it was wrong, yet fought and advocated for it anyway.

[WhiteCrowUK]

I really cannot see how the slave trade can be justified at all. They needed to kidnap people of one country, to work on land stolen from the indiginous people in another?

[phantomroller]

how can people not know that killing the Native Americans were wrong, or letting church people melt, or stealing from people, or segregation is wrong? I mean it's hard to justifiy that these acts are acceptable. it's true that not everyone knew these thing were wrong, but the majority knew it was wrong. but yet people still did it. there's really no way in to justify slavery or these things. people say that America wouldn't be as powerful if slavery didn't happen, but I disagree. had the slaves not been there, then the people who owned the slaves would have had to work themselves. so it wasn't like if there were no slaves, then it was impossible to have things get done....

Many Americans back then felt the glaring contradiction in fighting for a country of freemen while keeping others as slaves.

and this is a good point. many people felt that having slaves is wrong (mainly those in the north). only the south thought it was ok to have slaves. so it wasn't like the early Americans didn't know any better cause they did know.

[LV426]

Actually there were several founding fathers that did not agree with slavery but at the time of the revolutionary war it was more important in their eyes to stake their claim on their country and it's independance from English rule.

Slavery was justified in many ways during it's years in the U.S and other countries. Because most slaves were of a different ehtnicity it was said that they were less than human especially since they were mostly foreign and primitive people that did not speak english or practice christianity. The same reason used on taking away the lands from the American Indians and slaughtering them when the indians protested. They figured they were savages and because they did not have the same beliefs as christians and the "white man" in general that they were less than human and did not deserve the land they lived on.

It is very easy for people to justify their actions. We say that it is neccesary to kill wolves because they attack our cattle, but does that mean that we are right? Or we eat the cattle because we need food, does that make us right? We justify our actions not so people can understand but so that we can sleep at night without out conscience eating us alive.

Unfortunately as views change there are people who refuse to change with them. African American slaves were considered lazy and that is why they needed to be abused and forced to work. And yet that view still remains. Although it doesn't help that most people focus on the negative aspects of the race and culture.

While I don't justify slavery and murder, I do realize that every society has committed atrocities against other races and themselves. But hopefully in examining history one can break free from the preconceptions of the past and face the future in a better light and not one that relies upon the subjugation of humanity for profits and gains.

[WhiteCrowUK]

It is very easy for people to justify their actions. We say that it is neccesary to kill wolves because they attack our cattle, but does that mean that we are right? Or we eat the cattle because we need food, does that make us right? We justify our actions not so people can understand but so that we can sleep at night without out conscience eating us alive.


As a rough rule of thumb it does seem that the more you try and justify something, the more you really know at heart it is wrong.

[WhiteCrowUK]

While I don't justify slavery and murder, I do realize that every society has committed atrocities against other races and themselves. But hopefully in examining history one can break free from the preconceptions of the past and face the future in a better light and not one that relies upon the subjugation of humanity for profits and gains.

Out of interest how is this subject generally handled in American schools.

Being British, most of my history teachers had quite a socialist slant, so it was quite clear to us how shameful some past British attitudes were.

Obviously in a country like Germany there is a much more recent unpleasant past to really come to terms with. And although its not right to make someone appologise all the time, somehow that past has to be come to terms with.

Once in a student house I was in, there was a film with Japanese language in it. We called in Ishi (Japanese student) in to translate - just as a hoard of Japanese zeros (on screen) started dropping bombs on Perl Harbour. The poor guy felt the need to appologise to the American student for his country.

Kind of funny in a way, but also sad.

[phantomroller]

well I go to one of those ultra conservative catholic schools(someone help me please...), so we're taught from day one that any kind of abuse to humans is wrong. but, what's wierd is that they don't focus on it at all. they'll mention it once or twice, condenm it and move on. unless you study on your own, you won't really know about slavery and what it was like.

Once in a student house I was in, there was a film with Japanese language in it. We called in Ishi (Japanese student) in to translate - just as a hoard of Japanese zeros (on screen) started dropping bombs on Perl Harbour. The poor guy felt the need to appologise to the American student for his country.

well today in hstory class we're learning about WWII and we got to the part where Japan bombs Pearl Habor and in the class there's the girl in our class from Japan (she's half Japanese and half white). but anyhow when the teacher mention about Japan and Pearl Harbor, half the class looked at her and stared. I know that had to bee akward for her....

but anyhow, as to what you're saying, we don't learn about it in school, just that it's wrong.

[WhiteCrowUK]

well I go to one of those ultra conservative catholic schools(someone help me please

but anyhow, as to what you're saying, we don't learn about it in school, just that it's wrong.

Hey I used to teach in one of those conservative Catholic schools, each classroom fully equipped with a crucifix. And for some reason one had a statue of Holy Mary with a hook hand!?!

Shame you dont learn about it. Its not that you should be ashamed to be American - but I think for any country there are things we got right, and things we got horrendously wrong. It sometimes seems from the other side of the pond - that any teacher who mentioned any of Americas slightly dark past would be hounded out (or is that too much of a Donnie Darko view).

[LV426]

While people can point fingers at America and Americans and scream that we are horrible monsters and built our country on slavery, I have to point out that in every country there was a type of servitude involved. From slavery to indentured servitude to serfs. Every country is guilty of atrocities against human kind. Sad isn't it. But really no one really can judge countries for their historical actions.

[WhiteCrowUK]

While people can point fingers at America and Americans and scream that we are horrible monsters and built our country on slavery, I have to point out that in every country there was a type of servitude involved. From slavery to indentured servitude to serfs. Every country is guilty of atrocities against human kind. Sad isn't it. But really no one really can judge countries for their historical actions.

I dont know if you are aiming that comment at me - even though I said "I think for any country there are things we got right, and things we got horrendously wrong", and indeed I have constantly mentioned about the shamefull past of the British Empire, Germanys holocaust, and Japans behaviour in war, so I havent been on an anti-American rant.

The important thing to me is though that "the bad history" needs to be discussed and not skirted over. There is a Chinese philosopher (I know his name but I wont make myself look an idiot by misspelling it) who said "if we do not learn from history we are forced to repeat it". Wise words. :)

[phantomroller]

There is a Chinese philosopher (I know his name but I wont make myself look an idiot by misspelling it) who said "if we do not learn from history we are forced to repeat it". Wise words.

yes this is so true. which is why I'm so upset that all my history classes never really mention about the dark past of history. as the quote says, if we become educated on what happened, it won't happen again.

[WhiteCrowUK]

To give you an idea of how "fun" my education was, the two books we studied for English literature were "The Slave Dancer" and "Z for Zachariah".

In The Slave Dancer, a boy is abducted to work on a slave ship, where the crew treat the slaves badly - the ship sinks and only he and a slave survive.

Z for Zachariah is a much more fun book (where is the irony icon?) about a nuclear war. A girl has lost all her family and is possibly the last female remaining. A male scientist then arrives and tries to rape her. As part of the background for this we had to watch a film called "Threads" and numerous other material telling us how we were all going to die in a nuclear war.

Actually I'm surprised our school didnt breed more Goths to be honest ... ;)

[Darth Cluich]

There is a Chinese philosopher (I know his name but I wont make myself look an idiot by misspelling it) who said "if we do not learn from history we are forced to repeat it". Wise words. :)

If memory serves, that was Sun Tzu.

[WhiteCrowUK]

If memory serves, that was Sun Tzu.

Thats the man - only I thought he was spelled Tsun Su!!! [I'm pretty sure I'm wrong]

[Darth Cluich]

Thats the man - only I thought he was spelled Tsun Su!!! [I'm pretty sure I'm wrong]

The spelling varies, because you're taking a character-based language and imposing the Roman alphabet on it.

Anyway...back to the slavery issue!