Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: Puncturing the slavery myth, Constitutionally, Slavery Is No National Institution.

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,156

    Puncturing the slavery myth, Constitutionally, Slavery Is No National Institution.

    "THE Civil War began over a simple question: Did the Constitution of the United States recognize slavery — property in humans — in national law? Southern slaveholders, inspired by Senator John C. Calhoun of South Carolina, charged that it did and that the Constitution was proslavery; Northern Republicans, led by Abraham Lincoln, and joined by abolitionists including Frederick Douglass, resolutely denied it. After Lincoln’s election to the presidency, 11 Southern states seceded to protect what the South Carolina secessionists called their constitutional “right of property in slaves.”

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/16/op...stitution.html

    NYT Op-Ed By SEAN WILENTZ SEPT. 16, 2015

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...-slavery-myth/

    "Well worth reading – a good antidote to this myth that not only unfairly impugns the constitutional framers, but (more importantly) does serious damage to our sense of who and what we are as a nation." David G. Post at Volokh Conspiracy

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sean_Wilentz
    Last edited by Nightmare; 09-21-2015 at 07:43 AM.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  2. #2
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Spooner mentions many of the same things in The Unconstitutionality of Slavery.

    From what I have read and I wish I had the sources handy, only two southern states were for continuing slavery after the revolution, if it wasn't for New England states who made a lot of money shipping slaves it may very well have been done away with.

    Thanks for the links good read.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  3. #3
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,795
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    From what I have read and I wish I had the sources handy, only two southern states were for continuing slavery after the revolution, if it wasn't for New England states who made a lot of money shipping slaves it may very well have been done away with.
    I'll take those citations. It is hard to imagine that the constitution would have contained the "three-fifths" language in Art 1 Sec 2, the Art 1 Sec 9 "migration clause" with its guarantee of no changes until 1808, or the limitation on amendments altering this guarantee in Art 5. The Missouri Compromise to assure a continued balance of power between slave and free States in the US Senate also springs to mind as evidence that Southern States were very interested in preserving the institution of slavery.

    Further, more than 2 States made preservation of slavery a rather big part of their secession documents.

    Not to mention the fact that Southern State attempts to continue infringing the rights of freed blacks lead to the 14th and 15th amendments, along with the entire Civil Rights movement of the 60s and 70s. Which is not to say that Northern States were lacking in racism.

    I've spent much of my adult life correcting those who simple-mindedly (or dishonesty) claimed the civil war was "all about slavery". I find it unusual to be on the other side having to correct those who would rewrite history the other way by attempting to diminish the role slavery and racism played in our national history.

    It is true that many Southerners, including Southern slave owners, had deep concerns about slavery. And with good reason. When you wake up and realize those you are oppressing outnumber you in your own home, and constitute a large enough number of the regional population to make an uprising very personally dangerous, you start to consider on some things. In fact, such fears were a foundation for the earliest anti-RKBA (aka "gun control") laws in this nation as documented by Clayton Cramer in his "Racist Roots of Gun Control."

    Some considered shipping slaves to Africa (the misnamed "repatriatization" (sp??) given that most slaves by 1850 were born in the USA). Very few men gave serious thought to citizenship or anything approaching equal rights.

    This nation continues to pay a horrible price for the history of slavery and racism including gun control laws, the lack of a recognized right for States to secede, and the massive growth of the federal government over the proper power of States during the 1860s and 1960s.

    One needn't minimize the extent nor horrors of slavery or Jim Crow in order to have rational objections to some of the conduct of the federal government.

    Charles
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

  4. #4
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,795
    [QUOTE=Nightmare;2161247
    "Well worth reading a good antidote to this myth that not only unfairly impugns the constitutional framers, but (more importantly) does serious damage to our sense of who and what we are as a nation." David G. Post at Volokh Conspiracy
    [/QUOTE]

    I like the argument that the constitution tolerated slavery as a regional issue, as a pragmatic matter necessary to create a union.

    The notion that the USA was founded on racist principles has always been laughable to me. While the nation has grappled with racism and xenophobia, it seems to me it has dealt with racial (and religious, political, and other) diversity better than most other nations of which I'm aware that actually have any racial diversity. (Brazil may be one nation that does better than we have.)

    Of course, the notion that slavery was the end-all reason for the War is also pretty silly. It is clear that tariffs were a major sticking point, as well as the simple matter of State control rather than federal control. Slavery was AN issue. It was also a major cultural undercurrent that highlighted some of the differences between North and South. But it certainly wasn't THE issue over which the war was waged.

    South Carolina referred almost exclusively to slavery in its secession document even as Lincoln was saying everything he possibly could to assure the South that he wasn't going to forcibly end slavery. Within a couple of years, freeing the slaves became the rallying cry that maintained waning Northern support for the War even as most Southerners were fighting what they saw as a simple invasion of their home country.

    History is a strange thing.

    Charles
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

  5. #5
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Wow.....you are correcting nobody. Nobody has diminished the role of slavery and its horrors. Your continued personal attack is duly noted.

    You do realize the 3/5ths clause was to limit political power right? Not a clause about how much of a person an individual is right?

    Again this isn't about secession is it?
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  6. #6
    Regular Member solus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    here nc
    Posts
    6,881
    SVG, query...i know the 3/5s concept was to appease for apportionment and taxation but do you have any information in your tomes read on how this specific figure was reached by Madison?

    or was it just a grasp out of thin air of a figure between the 1/2 and 3/4 proposed by others?

    ipse
    I'm only human; I do what I can; I'm just a man; I do what I can; Don't put the blame on me; Don't put your blame on me ~ Rag'n'Bone Man.

    Please do not get confused between my personality & my attitude. My personality is who I am ~ my attitude depends on who you are and how you act.

    Remember always, do not judge someone because they sin differently than you do!

    Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please. Mark Twain

  7. #7
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,273
    Quote Originally Posted by solus View Post
    SVG, query...i know the 3/5s concept was to appease for apportionment and taxation but do you have any information in your tomes read on how this specific figure was reached by Madison?

    or was it just a grasp out of thin air of a figure between the 1/2 and 3/4 proposed by others?

    ipse
    Here ya go. May not answer your question directly because it appears that a back-room deal was done...why back then.

    http://www.heritage.org/constitution...-fifths-clause
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  8. #8
    Regular Member solus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    here nc
    Posts
    6,881
    thanks OC4ME, i keep forgetting about this site as i guess i do not ask the right question when searching, per se, to get where i want to go...

    booked marked for a rainy day...

    ipse
    I'm only human; I do what I can; I'm just a man; I do what I can; Don't put the blame on me; Don't put your blame on me ~ Rag'n'Bone Man.

    Please do not get confused between my personality & my attitude. My personality is who I am ~ my attitude depends on who you are and how you act.

    Remember always, do not judge someone because they sin differently than you do!

    Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please. Mark Twain

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,011
    The vice president of the Confederate States of America, Alexander Stephens, in his famous Cornerstone Speech, made it quite clear that the very foundation of the CSA was slavery:

    “Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests, upon the great truth that the African American is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth."

    In its entirety at: [ teachingamericanhistory.org/library/index.asp?documentprint=76 ]
    Last edited by beebobby; 09-23-2015 at 03:58 PM.

  10. #10
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by solus View Post
    thanks OC4ME, i keep forgetting about this site as i guess i do not ask the right question when searching, per se, to get where i want to go...

    booked marked for a rainy day...

    ipse
    I would take that motion by Elbridge Gerry with a grain of salt until verified by another source. The author of the essay quotes Gerry without citing his source for the quote--remember, the convention was held in secret. Much of what we know came from James Madison's notes released years and years later.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  11. #11
    Regular Member solus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    here nc
    Posts
    6,881
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    I would take that motion by Elbridge Gerry with a grain of salt until verified by another source. The author of the essay quotes Gerry without citing his source for the quote--remember, the convention was held in secret. Much of what we know came from James Madison's notes released years and years later.
    citizen, you are right of course to validate via other sources but when i turned to al gore's invention and put in 3/5s it kept coming up 60%...(joking!!)

    ipse
    Last edited by solus; 09-23-2015 at 10:16 PM.
    I'm only human; I do what I can; I'm just a man; I do what I can; Don't put the blame on me; Don't put your blame on me ~ Rag'n'Bone Man.

    Please do not get confused between my personality & my attitude. My personality is who I am ~ my attitude depends on who you are and how you act.

    Remember always, do not judge someone because they sin differently than you do!

    Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please. Mark Twain

  12. #12
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by solus View Post
    SVG, query...i know the 3/5s concept was to appease for apportionment and taxation but do you have any information in your tomes read on how this specific figure was reached by Madison?

    or was it just a grasp out of thin air of a figure between the 1/2 and 3/4 proposed by others?

    ipse
    An interesting question indeed. I assumed it was compromises and some sort of per capita ratio to "make it fair".


    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    Here ya go. May not answer your question directly because it appears that a back-room deal was done...why back then.

    http://www.heritage.org/constitution...-fifths-clause
    Very interesting read, seems very likely and plausible.

    Politics being politics.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •