This is certainly an important point. Context definitely matters.kramerica.inc wrote: ↑Thu Jul 14, 2022 11:45 amThe ugly parts are important to show. But what is often missing from this discussion (and these revisions to history) is the context of the people compared to world norms.RedFromMI wrote: ↑Thu Jul 14, 2022 8:35 am The author cradle keeps referring to is presenting a tired view that telling the truth about slavery and how it permeated the lives of the time is a problem because it ‘tarnishes’ the white male supremacist view that these things were just fine to be left alone.
In other words, we must whitewash our history to keep our children from seeing the ugly parts.
Slavery was not seen in the same light as it is today. When there was nothing in the world- war, brutality, and slave labor was how societies and economies were built. Perspectives change. Civilizations grow, evolve and change. What was considered kosher then is not today.
I watched a movie the other day. It was made in 2007. So not THAT long ago. Many of the things said in the movie, were extremely offensive. Would probably get DMac banned from this forum if he posted them as his own- even as a joke.
Now consider that the topic we are discussing - slavery, had been used since 3500 BCE as THE form of labor for EVERYTHING. There were no machines, technology etc. It was just slave labor.
So slavery was going strong in the world for over 5,000 years. In America, it began 400 years ago. So when you look at it from that perspective, Jefferson's place in history was at the relative "end" of slavery. His political contributions were not perfect compared to today, but they were progressive for his time. He is a controversial and complicated figure because he was at the real tipping point for slavery. He was living during the transition. He had a foot in both worlds.
The peak of the Atlantic slave trade from Africa was in the 1780's.
But in reaction, indeed in horror, the abolitionist movement grew quickly in Europe.
Indeed, the anti-slavery, abolitionist movement was raging in Great Britain at the end of of the 1700's culminating in the 1807 end of British slave trade (Abolition of the Slave Trade Act). By this point majorities had formed, not small #'s, who believed slavery was immoral...Jefferson certainly would have been exposed to those views.
The US itself passed legislation that year going into effect in 1808 banning Atlantic slave trade...but not the ownership of slaves, the trading and selling of slaves in the US. Signed by Jefferson as President.
Jefferson could have freed his slaves at that point, or, as some did, upon his death (1826)...he did not. At that point, about 25% of the entire population in what was then the US were of African descent, most still in slavery (higher percentage in the south). And indeed, this is what makes Jefferson so troubling a figure, given his yes, "progressive" views in some respects, but in others, quite not so.
Indeed, his earlier writing with Madison, anonymously. the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions, arguing a strict construction of the Constitution and for states rights was largely due to the importance of slavery to the south. Hugely problematic for generations thereafter, still today.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kentucky_ ... esolutions
Here's another conundrum. How aware are most US citizens that the War of 1812 was declared by the US (supported by Jefferson's Democrat-Republican Party and opposed by Hamilton's Federalist Party) against the British (and Spain in the southern US) largely in order to expand US territory in lands controlled by indigenous tribes/nations? Further that Jefferson sought the annexation of Canada as well?
Definitely one of the most consequential figures in American history, but complicated. History is complicated...