6 ms·

Yes the founders of America had great vision and developed a radically new kind of country. But I'm not convinced that they had great vision or positive impact

by MarkMc 8y ago

Yes the founders of America had great vision and developed a radically new kind of country. But I'm not convinced that they had great vision or positive impact with regard to slavery. Weren't they hypocrites to permit slavery while proclaiming proudly that all men are created equal? The Slavery Abolition Act of 1833 abolished slavery throughout the British Empire. The thirteenth amendment to the United States constitution abolished slavery in 1865. So a first approximation is that American independence extended slavery on US soil by 32 years.

euroclydon 8y ago
Sure, if you look at numbers in a timeline, but 1) the British couldn't hold on to the colonies in N. America and 2) based on #1, even if they had held on to the colonies, they would have had a heck of a time enforcing abolition in the Southern states area.
- cimmanom 8y ago
  That's an interesting point. If the American Revolution hadn't occurred in 1776 (or had failed), the Southern states at least would likely have rebelled if the English had attempted to abolish slavery in the 1830s-40s. Then you have to wonder whether the northern states would have sided with the South or with the English.
spaginal 8y ago
The British used indentured servitude well into the 20th century. Sure, it’s not the same kind of slavery movies enjoy depicting, but the practice was just as inhumane and brutal in many respects. Indians were particularly affected by it. America ended all forms of slavery, including indentured servitude, under the 13th amendment after the civil war. We shed a lot of blood as a country to get that result, the sacrifice of those men and women shouldn’t be so quickly cast aside. Our Founders knew the fight against slavery was coming, they discussed it extensively in historical records you can look up, but they had bigger fish to fry first when they founded the country. The fact the United States moved so quickly after the ratification of the Constitution to ban slave importation in 1808 shows they had a strong desire to get the issue solved. The country quickly chipped away at it with all things considered.
- krapp 8y ago
  >America ended all forms of slavery, including indentured servitude, under the 13th amendmemt after the civil war. Not entirely... the 13th amendment makes an exception for "punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted." Meaning slavery as a private institution is outlawed in the US, but the government is allowed to keep as many slaves as it wants, provided it convicts them of a crime first.
  - spaginal 8y ago
    That’s a much larger argument I agree. You could also argue the high level of citizen taxation combined with record deficit spending in our country could be further evidence that the goal posts simply shifted.
    - krapp 8y ago
      I won't go so far as to imply that the American justice system is intended to further the institution of slavery with a racially biased system of laws and law enforcement that results in disproportionate black incarceration. But... it is telling that the US just couldn't bring itself to let go of slavery entirely.
- jernfrost 8y ago
  With all due respect that is hogwash. The war of independence was not quite the glorious thing Americans like to paint it as. 1) The southern states only joined after they learned that the British were freeing slaves. Now the British may not have had ulterior motives, but then don't pretend all Americans did either. 2) The Royal Proclamation of 1763, which forbid european american settlers from expanding into native American territory, was a major contribution to resentment towards British rule. Not exactly a very honorable thing. 3) As for slavery. The Convict lease system existed until past the 1900s or so. This was an enormous system. Over 70% of the income of the state of Albama was from convict lease system. This was just black slavery under a new name. Not only that but it was significantly more brutal than the old slavery. 4) My wife's side of the family is from Hawaii so I've been there many times. I know all to well about the extent of involuntary servitude placed upon immigrants there. People were beaten lynched, racist laws preventing e.g. Chinese from doing anything but farm work. The whole island was illegally invaded by the US. Hawaii was recognized as a sovereign nation by all of Europe at the time. Ok, I am not trying to say the US was the worst ever, one always ends up getting those accusations. I merely asking to stop this incessant American tendency to glorify themselves as so much better than everybody else. Painting the English as some sort of evil tyrants might make sense in India. But in America people tended to enjoy a lot more freedom and lower taxes than anywhere else. Britain had never promised representation to colonial subjects. The US followed the exact same practice in their own colonies. Did not see the Philippines get any representation in the US. Puerto Rico still doesn't.
mobilefriendly 8y ago
By 1804 all northern US states had abolished slavery.
jacobwilliamroy 8y ago
The founding fathers did not develop a radically new kind of country. They observed the inter-national confederacies of the people who had already been living in and around the area that is now called New England. Under the articles of confederation (in which the term "The United States of America" is coined) the country was run in a way very similar to the Iroquois Confederacy. The big difference was that the Articles did make it possible for the central government to develop policies to be implemented in all states; the Iroquois Confederacy did not have anything of the sort. The federalist influence came later, but the Constitution we live under now did not require such a huge amount of creativity as we like to teach in our American History classes.

by MarkMc 8y ago

euroclydon 8y ago

Sure, if you look at numbers in a timeline, but 1) the British couldn't hold on to the colonies in N. America and 2) based on #1, even if they had held on to the colonies, they would have had a heck of a time enforcing abolition in the Southern states area.

cimmanom 8y ago
That's an interesting point. If the American Revolution hadn't occurred in 1776 (or had failed), the Southern states at least would likely have rebelled if the English had attempted to abolish slavery in the 1830s-40s. Then you have to wonder whether the northern states would have sided with the South or with the English.

spaginal 8y ago

The British used indentured servitude well into the 20th century. Sure, it’s not the same kind of slavery movies enjoy depicting, but the practice was just as inhumane and brutal in many respects. Indians were particularly affected by it. America ended all forms of slavery, including indentured servitude, under the 13th amendment after the civil war. We shed a lot of blood as a country to get that result, the sacrifice of those men and women shouldn’t be so quickly cast aside. Our Founders knew the fight against slavery was coming, they discussed it extensively in historical records you can look up, but they had bigger fish to fry first when they founded the country. The fact the United States moved so quickly after the ratification of the Constitution to ban slave importation in 1808 shows they had a strong desire to get the issue solved. The country quickly chipped away at it with all things considered.

krapp 8y ago
>America ended all forms of slavery, including indentured servitude, under the 13th amendmemt after the civil war. Not entirely... the 13th amendment makes an exception for "punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted." Meaning slavery as a private institution is outlawed in the US, but the government is allowed to keep as many slaves as it wants, provided it convicts them of a crime first.
- spaginal 8y ago
  That’s a much larger argument I agree. You could also argue the high level of citizen taxation combined with record deficit spending in our country could be further evidence that the goal posts simply shifted.
  - krapp 8y ago
    I won't go so far as to imply that the American justice system is intended to further the institution of slavery with a racially biased system of laws and law enforcement that results in disproportionate black incarceration. But... it is telling that the US just couldn't bring itself to let go of slavery entirely.
jernfrost 8y ago
With all due respect that is hogwash. The war of independence was not quite the glorious thing Americans like to paint it as. 1) The southern states only joined after they learned that the British were freeing slaves. Now the British may not have had ulterior motives, but then don't pretend all Americans did either. 2) The Royal Proclamation of 1763, which forbid european american settlers from expanding into native American territory, was a major contribution to resentment towards British rule. Not exactly a very honorable thing. 3) As for slavery. The Convict lease system existed until past the 1900s or so. This was an enormous system. Over 70% of the income of the state of Albama was from convict lease system. This was just black slavery under a new name. Not only that but it was significantly more brutal than the old slavery. 4) My wife's side of the family is from Hawaii so I've been there many times. I know all to well about the extent of involuntary servitude placed upon immigrants there. People were beaten lynched, racist laws preventing e.g. Chinese from doing anything but farm work. The whole island was illegally invaded by the US. Hawaii was recognized as a sovereign nation by all of Europe at the time. Ok, I am not trying to say the US was the worst ever, one always ends up getting those accusations. I merely asking to stop this incessant American tendency to glorify themselves as so much better than everybody else. Painting the English as some sort of evil tyrants might make sense in India. But in America people tended to enjoy a lot more freedom and lower taxes than anywhere else. Britain had never promised representation to colonial subjects. The US followed the exact same practice in their own colonies. Did not see the Philippines get any representation in the US. Puerto Rico still doesn't.

mobilefriendly 8y ago

By 1804 all northern US states had abolished slavery.

jacobwilliamroy 8y ago

The founding fathers did not develop a radically new kind of country. They observed the inter-national confederacies of the people who had already been living in and around the area that is now called New England. Under the articles of confederation (in which the term "The United States of America" is coined) the country was run in a way very similar to the Iroquois Confederacy. The big difference was that the Articles did make it possible for the central government to develop policies to be implemented in all states; the Iroquois Confederacy did not have anything of the sort. The federalist influence came later, but the Constitution we live under now did not require such a huge amount of creativity as we like to teach in our American History classes.