4 ms·

Not true that there were only a few slave owners. https://socialequity.duke.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/8.10.20.pdf https://socialequity.duke.edu/wp-content

Not true that there were only a few slave owners. https://socialequity.duke.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/8.10.20.pdf https://socialequity.duke.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/8.1...

cogman10 5y ago
> So, according to the Census of 1860, 30.8 percent of the free families in the confederacy owned slaves. That means that every third white person in those states had a direct commitment to slavery. This is probably quibbling over numbers, but I'd point out that we are talking about 30% of the white people in states that had slavery. Not 30% of the population at large. The states with slavery were underpopulated. The total population of the US in the 1860 was 31 million and the slave states had a population of 12 million (most of those slaves). 300k out of 31 million is, IMO, a few. Even if they are highly concentrated in a few states. None of this really negates what I was saying. Owning slaves was expensive and only the wealthy could afford them. The fact that 30% of white people in slave states were wealthy enough to own slavery isn't a contradiction.
- kerblang 5y ago
  > the slave states had a population of 12 million (most of those slaves). In 1860 only two states had more slaves than free citizens, South Carolina & Mississippi, and by a slim margin.
- s1artibartfast 5y ago
  It is an interesting point, but you also have to keep in mind that people at this time had vastly different experiences in terms of communication and travel. Abolitionist literature and advocates was banned in the south and a full third of whites were illiterate. It is really hard to get away from the "product of their time" sentiment without a deep dive into nature vs nurture, determinism, and spirituality. I am under no illusion that if you or I were white and born in the antebellum south, we would probably support slavery too. It can equally be said, that there almost assuredly were southerners that had moral reservations about slavery that failed to express themselves or take meaningful action. For me, the interesting question is not how bad were they as people, but why they did or didn't act. By what factors did cultural support and tolerance for slavery perpetuate. What was life experience like for different people in that culture. At any rate, I guess my sentiment is that the whole topic of trying to pass judgement on individuals out of the context of their time & place is a fools errand. If not time and place, what differentiates the future views of a child born to southern slave owners and northern abolitionists, or a child born today. In the end, we can agree that we think slavery was an barbaric practice, and hopefully investigate more interesting questions about what can be learned from history. Perhaps we can learn something to better our own culture.

Not true that there were only a few slave owners. https://socialequity.duke.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/8.10.20.pdf https://socialequity.duke.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/8.1...

cogman10 5y ago

> So, according to the Census of 1860, 30.8 percent of the free families in the confederacy owned slaves. That means that every third white person in those states had a direct commitment to slavery. This is probably quibbling over numbers, but I'd point out that we are talking about 30% of the white people in states that had slavery. Not 30% of the population at large. The states with slavery were underpopulated. The total population of the US in the 1860 was 31 million and the slave states had a population of 12 million (most of those slaves). 300k out of 31 million is, IMO, a few. Even if they are highly concentrated in a few states. None of this really negates what I was saying. Owning slaves was expensive and only the wealthy could afford them. The fact that 30% of white people in slave states were wealthy enough to own slavery isn't a contradiction.

kerblang 5y ago
> the slave states had a population of 12 million (most of those slaves). In 1860 only two states had more slaves than free citizens, South Carolina & Mississippi, and by a slim margin.
s1artibartfast 5y ago
It is an interesting point, but you also have to keep in mind that people at this time had vastly different experiences in terms of communication and travel. Abolitionist literature and advocates was banned in the south and a full third of whites were illiterate. It is really hard to get away from the "product of their time" sentiment without a deep dive into nature vs nurture, determinism, and spirituality. I am under no illusion that if you or I were white and born in the antebellum south, we would probably support slavery too. It can equally be said, that there almost assuredly were southerners that had moral reservations about slavery that failed to express themselves or take meaningful action. For me, the interesting question is not how bad were they as people, but why they did or didn't act. By what factors did cultural support and tolerance for slavery perpetuate. What was life experience like for different people in that culture. At any rate, I guess my sentiment is that the whole topic of trying to pass judgement on individuals out of the context of their time & place is a fools errand. If not time and place, what differentiates the future views of a child born to southern slave owners and northern abolitionists, or a child born today. In the end, we can agree that we think slavery was an barbaric practice, and hopefully investigate more interesting questions about what can be learned from history. Perhaps we can learn something to better our own culture.