Slavery is one of those incredibly divisive, polarizing issues that literally tore the country apart, leading to the Civil War. The Union was saved, and slavery finally officially abolished, when the North finally defeated the South.
Yet, the scourge of slavery, and the lasting impacts, did not simply end there. Many feel that slavery continues to be a divisive issue for the United States, even over a century and a half after it was officially abolished. Of course, you could argue that a form of slavery was reinvented when southern states created Jim Crow segregation, which was strictly enforced both legally and socially. This meant that the racial divisions that obviously existed during slavery were not directly confronted, but put off, as whites tried to maintain a de facto superior status. This, in turn, contributed to making the racial divisions in the country still very much a sore subject ever since.
That is particularly true since so many Americans, particularly white Americans, remain in denial about the nation's racist past.
This seems particularly true of those who would identify as conservatives (although some conservatives feel that many who identify as conservatives are not real conservatives). There is this denial of just how much racism has played a major role throughout American history. And you find this sentiment of waving off any concerns of racist particularly strong among those who support Donald Trump.
One particularly egregious example came from a politician from my own home state of New Jersey. This was a recent quote from New Jersey Assemblyman Michael Patrick Carroll:
"If slavery was the price that a modern American's ancestors had to pay in order to make one an American, one should get down on one's knees every single day and thank the Lord that such price was paid," Carroll told the Associated Press at the time.
He went on to say he was descended from Irish ancestors who fled their country in the 1850's, during the potato famine, which he said was exacerbated by the British. "Far from holding it against the modern British, I delight in the cruelty of their forebears. Without same, I might be hanging around in Inisfree," Carroll said, referencing an Irish island
Not so long ago, this might have seemed like a truly ignorant, even ridiculous statement from anyone, let alone an elected public servant. But these days, it is increasingly standard. In this day and age of Trump, staggeringly stupid and outrageous quotes and actions have become the norm, seemingly. And there are people, even networks like FOX, that encourage us to accept this as the new normal, and complain whenever some among us point out that there is nothing normal about what is happening, and how this clearly signifies an all too real dumbing down of America.
So, it should come as no surprise whatsoever that FOX News chimes in, and offers little but platitudes and some vague notions of moral superiority in the American past. No serious examination of racism or it's prominent role in American history. Just a whitewashing and glorifying of the freedom that they keep proclaiming this nation has always represented.
Fox News Contributor Katie Pavlich had this to say about slavery:
This seems particularly true of those who would identify as conservatives (although some conservatives feel that many who identify as conservatives are not real conservatives). There is this denial of just how much racism has played a major role throughout American history. And you find this sentiment of waving off any concerns of racist particularly strong among those who support Donald Trump.
One particularly egregious example came from a politician from my own home state of New Jersey. This was a recent quote from New Jersey Assemblyman Michael Patrick Carroll:
"If slavery was the price that a modern American's ancestors had to pay in order to make one an American, one should get down on one's knees every single day and thank the Lord that such price was paid," Carroll told the Associated Press at the time.
He went on to say he was descended from Irish ancestors who fled their country in the 1850's, during the potato famine, which he said was exacerbated by the British. "Far from holding it against the modern British, I delight in the cruelty of their forebears. Without same, I might be hanging around in Inisfree," Carroll said, referencing an Irish island
Not so long ago, this might have seemed like a truly ignorant, even ridiculous statement from anyone, let alone an elected public servant. But these days, it is increasingly standard. In this day and age of Trump, staggeringly stupid and outrageous quotes and actions have become the norm, seemingly. And there are people, even networks like FOX, that encourage us to accept this as the new normal, and complain whenever some among us point out that there is nothing normal about what is happening, and how this clearly signifies an all too real dumbing down of America.
So, it should come as no surprise whatsoever that FOX News chimes in, and offers little but platitudes and some vague notions of moral superiority in the American past. No serious examination of racism or it's prominent role in American history. Just a whitewashing and glorifying of the freedom that they keep proclaiming this nation has always represented.
Fox News Contributor Katie Pavlich had this to say about slavery:
"They keep blaming America for the sin of slavery but the truth is, throughout human history, slavery existed, and America came along as the first country to end it within 150 years. And we get no credit for that to move forward and try to make good on that.
“If you want to inflame racial tension even more, start blaming people who have nothing to do with slavery for the sin of slavery. That is not fair, that’s not the American way, and we shouldn’t be doing it.”
Some responded immediately, such as Soledad O'Brien, via tweet:
Soledad O'Brien ✔ @soledadobrien Is it hard for @KatiePavlich to be a complete moron? The utter stupidity.
Soledad O'Brien ✔ @soledadobrien Is it hard for @KatiePavlich to be a complete moron? The utter stupidity.
I looked at her statement, and have to say that, if I try, it seems that her statement might not be as clear-cut as it seems. She says that we were the first nation to end it after 150 years, which suggests that slavery only existed for 150 years in the United States, but that is demonstrably not true. Technically, the first African slaves on what would become American territory were seen in Florida, although that would remain a Spanish colony for some time. But slavery definitely was introduced to what would become the United States - which were then the thirteen original colonies - in the early 1600's. So, given that slavery was in existence by the early 1600's, and was officially abolished in the mid-1800's, her math is clearly off by about 100 years.
So, then I thought: maybe she meant that slavery only existed in the United States as a country (since gaining it's independence) for 150 years. But again, we achieved independence in 1776, and that means that it lasted less than 100 years, so that did not make much sense, either. Other countries abolished slavery in less time than the United States following independence (we'll get to the specifics of when numerous countries abolished slavery shortly).
And the only other angle that I can see is that she is claiming that the United States was the first country to abolish slavery. Now, if you suggest that a territory that was not then a part of the United States, but would become a part of it later, was the first to abolish slavery, then maybe, maybe, she might have somewhat of a point. Indeed, the State of Vermont, then it's own independent republic, banned slavery in 1777. And the United States itself banned slavery through legislative action in 1808, although that clearly had no impact on the South for many decades. Slavery remained fully in effect in the South. This was no secret, because it was the divisive issue of it's day. In fact, we fought a bloody war over it.
So, then I thought: maybe she meant that slavery only existed in the United States as a country (since gaining it's independence) for 150 years. But again, we achieved independence in 1776, and that means that it lasted less than 100 years, so that did not make much sense, either. Other countries abolished slavery in less time than the United States following independence (we'll get to the specifics of when numerous countries abolished slavery shortly).
And the only other angle that I can see is that she is claiming that the United States was the first country to abolish slavery. Now, if you suggest that a territory that was not then a part of the United States, but would become a part of it later, was the first to abolish slavery, then maybe, maybe, she might have somewhat of a point. Indeed, the State of Vermont, then it's own independent republic, banned slavery in 1777. And the United States itself banned slavery through legislative action in 1808, although that clearly had no impact on the South for many decades. Slavery remained fully in effect in the South. This was no secret, because it was the divisive issue of it's day. In fact, we fought a bloody war over it.
That means that neither of those arguments makes much sense.
And that leaves one argument left, which is that the United States was the first nation to abolish slavery. But this, too, is clearly, demonstrably false.
And that leaves one argument left, which is that the United States was the first nation to abolish slavery. But this, too, is clearly, demonstrably false.
Denmark banned import of slaves to the West Indies in 1792. Spain abolished slavery in 1811, although Cuba rejected this ban and continued the practice. Sweden banned slavery in 1813. Netherlands banned slavery in 1814. France banned slavery in 1817, although this did not take effect until nearly a decade later. Great Britain abolishes slavery in 1833. Portugal abolished slavery in all of it's colonies in 1858.
Then, Abraham Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation banned slavery throughout the United States, and the 13th Amendment confirmed this, although this only fully took effect in 1865, following the end of the Civil War.
Slavery still did exist elsewhere, however. It was abolished in Cuba in 1886, and finally in Brazil in 1888. And while slavery had officially been banned many years before, in 1838 by the British, it still basically existed in the old Boer republics within South Africa: the Orange Free State and the Zuid-Afrikaansche Republiek (ZAR), more commonly known as the Transvaal, inside of present day South Africa. It eventually was phased out, but the end was not quite as clear as in some of those other countries, as it continued to exist in particularly isolated pockets for many decades after it was officially abolished by the British in South Africa.
So, we can see that while the United States was not the last country to abolish slavery, it was far from the first. These are the facts, and then really is no way to dispute them. You certainly cannot make the argument that because the then independent state of Vermont banned slavery in 1777, that this somehow applied to the whole country. Hell, slavery was officially banned in the United States through legislative action in 1808, but it would take well over a century more - and only after a bloody civil war had been fought to eradicate it - for slavery to finally go away. That makes the United States the only nation where it took a major war to end the institution of slavery.
And, let's face it: slavery ended, but something new took it's place. The United States became the first country to replace official slavery with official segregation, which also was strictly socially enforced.
Those are some dubious distinctions, and we as Americans have to own up to it, regardless of what any so-called "expert" on FOX News says, or how she tries to rewrite history. The facts are the facts, and there are no alternative facts that can be relied upon. And regardless of how truth and facts seem to consistently get trampled on during this era of Trump, facts do matter.
So, we can see that while the United States was not the last country to abolish slavery, it was far from the first. These are the facts, and then really is no way to dispute them. You certainly cannot make the argument that because the then independent state of Vermont banned slavery in 1777, that this somehow applied to the whole country. Hell, slavery was officially banned in the United States through legislative action in 1808, but it would take well over a century more - and only after a bloody civil war had been fought to eradicate it - for slavery to finally go away. That makes the United States the only nation where it took a major war to end the institution of slavery.
And, let's face it: slavery ended, but something new took it's place. The United States became the first country to replace official slavery with official segregation, which also was strictly socially enforced.
Those are some dubious distinctions, and we as Americans have to own up to it, regardless of what any so-called "expert" on FOX News says, or how she tries to rewrite history. The facts are the facts, and there are no alternative facts that can be relied upon. And regardless of how truth and facts seem to consistently get trampled on during this era of Trump, facts do matter.
Fox News Contributor Katie Pavlich: America ‘Doesn’t Get Enough Credit’ For Ending Slavery Journalist Soledad O’Brien called the contributor “a complete moron” by David Moye, 03/19/2019:
NJ Lawmaker Said African-Americans Should Be Thankful for Slavery. Now, He Wants a New Job by Karen Rouse, January 30, 2019:
12 YEARS AGO CHRONOLOGY-Who banned slavery when? IN DEPTH, MARCH 22, 2007:
Slavery in the South African Interior During the 19th Century by Fred Morton Subject: Cultural History, Slavery and Slave Trade, Southern Africa Online Publication Date: Apr 2017:
No comments:
Post a Comment