The latest lefty tactic appears to be to declare that the United States was "founded on slavery."
Most recently, I heard Kat Taylor declare this at the Bay Area Book Fair.
It is just more tearing down of the concepts of free markets and liberty.
The country the Founding Fathers created is far from perfect and not a PPS, but it was not founded on slavery. The founding principles of the Constitution were about liberty (and democracy) albeit not for slaves.
Slavery was not the driving engine that made the country great. It was the great liberty that was allowed. Indeed, it was liberty that even allowed for abolitionists who called for the end of slavery.
Just because something existed at a given time doesn't mean it was fundamental to the development of capitalism and that capitalism wouldn't have developed without it.
Indeed, the ancestors of slaves would be much better off today taking advantage of the freedom to be creative and prosper rather than focusing on the non-capitalists trends in the country of handouts and transfer payments. This is what will keep them down, not capitalism.
Malcolm X understood this.
-RW
So did Ali. "I'm sure glad my Grandaddy got on that boat!"
ReplyDeleteBTW, how are those other (greater) slave owning countries doing? (Brazil, St. Lucia, St. Vincent, Grenada, Haiti(!!)
Oh, yeah, Haiti had a slave revolt. How'd THAT turn out?
Hello,
ReplyDeleteNice article.
When you write "[j]ust because something existed at a given time doesn't mean it was fundamental to the development of capitalism," I believe you refer to slavery in our Republic.
Can you provide evidence in support of the assertion that slavery did not constitute a fundamental part of the economy during the early years of the Republic?
Thank you,
Aaron A
Aaron,
DeleteIf someone could provide evidence that slavery did or did not constitute a fundamental part of the economy during the early years of the Republic, would that prove that slavery was or was not the foundation of the USA?
By the way the assertion from RW was not that slavery did not constitute a fundamental part of the economy. “Slavery was not the driving engine that made the country great.” “Just because something existed at a given time doesn't mean it was fundamental to the development of capitalism and that capitalism wouldn't have developed without it.”
Alex Zougle,
DeleteThank you for your response.
You may be wholly right.
Regardless, I only wish the author would make a more nuanced argument.
His statement --
"Slavery was not the driving engine that made the country great. It was the great liberty that was allowed. Indeed, it was liberty that even allowed for abolitionists who called for the end of slavery.
Just because something existed at a given time doesn't mean it was fundamental to the development of capitalism and that capitalism wouldn't have developed without it."
-- leaves me wanting.
Maybe the author could expound upon this statement in a future blog post.
Thank you,
Aaron Albrecht
Also, when talking about slavery in the US, you should also look at indentured servitude and the progression from this to slavery. It wasnt foundational in this regard because it wasnt started as slavery, but as indentured servitude.
DeleteAlex Zougle,
DeleteFor example, I found an article in Forbes Magazine entitled, "The Clear Connection between Slavery and American Capitalism," where Forbes Magazine interviews Harvard University historian Sven Beckert.
During the interview Professor Beckert says,
"There are very many economic links between the southern plantation complex and the development of American and global capitalism, involving trade, industry, banking, insurance, shipping, and other industries. The most prominent link developed around cotton.
As you know, the cotton industry was crucial to the world-altering Industrial Revolution as it first unfolded in Great Britain and then spread from there to other parts of the world, including the northern states of the Union. Until 1861, until the American Civil War, almost all cotton used in industrial production was grown by enslaved workers in the southern parts of the United States. Slavery thus played a very important role in supplying an essential raw material for industrial production."
You can read the rest of the Forbes article here:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/hbsworkingknowledge/2017/05/03/the-clear-connection-between-slavery-and-american-capitalism/#17fd8eda7bd3
The argument made by Professor Beckert constitutes an example of a nuanced argument, the type of argument readers of Target Liberty expect from Robert Wenzel.
Thank you,
Aaron Albrecht
This is a part of the current overall trend of victimhood. Pointing out victims is second only to actually being a victim or having even the slightest possibility of being able associate yourself with victims past or present.
ReplyDeletePrior to 1850 the number of free states and the number of slave states maintained an almost perfect equilibrium. Between 1850 and the 13th amendment in 1865 only one state out of six entered as a slave state.
Based on the 1860 Census:
Slaves as a percent of population: Total: 12.67%; Slave States: 31.92%
Slave holders as a percent of free population: Total: 1.45%; Slave States: 4.68%
Percent of families that owned slaves: Total: 7.64%; Slave States: 25.53%
About 95% of the slaves brought from Africa to the Americas were enslaved outside of what is now the USA.
These statistics do not prove that slavery was or was not the foundation of the USA. Everyone knows that slavery is a horrible part of the history of the USA. What we do not hear about is that slavery is a part of the history of the majority of human civilization.
And slavery is not even a racial thing either. Throughout history, whites have enslaved both non-whites and whites, and non-whites have enslaved both non-whites and whites. It's a power thing.
DeleteI wonder if there was a specific demographic of people (let's call them group J) who had a large hand in the shipping and financing of slavery that later went on to place all the blame on a different demographic (group W) that looked very close to them? I also wonder if that group J continues to vilify the other group now that they find themselves in control of a vast majority of the media?
ReplyDeleteGee,now who could that group be....?????
DeleteRobert should be supporting Kevin MacDonald's work and do an interview with him.
Deletewhy should we give more weight to ideas as the founding of the united states ("the founding principls of the constitution") than its economic structure (slavery for 400 years, which developed concurrently with capitalism for a large percentage of us history)?
ReplyDelete-will c
Gosh, and all those powdered wigs!! Could THAT be a factor??
DeleteWell, gosh, there's direct correlation!!!
the ideas you so exalt in this purely idealist history ("liberty," "democracy") have never existed except as truncated half-forms in the history of the united states. you acknowledge that democracy and liberty were not extended to slaves in the founding period. actually: "slavery is not something that persisted despite the success of the three liberal revolutions. on the contrary, it experienced its maximum development following that success: 'the total slave population in the americas reached around 330,000 in 1700, nearly three million by 1800, and finally peaked at over six million in the 1850s.'" (losurdo, "liberalism: a counter-history" pg. 35). "slavery in its most radical form triumphed in the golden age of liberalism and at the heart of the liberal world. this was acknowledged by james madison, slave-owner and liberal (like numerous other protagonists of the american revolution), who observed that 'the most oppressive dominion exercised by man over man"--power based on 'mere distinction of colour'--was imposed 'in the most enlightened period of time.'" (losurdo, 37). abstract generalities do not work upon history. they are only ever sites of contestation and struggle. liberty and democracy have been pursued in american history not owing to their invocation in some slaveowners' founding documents but precisely *in spite of that.*
ReplyDelete