UncleTomFord15
Veteran
Bumboclaatinteresting
Wait. King George III was AGAINST slavery?!
- Thread starter ☑︎#VoteDemocrat
- Start date
easily the American revolution. c'mon now.
Look at the slaves who were given freedom to fight for the British.
time and time again, black people kept siding with the British at that time
Black Refugee (War of 1812) - WikipediaIn fact, South Carolina almost didn't join the American revolution and talked about surrendering to the British because the George Washington wanted them to arm the slaves to help fight the revolution but they feared slaves using the weapons in revolts so they voted down the plan. Then South Carolina voted down the plan.
Carol Anderson on White Supremacy vs. Democracy - FAIR
Slavery and Liberty in the American Revolution - Archiving Early America
John Laurens - Wikipedia
George Washington: His Troubles with Slavery
Measures to allow enslaved blacks to join the army as well, and to reward them with their freedom in exchange for their service, were initiated over the next several years. One such scheme called for the legislatures of Georgia and South Carolina to create army units made up of slaves, who would then be freed following their discharge. This plan met with strong opposition in the two states involved, culminating in the threat that South Carolina might even withdraw its support for the war effort. Washington’s silence on the matter and his tempered reaction to the failure of the plan clearly indicate that he was fully aware of the volatility of the subject and foreshadows his decision to abstain from the heated debates on slavery that were to recur during the Constitutional Convention a decade later. The basic issue that Washington saw in 1779 was that the ‘Spirit of Freedom which at the commencement of this contest would have gladly sacrificed every thing to the attainment of its object has long since subsided, and every selfish Passion has take[n] its place — it is not the public but the private Interest which influences the generality of Mankind nor can the Americans any longer boast an exception.’ In other words, private interest already had reestablished itself as the dominant force in American society, and all efforts to affect the institution of slavery would henceforth be held accountable to it.
I agree. and I see that move.
But what's that got to do with American history?
Look, if we're keeping it honest, lets do that. seems like they lied about George III, correct?
Everytime I read the words “liberty and freedom” coming from those early Americans who still owned slaves and approved slavery I legit get heated. What pisses me off even more is that current Americans keep talking about “ we owe that Everyman is born free” so called sacred proclamation and other horseshyt. I’m always like “do y’all realise there were literal slaves living in the country whilst they were saying this shyt. Why does everyone choose to ignore the massive elephant in the room? 
king George was against slavery."We're talking about North America right now" & "Yes, I know the Caribbean colonies were still active but one thing at a time" does not make sense in a thread titled King George III was against slavery.
Parliament seemed to endorse it.
Georgia Experiment - Wikipedia
The only King George that matters
the conservative American view is to say: The constitution allowed us to be free because it set up the plan to allow abolition...its so fukking convoluted in its nonsense that they have to accept it as true otherwise they have to tell on themselves. Its completely bullshytEverytime I read the words “liberty and freedom” coming from those early Americans who still owned slaves and approved slavery I legit get heated. What pisses me off even more is that current Americans keep talking about “ we owe that Everyman is born free” so called sacred proclamation and other horseshyt. I’m always like “do y’all realise there were literal slaves living in the country whilst they were saying this shyt. Why does everyone choose to ignore the massive elephant in the room?
This is what @Get These Nets is basically doing when he says this. Its this notion that the American revolution has to be viewed as positive because it allowed everything to end up ok without accepting that it was inherently flawed and that the country isn't this perfect gemstone. Its baby brained thinking.
get these nets
Veteran
the conservative American view is to say: The constitution allowed us to be free because it set up the plan to allow abolition...its so fukking convoluted in its nonsense that they have to accept it as true otherwise they have to tell on themselves. Its completely bullshyt
This is what @Get These Nets is basically doing when he says this. Its this notion that the American revolution has to be viewed as positive because it allowed everything to end up ok without accepting that it was inherently flawed and that the country isn't this perfect gemstone. Its baby brained thinking.
I neither said, nor implied any such thing. I don't take deflection bait.
So try again.
This is your argument though. They didn't abolish slavery EVERYWHERE at once, therefore they didn't do it anywhere.
Not true bro.
Again, there was a major threat of abolition pre-1776 and people are just now learning about it.
get these nets
Veteran
There was too much revenue being generated from the plantation economies in the Caribbean for slavery to be abolished there BEFORE the numerous revolts made it problematic.
Britain was fine with the torture and enslavement of more generations of Africans.
You can't ignore comments and moments and movements pre-1776 as being "not abolition" and then only counting the literal signing of the laws banning slavery as the only thing worth remembering.
The entire point of this whole revisiting of the American revolution is essentially that we were lied to about the founders motivations.
Punjabi nap getting destroyed in his own thread as usual
humminbird
Veteran
People just have customized smilies for every situationinteresting
I really wish y’all would read books in their entirety.
Horne isn’t arguing that Britain tried to free black people before Americans went rogue, nor how the despotic King is the hero in abolition, he is saying that African people/enslaved people understood a more genuine form of resistance to the system. Horne uses KingG to show how Americans fought harder to maintain the system despite Britain trying to move to another capitalist machine. Britain saw slavery as pointless because they sought out imperialism and debts; basically a new form of bondage.
None of these white men are the victors in our story of freedom.
I have every Horne book on this topic even his recent 16th century book. I listen to every Interview he does. No one is saying to revere them. Were saying that the American colonialists and their mythology is a big fat lie.
I really wish y’all would read books in their entirety.
Horne isn’t arguing that Britain tried to free black people before Americans went rogue, nor how the despotic King is the hero in abolition, he is saying that African people/enslaved people understood a more genuine form of resistance to the system. Horne uses KingG to show how Americans fought harder to maintain the system despite Britain trying to move to another capitalist machine. Britain saw slavery as pointless because they sought out imperialism and debts; basically a new form of bondage.
None of these white men are the victors in our story of freedom.
