Cable News

[Bob21]

I am not a historian, but I need to comment on the phrase, "America, is why slavery, for the most part, does not exist today in the world.".

America was not the forerunner for society in the 1850's. Europe, not America, knew where America stood in the world positioning. America was not a leader in the efforts to abolish slavery.

As stated earlier, there was a pact in 1815, Congress of Vienna, that declared opposition to slavery. The countries included: UK, Portugal, Sweden, Norway, France, Austria, Russia, Spain, and Prussia. Yes, there are other smaller colonies that took the initiate before 1865.

The countries from that Congress of Vienna pact took years to implement their internal rules. They did it before on their own before 1865.

There are other countries as: Argentina, Peru, and Venezuela that passed the rule before America.

I am not political. Just stating facts (as far as I know).

But America WAS in the forefront of ending slavery. Abolitionists were here in the 1600's. Thomas Jefferson outlawed the importation of slaves during his presidency (1801-1809). As it developed, the northern states with a population above 20 million whites were free soil but the southern states with a population of about 4 million whites were not. Though they wanted to for decades the north could not end slavery because of the inordinate amount of political power the south wielded in the Senate.

The United States was all about ending slavery from our very beginning. Thomas Jefferson wanted to indict the King of England in the Declaration of Independence for carrying on the slave trade but was nixed by the Committee of Five because the slaveholding colonies were badly needed in the fight to separate from England.

The United States was at the forefront of ending slavery from our very beginning. Slaveholders represented about 1% of the population but because of their political power it took decades of political movement and a civil war to eradicate slaveholder's political and economic power and end slavery.

But the marxist dogma is always America bad. Isn't that right, Comrade Dietz?

I believe that Thomas Jefferson was one of the finest statesmen/politicians we have had in this country. Yes, he advocated for abolition but still owned slaves during his lifetime. Granted, most of these slaves were "inherited".

While Jefferson pushed for abolition, his home state of Virginia had the slave population increase by 60% between 1790 and 1830 (Jefferson died in 1826). The southern states were not going to cater to this approach.

Jefferson had a plan of gradual emancipation. The elimination of transatlantic slave trade, improve slave's living conditions, and arranging for new born slaves to be freed after a certain age. Personally, this sounds logical. Unfortunately, opponents stated that if slavery conditions were improved, then there is no need for abolition.

Jefferson was 100% correct about one thought. He stated that if slavery continued, there will be a day when the country would be fighting within itself regarding this issue. He loved his new country so much, he did not want to see this happen.

While Jefferson was an abolitionist, his reasoning to end slavery were not exactly pure. He believed that whites and blacks were two separate nations who could not live peacefully in any one country. Secondly, he thought blacks were racially inferior and simple minded. Thirdly, he thought that freed slaves would eventually attack their previous owners, hence, they should be deported. Keeping freed slaves in America would result in a race war.

As stated earlier, I do not believe America was at the forefront globally of freeing slaves since it did not occur until the mid 1860's. I do find it ironic that not all abolitionists wanted emancipation for blacks as a noble cause. They wanted them freed and shipped to another country.

PS: The Broadway play, "Hamilton" is on Disney Plus this coming Friday night. A great play and a great historical experience.

PSS: MC, no disagreement with most of what you stated.

Deech, here’s what you’re missing in your micro-analysis. If you want to get technical, the end of slavery really started when the pilgrims landed in America in the 1600s, searching for and finding freedom.

Every country that you mention that pushed for abolishment of slavery had to first become free themselves. They became free because they saw what America was developing, and they wanted it in their home country. Believe it or not, much of this happened even before our American revolution.

So once the people in these countries got their freedom, they saw the hypocrisy of slavery and pushed for freeing slaves too. Yes, it didn’t happen overnight, but when an institution like slavery has been around for thousands of years, it doesn’t die easy.

Just like the evil of liberalism is around today and accepted by the mainstream, the same was true with slavery back then.

So I still contend (and many historians agree with me, and have pointed this out long before I came along) that America or you could say the concept of America is what ultimately led to the abolishment of slavery.

It’s the same argument you’ll hear liberals make about the civil war, trying to distort history claiming our civil war was to unite a nation, rather than to free the slaves. This is a complete misunderstanding of why we had a civil war.

As a refresher for those that don’t know what led to the civil war, Abraham Lincoln was a Wigg and tried to get the party to address the slave issue, but many wouldn’t listen to him. They looked at Abe as a “drone”, and wish he quit bringing up the slavery issue, since it made people uncomfortable. Btw, there were a lot of people back then like Ozzy, who didn’t want to hear about or confront evil, so they called people that did drones, or something like that.

So Abe formed a new party called the Republican party, whose main platform was to free the slaves. Here’s an interesting fact. When Lincoln was elected, but before he became President, the South succeeded, because they wanted no part of what Lincoln was going to do. I mean Lincoln was elected for the sole purpose of freeing the slaves.

So what did Lincoln do? He went to war with the South so he could bring them back under his control and free the slaves. Obviously, Abe couldn’t free the slaves, if he didn’t control the south.

More people died in our Civil War than in WW I, WW II and Vietnam, and this was when there weren’t many people in our country. Think about it? Is this what a racist nation would do? A bunch of white people electing a president for the sole purpose of ending slavery and then having to go to war to get it done. And this was a violent violent war. More soldiers died in one battle at Gettysburg than in the entire Vietnam war.

I stand by my contention: America is what led the world out of darkness and is the reason slavery doesn’t exist today.

Now the sad fact is the Democrats under Lyndon Johnson, the most racist president we’ve ever had, led many blacks back into slavery, but this time they were slaves to the State. The Democrats tricked the blacks by telling them to trust the government to take care of them, and many did and it hasn’t gone well.

As the Republican did in the 1860s, the Republicans are once again the party trying to free Blacks; but this time it’s from the State.

Democrats have always been the party for slavery...nothing much has changed with the party since the 1800s, but now slavery is disguised as liberalism....instead of being owned by another individual, Democrats want your life to be owned and controlled by the State.