the constitution, slavery, and the problem of agency

[JakeStarkey]

"Sean Wilentz’s [URL='http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/16/opinion/constitutionally-slavery-is-no-national-institution.html?_r=0']op-ed[/URL] in Wednesday’sNew York Timeswas by turns baffling, infuriating, and sad. At its root, the essay is a narrow, technical argument trying to disguise itself as an overarching Big Answer to Important Questions. Wilentz claims “the myth that the United States was founded on racial slavery”—a myth embraced “notably among scholars and activists on the left”—is actually “one of the most destructive falsehoods in all of American history.”

An excellent introduction to the destructive comments that the far right propagandists refuse to acknowledge that our Constitution recognized and protected slavery. Read on for a great essay that destroys the mongering of the far right.

Guest Post: The Constitution, Slavery, and the Problem of Agency

 

[the_human_being]

"Sean Wilentz’s [URL='http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/16/opinion/constitutionally-slavery-is-no-national-institution.html?_r=0']op-ed in Wednesday’sNew York Timeswas by turns baffling, infuriating, and sad. At its root, the essay is a narrow, technical argument trying to disguise itself as an overarching Big Answer to Important Questions. Wilentz claims “the myth that the United States was founded on racial slavery”—a myth embraced “notably among scholars and activists on the left”—is actually “one of the most destructive falsehoods in all of American history.”

An excellent introduction to the destructive comments that the far right propagandists refuse to acknowledge that our Constitution recognized and protected slavery. Read on for a great essay that destroys the mongering of the far right.

Guest Post: The Constitution, Slavery, and the Problem of Agency[/URL]

Actually it's not worth the effort. We've heard enough from all the "victims" over and over and over again. It's like a stuck record.

 

[Compost]

Nothing new or insightful in Sean's little opus. For those who missed this news, slavery was abolished in this country. That is true even if a right winger says it.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I knew the far right would have a dismissive hissy with the opinion.

The fact is that the far right denies that slavery was embedded in the Constitution, which required a Civil War, almost 700 thousand dead, a destroyed South, an amendment to simply end the evil practice.

 

[Compost]

I knew the far right would have a dismissive hissy with the opinion.

The fact is that the far right denies that slavery was embedded in the Constitution, which required a Civil War, almost 700 thousand dead, a destroyed South, an amendment to simply end.

It's so cute how you preface your rebuttal with an all encompassing accusation of right wing hissiness! Did you practice that line?! Awwww.

Anywhoo. Yes indeed. The Constitution was written when slavery was a reality. What some folks ignore is who was for slavery. (Hint. southern democrats.) Eventually, a war was fought because the south wanted to keep slaves (it was good for business!) but the north didn't think it was cool to make other human beings work for you for nothing.

The war ended. And so did slavery.

Blaming the "far right" for the evils of slavery, is not just silly, it is ignorant.

 

[JakeStarkey]

And the comment immediately above demonstrates the hissiness of the deniers "oh, it was not a great problem, and we can ignore it today."

The great thing is your children are being taught the truth in public schools and higher education. You cannot hide the truth from them.

 

[Compost]

And the comment immediately above demonstrates the hissiness of the deniers "oh, it was not a great problem, and we can ignore it today."

The great thing is your children are being taught the truth in public schools and higher education. You cannot hide the truth from them.

What you just said is gibberish. I did not say slavery wasn't " a great problem". What I said was, there was slavery when the Constitution was written. We fought a war and there is no longer slavery in this country. History is what happened. I didn't say anything about ignoring it or hiding it.

You can keep repeating your hissy line but you aren't saying anything new or, sadly, anything of substance.

 

[JakeStarkey]

And the comment immediately above demonstrates the hissiness of the deniers "oh, it was not a great problem, and we can ignore it today."

The great thing is your children are being taught the truth in public schools and higher education. You cannot hide the truth from them.

What you just said is gibberish. I did not say slavery wasn't " a great problem". What I said was, there was slavery when the Constitution was written. We fought a war and there is no longer slavery in this country. History is what happened. I didn't say anything about ignoring it or hiding it.

You can keep repeating your hissy line but you aren't saying anything new or, sadly, anything of substance.

Your hissy line is that you keep suggesting that it is all over now. Your dismisiveness shows that you are defensive about this, as you well shout be. And that is being pointed out as cognitive dissonance by your ilk to the students.

It isn't and it won't be for a long time.

I am glad that you admit the column's main point about the right wing myth.

 

[Compost]

And the comment immediately above demonstrates the hissiness of the deniers "oh, it was not a great problem, and we can ignore it today."

The great thing is your children are being taught the truth in public schools and higher education. You cannot hide the truth from them.

What you just said is gibberish. I did not say slavery wasn't " a great problem". What I said was, there was slavery when the Constitution was written. We fought a war and there is no longer slavery in this country. History is what happened. I didn't say anything about ignoring it or hiding it.

You can keep repeating your hissy line but you aren't saying anything new or, sadly, anything of substance.

Your hissy line is that you keep suggesting that it is all over now. Your dismisiveness shows that you are defensive about this, as you well shout be. And that is being pointed out as cognitive dissonance by your ilk to the students.

It isn't and it won't be for a long time.

I am glad that you admit the column's main point about the right wing myth.

So who fed you these lines? Did they run out of Social Justice Warriors with basic debating skills ? Here's a little free advice. Read history for yourself. Think about it. Decide for yourself what it means. If/when you do that then maybe you and I can have a conversation.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Compost reveals that he does not know history, that he has not bothered to read the article, and that he engages in running around in hissies.

 

[tyroneweaver]

The first colony was founded at Jamestown, Virginia, in 1607. Many of the people who settled in the New World came to escape religious persecution. The Pilgrims, founders of Plymouth, Massachusetts, arrived in 1620. In both Virginia and Massachusetts, the colonists flourished with some assistance from Native Americans.
Colonial America (1492-1763) - America's Library - private
www.americaslibrary.gov/jb/.../jb_colonial_subj.htmlAmerica's Library

 

[2aguy]

"Sean Wilentz’s op-ed in Wednesday’sNew York Timeswas by turns baffling, infuriating, and sad. At its root, the essay is a narrow, technical argument trying to disguise itself as an overarching Big Answer to Important Questions. Wilentz claims “the myth that the United States was founded on racial slavery”—a myth embraced “notably among scholars and activists on the left”—is actually “one of the most destructive falsehoods in all of American history.”

An excellent introduction to the destructive comments that the far right propagandists refuse to acknowledge that our Constitution recognized and protected slavery. Read on for a great essay that destroys the mongering of the far right.

Guest Post: The Constitution, Slavery, and the Problem of Agency

of Course, slavery was here before the Europeans arrived...as was cannibalism......and Africans captured and sold each other to Europeans who brought them here in ships......then, when we formed our country, we ended the slave trade and weakened the power of the slave states as best they could given the European and African tradition of slavery created here on this continent....

so no, our country was not founded on slavery...we ended it at great cost.

 

[JakeStarkey]

And that is why the op ed was written: to rebut sillies like 2aguy

 

[DigitalDrifter]

I knew the far right would have a dismissive hissy with the opinion.

The fact is that the far right denies that slavery was embedded in the Constitution, which required a Civil War, almost 700 thousand dead, a destroyed South, an amendment to simply end the evil practice.

 

[WinterBorn]

And the comment immediately above demonstrates the hissiness of the deniers "oh, it was not a great problem, and we can ignore it today."

The great thing is your children are being taught the truth in public schools and higher education. You cannot hide the truth from them.

What you just said is gibberish. I did not say slavery wasn't " a great problem". What I said was, there was slavery when the Constitution was written. We fought a war and there is no longer slavery in this country. History is what happened. I didn't say anything about ignoring it or hiding it.

You can keep repeating your hissy line but you aren't saying anything new or, sadly, anything of substance.

Almost all of the Founding Fathers disliked slavery. Even some who held slaves. Madison wanted slavery abolished in the US Constitution, but would have lost GA & SC if that was done. So they compromised and didn't mention slavery. But they did offer 3 major compromises.

The 2/3 rule was one. I have seen people say that this was the gov't saying that blacks were only 2/3 of a person. That is obviously not true. Slaves were only counted as 2/3 of a person, and only for the census which determined the representation in the House. If anyone would want the slaves counted as 1 person, it would be the slave owners. That would increase their power in the House. It also encouraged emancipation by increasing a state's power for every freed slave. And this was even more important in those days, because it gave them more power in the selection of the president.

Next was the delay in banning the slave trade. In order to maintain the union (keeping SC & GA), there was no way they would have been able to ban the slave trade. So they wrote into the Constitution a delay in banning the trade. Article 1, Section 9 delayed the ending of the slave trade for 20 years. This effectively put it on Congress to ban the importation of new slaves in 1808.

And lastly, they added the fugitive slave clause.

 

[the_human_being]

I knew the far right would have a dismissive hissy with the opinion.

The fact is that the far right denies that slavery was embedded in the Constitution, which required a Civil War, almost 700 thousand dead, a destroyed South, an amendment to simply end the evil practice.

Why don't you evolve and come live in the world of 2015 like the grownups do?

 

[JakeStarkey]

I knew the far right would have a dismissive hissy with the opinion.

The fact is that the far right denies that slavery was embedded in the Constitution, which required a Civil War, almost 700 thousand dead, a destroyed South, an amendment to simply end the evil practice.

An excellent graphic of the far right hissiness.