Back to topGroup C
01/17/02 (The Missing Peace)
http://webby.cc.denison.edu/~waite/liberia/history/acs.htm Also on the ACS.
I thought that this chapter was an interesting one. One aspect of the chapter that interested me was how some of the slave owners and also antislavery personas viewed slavery. A quote from the book by Thomas Jefferson described slavery as having a “wolf by the ears; and we can neither hold him, nor safely let him go…” I guess, as me being a contemporary reader, I just don’t understand how slavery could have even existed. Because the idea of having one human own another just does not seem to be morally right. Another issue that struck me was the Quakers and their stances on slavery. They were the group most noted for antislavery, but the way they progressed was not something I would have thought from an antislavery group. They were involved in the shipping of slaves, but after their Yearly Meeting they banned the “importation of Negroes” in 1727, but said nothing of ownership. Forty-six years later they were told to treat their slaves with tenderness and not until 1780 did the Meeting abolish slavery.
Another interesting aspect was that of seeing the two groups, besides Quakers, involved in nonviolent principles. The Garrisonian group amazed me because of their extreme stances in believing in only the “divine government.” I was also led to wonder if they got away with not paying their taxes because they didn’t want to be involved in earthly government. I would just like to know the actions taken against them not paying taxes, if any arose. The Tappanites seemed to me to be a mix of the Quakers and the Garrisonians. They took the stance of government and churches (Quakers), but adopted the idea of the social roles of women (Garrisonians). Another aspect is they could choose when the appropriate time was to use “justified violence.”
http://webby.cc.denison.edu/~waite/liberia/history/acs.htm
I picked this site because I wanted to see if there was anything more to this American Colonization Society besides shipping slaves back to Africa. I found out that the society raised the money by selling membership into the group. In 1819, the received $100,000 from Congress and sent the first ship over with 3 whites and 88 emigrants. All whites and 22 blacks died within three weeks from yellow fever. Within the upcoming years 2,638 African-Americans migrated over and they eventually formed the independent state of Liberia and had a profound effect on Liberia’s history.
www.amhersthistory.org/ahm_aa/ahm_aa16.htm
Anti-slavery history--Amherst, MA
The
anti-slavery movement is something that we look back on an and think
Link:
www.amhersthistory.org/ahm_aa/ahm_aa16.htm
http://docsouth.unc.edu/fitzhughcan/menu.html George Fitzhugh’s defense of slavery
First
of all, I must admit that I found that piece of reading very interesting. There
are many reasons why it caught my attention. Undoubtedly, the whole issue of
slavery has been stirring people's imagination and
What
shocked me apart from such national and ethnical hypocrisy was the extent of
propaganda. In spite of the fact that I have some grasp of American history,
only owing to this text, I realized how people were made to believe that slavery
wasn't unjust. Obviously, literature and newspapers were always powerful media
of brainwashing. However, when it comes to the States, religious leaders and
politicians were also among those who tried to convince people of the moral
propriety of slavery.
Anyway,
I find the text very informative, because it analyzes the different measures
people took in order to change the unfair system. Actually, it is really
surprising that the most radical groups such as the Garrisonians didn't turn out
to be the most successful. Besides, not only was it difficult to put an end to
slavery, but also to restore the social and economic order afterwards. I think
that, although many people blame the Americans for keeping slavery legal for
such a long time, they don't take into consideration the fact that a faster
abolition process wouldn't bring satisfactory results. Even after the Civil War
the ex- slaves faced suffering and segregation. Moreover, many steps, which we
regard as worth having been taken, were rejected by the slaves themselves. It's
not surprising if we take into account the totally different time, spacial and
ethnical circumstances in which we live. But still, even if I try to imagine
living in the States in the 19th century, there are many issues concerning
antislavery movement which I don't understand.
First
of all, it's paradoxical that the critics consider the narratives written by
runaway slaves to have influence on other Black people and persuade them to
rebel. How could the slaves get hold of and understand the texts if the majority
of them was illiterate? Another idea I
Finally,
in my opinion, the text makes you aware of the degree to which the Civil War is
often idealized. The focus is usually on the courageous male heroes, stong women
left at home, dramatic seperations of families and fighting against friends. The
end is usually regarded as more or less happy ending, because slavery was
finally abolished. However, few people realize that for the Afro-Americans it
was only the beginning of their long way to freedom.
I
wanted to look into George Fitzhugh's writing and ideology. That's why I chose: http://docsouth.unc.edu/fitzhughcan/menu.html
It
shows other sites where you can find something out about the logic behind the
opinions that slavery was just.
http://members.aol.com/jfepperson/garrison.html
(Only blank for me.)
http://www.kersur.net/~bancroft/town.html
On Hopedale, Mass.
There
were many things in this reading that caused me to raise my eyebrows and really
think about what these people were saying and proposing that we do or think.
Some of them I agreed with others I had very strong feelings against and yet
others that I could not understand where they thought that their ideas would
have any applicable use in the real world. To say the least I have many things
underlined and many scribbles in the margins already.
The
first question that they give us to answer is one that I have been asking myself
since middle school or before. How could people do this to other people? How
could they justify this kind of abuse? Now that I have lived a few more years
and have seen just a glimpse of what people can do to other people I now see
that people justify their actions after they do them and not think about what
they do before they do them. WWJD comes close to that. I always wondered if the
people that wore those bracelets were really asking themselves that question or
just going through the motions. Many of the people in the south were just going
through the motions with the skewed justifications of their forefathers. Another
thing that I have learned is that is impossible to change someone else's mind.
Forcing someone to do something will only cause opposition. "For everything
there is an equation and opposite reaction." I think that is one of
Newton's laws that is applicable is more that one situation.
When they were talking about colonization it sounded like what was and is going
on in Bosnia and in other places in Eastern Europe. From what I know of what is
going on I understand that the races what to separate themselves and move the
races into other areas so that the fighting might stop. This might be the
solution that they chose but it would not be the one that I would choose for
myself. To put this into context for myself I thought about how if the
Native-Americans would decide to take back the United States and did it, what
would the Native Americans do with us? Would they let us stay on their lands? Or
would they tell us to go back to where ever we came from? It seems silly to me
that our political leaders even thought about this. But they did it!! It would
be like sending me back to Germany when I have never even been there and don't
consider it my home!
Just
a small comment: On page 83 they say that "Whites were acting with a great
deal of presumptions" That might be one of the biggest understatements I
have heard in a long time. On page 92 they quote William Lloyd Garrison when he
says, "master-passion in the bosom of the slaveholder is not the love gain,
but the possession of absolute power, unlimited sovereignty." Then they go
on to say, "Garrison's interpretation explained the intractability of
northern racism as well as southern slavery." This wording changes
Garrison's opinion into fact. I don't believe that slavery in the south can be
boiled done to that small of terms that slavery was fought for because of man's
egotism and stubbornness.
I could go on about other things but I will wait for class.
Websites
http://members.aol.com/jfepperson/garrison.html
http://www.kersur.net/~bancroft/town.html
Antislavery
movements such as the Underground Railroad and the
Apparently
the beliefs of the Society were to assist free blacks to
I
think the Society's reasons for sending black people back was a
website:
www.pbs.org/wgbh/aia/part3/3p1521.html
www.innercity.org/holt/slavechron.html
A Chronology of American Slavery
The
reading reminded me of the fact that our nation is not perfect.
For a
Here
is a sight related to the reading:
www.innercity.org/holt/slavechron.html
Back to top
Journal Postings home page Group C Journals Page LAS 301-01 home page
Bluffton College
Questions? Comments? Email me