Slavery: Not Just Something For The South

Slavery: Not Just Something For The South

Part XXXII

Quote
"And these blacks were brought here by Northern built and Northern owned ships, except for the Souther yacht, Wanderer, which, in 1858,  brought the last 400 blacks to the U.S."

I would suggest that you also add the words, "And ships bought from the North" as many were.
___________________________________________________________
Mr. Unionblue,
Naturally you can "suggest" anything that you wish, but I would suggest that you prove that statement before leaving it in the air.

Throughout your post you insinuate that I have a "conspiracy theory" going.  That's not true, but let's turn this around.  I have said before that I am not as learned as you others so I am wondering: since you say that they didn't have time in our school systems, (and yes, I did get beyond the ABC,S and through University) why is no effort made here to show these things that you bring up only after I have said these were Northern ships.

I get the impression that you know your stuff without much hesitation (although unless you post in the middle of the night because you are up with pain) it seems odd that you post at such odd hours.  Are you one of those like Martha Stewart who gets by on only 3-4 hours of sleep?)

Sorry, I got off track there.  The point I wanted to make was this: You have had numerous opportunities, as have your followers, to tell me up front about the slave-running, but no one has brought it up until I did.  You act as if it is insignificant in the long run.  I disagree.  Those blacks were sold by other blacks in Africa for a profit.  And certainly the North needed cotton for their textile factories.

 Ole would like for everyone to believe that they would have paid fair value for that cotton.  I disagree with that too.  The North wanted the South to buy their goods that the South did not produce themselves at a higher price from the North rather than from England where they could have bought what they needed at a fair price.

Mercantilism had already arrived in the North.  The South was solidly agrarian.
______________________________________________________________

Mr. Unionblue states:
But why did all these Northern ships, Northern built and owned and sold, bring all these blacks here to the US and South America?  Because there was a huge market for slaves in each region.  There would have been no ships, Northern owned, built, etc., if there had been no market.  One must go hand-in-hand with the other if we are to judge the effects of that monsterous institution we call slavery.
______________________________________________________________
You are quite right, Mr. U.Blue.  They go hand in hand. The North needed the product we were producing and were perfectly willing to supply those blacks, packed like cord wood, so this market could continue. Each section was making money out of it, not just the South.____________________________________________________________
Pie stated:
Quote from Mr. Unionblue:
"I've been informed that anyone could look up this information if they just used a search engine. But my point has been this: I did not know that "slave-running" had continued even into 1862 by some Northerners who made vast fortunes from this.  Why the secrecy?  The answer: Because it's not something the North is proud of."

Frankly, Mr. Unionblue, I thought that remark about using a search engine smacked a bit of sarcasm. It was below the level of courteous debate and I'd thought better of you than that.
_______________________________________________________________
Mr. Unionblue states:
Or that nobody ever kept it 'secret' in the first place.  Or nobody on a typical Civil War board ever considered before.  Or lots of reasons.  But please, because it was kept 'secret?'  That it was suppressed or purposefully hidden away from 'everyone?'  Not just because most of the American public could care less about history and more about the price per gallon of gasoline?  Trying to create a 'conspiracy theory' on slave-running is just wrong and it gives the impression there is a concentrated effort to hide this part of history.  Ever been to the Amistad website?  Ever take the time to type the words "slave-running" into your search engine?  Doesn't wash.
_____________________________________________________________
Mr. Unionblue:Again, the debate is now dissolving into something I don't want to be a part of.  Of course I have been to the Amistad website.  This entire paragraph was uncalled for.  There are others on this board who are truly trying to learn about debate, about how to use search engines, and you just insulted not only me, but a lot of newcomers.  If it is your desire to be left on this board with only your Northern friends, you are fast getting there.  

As for my trying to create a "conspiracy theory" that's ridiculous.   It would behoove you and all who know things  that others don't know to save us some trouble and tell us so that we can catch up and try to have a serious debate instead of all this one-upmanship that you long for.  Seems to me you already have it, but you are probably intimidating some Southerners who thought it would be "fun" to debate the war, only to take a long look at our conversations and decide, this isn't fun at all, this is war all over again. Or is it that, as I've stated, you'd really prefer that we not know anything about slave-running.  I'm sure in your mind it does not compare with slavery and I agree wholeheartedly, but there are two sides to this country's history and all of history must come out.

To this day people of various regions find tv shows depicting Southerners as stupid, living in trailers, having no aspirations for a better life.  The little belittling jokes that are passed constantly on the internet have an acidity to them that will certainly do nothing to end the  deviciveness in this country.  And I am not talking about blacks and whites in the South not getting along.  I have many many relatives who live in the South who tell me that the diversity is stirred up by the likes of Jesse Jackson , et al coming South  to start trouble.  They tell me of pot luck suppers where all people are welcome, and they are well attended.  And for many years now at Easter, Christmas, and holidays churches have all denominations and all colors come together, meeting each time at a different church and have services together.  The South is not what you see on tv except for one thing that is very troubling and I wonder if this is a problem everywhere.  My relatives tell me that each year it seems the black on black crime ratio is increasing.  Drug usage is increasing and there is a ground swell about illegal aliens taking black jobs.

But back to the jokes and the tv shows, I realize Hollywood producers don't care if they create more trouble in the South, as long as they make money, but doesn't anyone think that the same people they are so busy making fun of are by far the largest group that ever volunteers to fight America's wars. 

I hope people think about that the next time they send a joke about a Southerner or laugh at a show like that idiotic "Earl" thing.  At least one Southerner, along with some from other regions died today thinking he was dying because "Freedom is not free."
_________________________________________________________________
Pie said:
Quote
"Schools I went to, and from what I gathered from others, have never taught anything about Northern slave-running.  Why is it that this was never taught in schools?  The answer is simple: to make the entire South look like slave owners: bad men who beat slave half to death to get work out of them."
_____________________________________________________________________
Mr. Unionblue says:
Frankly, the more I read this paragraph above, the more I believe it to be out-and-out crock. (There goes your sarcasm, Mr. U.Blue, and I don't appreciate it....PIE) "Why is it that this is never taught in schools?"  What schools?  Grade schools?  High schools?  Prep schools?  Home schools?  Colleges?  Universities? (I went to traditional schools, Mr. U.Blue, and graduated from college.)
______________________________________________________

Mr. Unionblue states:
Tell you what, I'm willing to bet Grade schools would have a tough time putting this in their schedules, what with nap time, recess, ABCs, basic math and such, and just learning to play well with others taking up most of a school day. 

As for what is NOT taught at high schools, you and I could start an entire new website on that subject.  High schools rarely, if at all, teach anything about balancing a checkbook to their students.  Does this mean there is a conspiracy to get students to use credit cards instead?

How about the idea that high schools are primarily directing their efforts to get most of their students to pass the SATs, instead of a vast, Northern conspiracy to hide Northern involvement in the slave-trade?  Sound a bit more plausible?  If not, we're going to have to gear up and prove how EVERY teacher in EVERY class or EVERY school is involved in the cover-up, not to mention Principals, administrators, school board members, local and state governments, right up to the Department of Education which can't even get our kids educated up to Japan's or Gemany's level or find it's collective butt with both hands.
_______________________________________________________
Pie states:
(How is it that they had time to talk about Sherman's March to the Sea and the supposed Saving of the Nation and to do everything but bow down to a picture of Abraham Lincoln?...PIE)

Mr. U.Blue continues:
Don't cheapen your very informative thread, which is accurate and historically accurate, by claiming such fantasy threats.  While I agree with you our schools could do much better at history and a myriad of other topics and subjects, your primary beef about lack of historical content should be directed at indifferent parents, too much TV and computer games and a bloated and inefficiant school administration.

What you try to do here is worth the effort, but do not assume this took place in a social and moral vacum.  Without the South and the support of Southern administrations during the height of the slave-trade, no such trade could have existed.  Northern slave-runners went hand-in-hand with Southern slaveowners.  If it was wrong to run slaves, to be carriers of slaves, it was just as wrong to own them.  Taking this part of slavery out of context is just as wrong as to condem all Southerners as slaveowners. (Pie states: I agree with your last paragraph, with the exception that you never once mention that the North is making a profit the entire time slave-running is going on.)

Pie continues:
  I have mentioned some hugely important names that even today were built on their involvement in those awful days, yet you ignore that information in your zeal to drive home your theme of slavery and the South.  Just as abolitionists of the era could not or would not accept their own complicity. They were focused upon the change. And well and good for them. They did, often insanely, what they felt they had to. But with that comes responsibility.  John Brown hanged.  And no man was more justly hanged.

We of course know that Lincoln went to war to preserve the Union, not to free the slaves.   And it is absolutely redundant but must be re-emphasized for newcomers that the Emancipation Proclamation only freed slaves in the states  that were still under Union control.  The Southern states had seceded and his proclamation had nothing to do with them.

I am not going to get into various other reasons for the war because this thread was begun to talk about "slave-running"  and I want to finish what I have started.

I will say this, however.  There are 27 million people in the world today who are slaves. (Yes, I found that simply by using my server.  I see no outcry from anyone about this.)   If abolitionists today are that passionate and hate slavery and slavers THAT much, they should not be WASTING time and energy lamenting and proselytizing about slavery two centuries ago and put it to real human suffering right now.   

The US labor department stated there was over 50,000 slaves in the US;  and that was years ago.  There are more slaves today than during the entire 300 years of the Atlantic slave trade. Yet other regions of these United States want to continue this harangue of the South.  The states will never be the United States of America as long as this continues.  Does anyone understand this? Does "Hollywoebegone" even care, as long as they make a profit, that they are doing so at the expense of a region of the country?

The snide little jokes made at the expense of the South, the sitcoms devoted to mockery of the South, the endless thrust to "force" diversity in the South while everyone looks the other way at the riots in other parts of the country, etc. Does that make anyone in the South feel all warm and fuzzy towards those that laugh at this stuff?

But again, I am getting away from the subject that I want to finish. Trust me, I am almost finished.

I fully intend to get my message out no matter how exasperated you sound.  Frankly, it doesn't bother me one bit what you think of me or my thoughts, just that they see the light of day and that more than one idea is expressed on this board. And when this ceases to peak my interest I will move on to something that makes me SMILE!