Comments on: Bicentennial of the abolition of the U.S. slave trade http://living.jdewperry.com/2007/08/bicentennial-of-the-abolition-of-the-us-slave-trade/ Exploring the Legacy of Slavery and Race in the United States Thu, 26 Jan 2012 05:02:15 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Venita Benitez http://living.jdewperry.com/2007/08/bicentennial-of-the-abolition-of-the-us-slave-trade/comment-page-1/#comment-47667 Venita Benitez Wed, 07 Dec 2011 19:20:24 +0000 http://blog.jdewperry.com/2007/08/04/bicentennial-of-the-abolition-of-the-us-slave-trade/#comment-47667 Okay...I'm back. I would like to talk about Virginia, the Civil War and as well as, a little bit about the King James charter for the settlement of America 1606. Okay…I’m back. I would like to talk about Virginia, the Civil War and as well as, a little bit about the King James charter for the settlement of America 1606.

]]> By: Venita Benitez http://living.jdewperry.com/2007/08/bicentennial-of-the-abolition-of-the-us-slave-trade/comment-page-1/#comment-40142 Venita Benitez Tue, 11 Oct 2011 14:56:56 +0000 http://blog.jdewperry.com/2007/08/04/bicentennial-of-the-abolition-of-the-us-slave-trade/#comment-40142 James, We believe in the same. TRUTH, it is our only hope. I'm ready to learn. Thank you. I will be back soon.... I need to get several bids out over the next two weeks. I Promise, I'll be back. Blessings. Venita James,

We believe in the same. TRUTH, it is our only hope. I’m ready to learn.

Thank you. I will be back soon…. I need to get several bids out over the next two weeks. I Promise, I’ll be back.

Blessings.

Venita

]]> By: James http://living.jdewperry.com/2007/08/bicentennial-of-the-abolition-of-the-us-slave-trade/comment-page-1/#comment-40129 James Tue, 11 Oct 2011 12:28:43 +0000 http://blog.jdewperry.com/2007/08/04/bicentennial-of-the-abolition-of-the-us-slave-trade/#comment-40129 By the way, Venita, there's a reason why I try to set the historical record straight on issues like these. Our nation has long perpetuated a series of highly damaging myths about our history of slavery and race. These myths, arising partly out of nothing more than false assumptions over the generations, have created the impression that the North was relatively uninvolved in slavery, that the Civil War was waged to abolish slavery, and that the racial problems of the Jim Crow era were confined to the South. I believe that these historical misunderstandings have grossly distorted our contemporary dialogue about the legacy of slavery and about today's racial ills. Once the record is set straight, people are able to come together to have honest conversations and work together on where we go from here. But this process requires a deliberate effort to cast aside the historical narratives handed down from previous generations and to look carefully at the established historical record. This isn't, in other words, about historical details that don't matter. Nor is it about whitewashing the past. Instead, it's about ensuring that in our zeal to blame the traditional villains -- southern slaveowners, Confederate officials -- that we don't inadvertently hide the complicity of others. By the way, Venita, there’s a reason why I try to set the historical record straight on issues like these.

Our nation has long perpetuated a series of highly damaging myths about our history of slavery and race. These myths, arising partly out of nothing more than false assumptions over the generations, have created the impression that the North was relatively uninvolved in slavery, that the Civil War was waged to abolish slavery, and that the racial problems of the Jim Crow era were confined to the South.

I believe that these historical misunderstandings have grossly distorted our contemporary dialogue about the legacy of slavery and about today’s racial ills. Once the record is set straight, people are able to come together to have honest conversations and work together on where we go from here. But this process requires a deliberate effort to cast aside the historical narratives handed down from previous generations and to look carefully at the established historical record.

This isn’t, in other words, about historical details that don’t matter. Nor is it about whitewashing the past. Instead, it’s about ensuring that in our zeal to blame the traditional villains — southern slaveowners, Confederate officials — that we don’t inadvertently hide the complicity of others.

]]> By: James http://living.jdewperry.com/2007/08/bicentennial-of-the-abolition-of-the-us-slave-trade/comment-page-1/#comment-40126 James Tue, 11 Oct 2011 12:09:37 +0000 http://blog.jdewperry.com/2007/08/04/bicentennial-of-the-abolition-of-the-us-slave-trade/#comment-40126 Venita, history records that Sherman's field order was reversed by Andrew Johnson in 1865 and the land given back to the original owners. The Confederate states did not begin to regain admission into Congress until 1866. Therefore, President Johnson could not have been working with former Confederates in Congress to reverse that order, nor could former Confederates in Congress have been given the land. The passage you quote refers to the election of former Confederate officials to Congress from North Carolina after that state was readmitted to Congress in 1868. It's certainly true that former Confederates worked hard during Reconstruction to undermine progress for black Americans and to establish the Jim Crow system. But the story of Sherman's order illustrates how complicit the rest of the nation was in the racial vision that would lead to Jim Crow laws and practices throughout the nation. "James, how many former Confederate officials were in Congress when President Andrew Johnson reversed Special Field Order No. 15?" None. That order was reversed in 1865. Tennessee was readmitted to Congress in 1866, and no other states would rejoin Congress until 1868. Venita, history records that Sherman’s field order was reversed by Andrew Johnson in 1865 and the land given back to the original owners. The Confederate states did not begin to regain admission into Congress until 1866. Therefore, President Johnson could not have been working with former Confederates in Congress to reverse that order, nor could former Confederates in Congress have been given the land.

The passage you quote refers to the election of former Confederate officials to Congress from North Carolina after that state was readmitted to Congress in 1868.

It’s certainly true that former Confederates worked hard during Reconstruction to undermine progress for black Americans and to establish the Jim Crow system. But the story of Sherman’s order illustrates how complicit the rest of the nation was in the racial vision that would lead to Jim Crow laws and practices throughout the nation.

“James, how many former Confederate officials were in Congress when President Andrew Johnson reversed Special Field Order No. 15?”

None. That order was reversed in 1865. Tennessee was readmitted to Congress in 1866, and no other states would rejoin Congress until 1868.

]]> By: Venita Benitez http://living.jdewperry.com/2007/08/bicentennial-of-the-abolition-of-the-us-slave-trade/comment-page-1/#comment-40070 Venita Benitez Tue, 11 Oct 2011 03:22:36 +0000 http://blog.jdewperry.com/2007/08/04/bicentennial-of-the-abolition-of-the-us-slave-trade/#comment-40070 James, I disagree. I believe President Andrew Johnson and former Confederates in Congress worked together to reverse General Sherman’s Special Field Order, No.15 (50 acres NO mule) Mules were never included in Special Field Order, No. 15. And yes I do believe Confederate veterans and former Confederates in Congress received land from that reversed order. “In North Carolina, President Johnson appointed William W. Holden as provisional governor, and many Confederates were pardoned. Jonathan Worth, wartime state treasurer, then defeated Holden for the governorship, and many former Confederate officials were elected to Congress. Congress, however, refused to seat these delegates on the grounds that they had been disloyal to the Union and freedmen were being mistreated (via the "Black Codes").” James, how many former Confederate officials were in Congress when President Andrew Johnson reversed Special Field Order No. 15? Why did President Carter reinstate Jefferson Davis citizenship? After all, Davis had been dead for over 100 years… Do you have any idea why President Carter did that? Just asking… My GGG Great Grandfather was a Confederate Soldier. So were some of my GG Great Uncles. James, I disagree.

I believe President Andrew Johnson and former Confederates in Congress worked together to reverse General Sherman’s Special Field Order, No.15 (50 acres NO mule) Mules were never included in Special Field Order, No. 15. And yes I do believe Confederate veterans and former Confederates in Congress received land from that reversed order.

“In North Carolina, President Johnson appointed William W. Holden as provisional governor, and many Confederates were pardoned. Jonathan Worth, wartime state treasurer, then defeated Holden for the governorship, and many former Confederate officials were elected to Congress. Congress, however, refused to seat these delegates on the grounds that they had been disloyal to the Union and freedmen were being mistreated (via the “Black Codes”).”

James, how many former Confederate officials were in Congress when President Andrew Johnson reversed Special Field Order No. 15?

Why did President Carter reinstate Jefferson Davis citizenship? After all, Davis had been dead for over 100 years… Do you have any idea why President Carter did that? Just asking…

My GGG Great Grandfather was a Confederate Soldier. So were some of my GG Great Uncles.

]]> By: James http://living.jdewperry.com/2007/08/bicentennial-of-the-abolition-of-the-us-slave-trade/comment-page-1/#comment-40032 James Mon, 10 Oct 2011 21:31:10 +0000 http://blog.jdewperry.com/2007/08/04/bicentennial-of-the-abolition-of-the-us-slave-trade/#comment-40032 Venita, I don't believe there was anything fair about how the federal government treated former slaves after the Civil War. However, General Sherman's Special Field Orders, No. 15, was reversed by President Andrew Johnson, not by former Confederates in Congress. Moreover, the land in question was returned to its original owners, not to Confederate veterans or former Confederates in Congress. All of this is consistent with the notion that the Union was never interested in granting freed slaves any form of compensation for their suffering. In this, the North and South, the Blue and the Grey, were united all along. It did not take former Confederates to undermine the idea of "40 acres and a mule." Venita, I don’t believe there was anything fair about how the federal government treated former slaves after the Civil War.

However, General Sherman’s Special Field Orders, No. 15, was reversed by President Andrew Johnson, not by former Confederates in Congress. Moreover, the land in question was returned to its original owners, not to Confederate veterans or former Confederates in Congress.

All of this is consistent with the notion that the Union was never interested in granting freed slaves any form of compensation for their suffering. In this, the North and South, the Blue and the Grey, were united all along. It did not take former Confederates to undermine the idea of “40 acres and a mule.”

]]> By: Venita Benitez http://living.jdewperry.com/2007/08/bicentennial-of-the-abolition-of-the-us-slave-trade/comment-page-1/#comment-40030 Venita Benitez Mon, 10 Oct 2011 21:18:07 +0000 http://blog.jdewperry.com/2007/08/04/bicentennial-of-the-abolition-of-the-us-slave-trade/#comment-40030 Hi James. Thank you. James, Do you think it was fair for the Confederates in Congress and the former owners of acres to snatch back the 50 acres given to each freeman (freemen) shortly after the association of Lincoln? Most of the confederate soldiers received this land as well as the confederates placed in Congress. Do you know if any of the (former Slaves) Black Confederate Soldiers received any of the land taken from the freeman as their fellow confederate comrades? Venita Hi James. Thank you.

James,
Do you think it was fair for the Confederates in Congress and the former owners of acres to snatch back the 50 acres given to each freeman (freemen) shortly after the association of Lincoln? Most of the confederate soldiers received this land as well as the confederates placed in Congress. Do you know if any of the (former Slaves) Black Confederate Soldiers received any of the land taken from the freeman as their fellow confederate comrades?

Venita

]]> By: James http://living.jdewperry.com/2007/08/bicentennial-of-the-abolition-of-the-us-slave-trade/comment-page-1/#comment-39885 James Sun, 09 Oct 2011 19:22:22 +0000 http://blog.jdewperry.com/2007/08/04/bicentennial-of-the-abolition-of-the-us-slave-trade/#comment-39885 Venita, I've said frequently on this blog that the U.S. government was deeply involved in slavery and, later, the racial hierarchy of the Jim Crow era. I've also said repeatedly that the U.S. has never repaired the consequences of either slavery or Jim Crow. Naturally, many federal officers from southern states joined the Confederacy during the war. And many representatives elected to Congress from southern states following the war had been on the southern side during the war. These facts don't have anything to do with whether the federal government was involved in slavery; indeed, many of these individuals were opposed to slavery, even if they sided with the Confederacy. If you're simply suggesting that many people involved in the federal government in the 19th century had been supportive of slavery, I agree with this. In fact, I'd go further than you do: this applies not just to those who sided with the South, but to many federal officials from the North, the Midwest and the West. Venita, I’ve said frequently on this blog that the U.S. government was deeply involved in slavery and, later, the racial hierarchy of the Jim Crow era. I’ve also said repeatedly that the U.S. has never repaired the consequences of either slavery or Jim Crow.

Naturally, many federal officers from southern states joined the Confederacy during the war. And many representatives elected to Congress from southern states following the war had been on the southern side during the war. These facts don’t have anything to do with whether the federal government was involved in slavery; indeed, many of these individuals were opposed to slavery, even if they sided with the Confederacy.

If you’re simply suggesting that many people involved in the federal government in the 19th century had been supportive of slavery, I agree with this. In fact, I’d go further than you do: this applies not just to those who sided with the South, but to many federal officials from the North, the Midwest and the West.

]]> By: Venita Benitez http://living.jdewperry.com/2007/08/bicentennial-of-the-abolition-of-the-us-slave-trade/comment-page-1/#comment-39884 Venita Benitez Sun, 09 Oct 2011 19:07:59 +0000 http://blog.jdewperry.com/2007/08/04/bicentennial-of-the-abolition-of-the-us-slave-trade/#comment-39884 James, Some of the Confederates were working for the government starting with its very own president of the confederates and our (U.S) secretary of war, Jefferson Davis. After the civil war, did some of the “former” confederates have seats in congress given to them? Almost half of Congress were made up of confederates after the civil war!!! The government was involved in slavery. How could you not see this James? How could you say that the government never was involved in slavery before...? How could you say this.... Venita The federal government is morally accountable for its support of a deeply entrenched racial hierarchy and its failure to repair the consequences of slavery and Jim Crow. James,
Some of the Confederates were working for the government starting with its very own president of the confederates and our (U.S) secretary of war, Jefferson Davis. After the civil war, did some of the “former” confederates have seats in congress given to them? Almost half of Congress were made up of confederates after the civil war!!! The government was involved in slavery. How could you not see this James? How could you say that the government never was involved in slavery before…? How could you say this….

Venita

The federal government is morally accountable for its support of a deeply entrenched racial hierarchy and its failure to repair the consequences of slavery and Jim Crow.

]]> By: James http://living.jdewperry.com/2007/08/bicentennial-of-the-abolition-of-the-us-slave-trade/comment-page-1/#comment-39888 James Tue, 22 Feb 2011 13:07:35 +0000 http://blog.jdewperry.com/2007/08/04/bicentennial-of-the-abolition-of-the-us-slave-trade/#comment-39888 Venita, this is the last time I'll say this: the 1807 act banning the slave trade did <i>not</i> involve any steps to abolish slavery, much less to root out hidden slavery or to end slavery in other nations. These are noble goals that I fully support, but they are not advanced in two-century-old legislation, but instead by modern laws. I agree that there are a great many slaves in the world today, and that the U.S. can, and should, do more to help end modern slavery. But that doesn't mean that the U.S. hasn't outlawed slavery, and isn't actively working to end it, both here and abroad. The fact that the U.S. is the highest financial contributor to the U.N. and UNESCO only supports that argument; it doesn't undermine it. Venita, this is the last time I’ll say this: the 1807 act banning the slave trade did not involve any steps to abolish slavery, much less to root out hidden slavery or to end slavery in other nations. These are noble goals that I fully support, but they are not advanced in two-century-old legislation, but instead by modern laws.

I agree that there are a great many slaves in the world today, and that the U.S. can, and should, do more to help end modern slavery. But that doesn’t mean that the U.S. hasn’t outlawed slavery, and isn’t actively working to end it, both here and abroad. The fact that the U.S. is the highest financial contributor to the U.N. and UNESCO only supports that argument; it doesn’t undermine it.

]]>