Was the one-drop rule something instituted specifically to ward off another Haiti? Maybe experts know. It would fit with how extensively the slaveocracy was actively thinking and tweaking the system with that in view.
I guess, and the folks who know American history will know better, but this seems like a pretty common pre-cotton gin attitude towards slavery and race. I.e. slavery is evil and will eventually go away on its own but if we go too fast we'll have a revolt like in Haiti, so don't do that. In some ways it feels more familiar precisely because there's no real belief in the viability of the slave system or long-term segregation.
According to my expertise (i.e. Wikipedia), the one drop rule really didn't come into prominence until the Jim Crow period. I don't think they were worried about another Haiti by them, but my expertise doesn't have that kind of information gathered on a single page.
2 to the OP. To 1, I believe the one-drop rule didn't come about formally until Jim Crow, and was part of the attempt to prohibit social equality in the face of formal legal equality. But obviously in the future US vs the French sugar colonies there was much more concern with being less open about the fact that white men were rampantly fucking their slaves, not that this was a secret, probably because health conditions were better and more European women were arriving.
That was an accident. A pwn only gets one F you.
A number of colonies/states had the rule that the status of the child followed that of the mother. Children of enslaved woman = enslaved from birth.
Don't worry. I may have been first, but your writing was much less coherent.
Incoherent comments give people something to do
2: I don't see the bit in the OP where he argues that slavery is evil. Obviously he is afraid that it will go away by itself or otherwise, but I suspect it is an anachronistic reading to suppose that he really believes all that guff about rights. He's just afraid the slaves will do so.
Yeah, I agree with 11. I don't see anything in there indicating that he thinks slavery is going to disappear on its own. (And 1802 is post-cotton gin anyway, although probably before the magnitude of its effect was apparent.) It is interesting that he doesn't want to say this publicly, though.
Jefferson (who appointed him) had similar concerns. There's a lot of "sure freedom's great, and slavery is bad for both slaves and masters,* but if we do emancipation now the newly freed people will be so resentful they'll kill us so we can't" in anti-emancipation arguments in the South up until about the 1830s. Then things start to harden into more distinct pro and anti-slavery arguments and by the 1850s you have slave state politicians advocating re-opening the trans-Atlantic slave trade.
*A lot of this was probably rhetorical concern rather than genuine concern with the lives of slaves. Jefferson's concerns, IIRC, are more about how the system commits masters to physical and moral violence that takes a toll on them (the masters) than about what it does to the slaves.
Apparently Granger was from Connecticut, so he's presumably not speaking from personal experience or concern here, which is also suggested by the detached tone. He may just be channeling Jefferson's own concerns.
Connecticut, like a lot of northern states, didn't abolish slavery immediately, or that long before 1800. A quick look up says Connecticut passed gradual abolition in 1784 and those born into to slavery were not emancipated until they were 25. So there were still slaves in Connecticut in 1802.
I have no idea if Granger himself owned slaves. I never heard of him until now.
Yeah, fair point. Still, even if Granger did own slaves, he wasn't coming from one of the states with huge numbers of slaves where insurrection was a major concern, unlike Jefferson.
"Major concern" is doing a lot of work there -- you can get major concern without much factual evidence of a conspiracy.
Major Concern did lots of work, but General Upset was mostly hot air.
I guess given the title this would also be an appropriate Panama Papers thread.
I don't see the bit in the OP where he argues that slavery is evil.
They will "increase their knowledge of natural rights," and "they will learn that a man's rights do not depend on his color" suggests that Granger sees slavery as contrary to natural rights, even if he's willing to accommodate the institution -- which I think supports Tigre's reading in 2.
You could read it either way, agreed. But I don't think that you can simultaneously believe that one race or the other must be masters (which is the author's premise) and that there are natural, universal rights -- which is the conclusion he wishes the slaves never to reach. Therefore, he thinks that "rights" are dangerous bullshit and subordination the natural state of affairs. That is certainly how a lot of conservatives think to this day.
Here are a couple antebellum insurrectionists texts that I just found out about today.
Fellow-men! patient sufferers! behold your dearest rights crushed to the earth! See your sons murdered, and your wives, mothers, and sisters, doomed to prostitution! In the name of the merciful God! and by all that life is worth, let it no longer be a debateable question, whether it is better to choose LIBERTY or DEATH! In 1822, Denmark Veazie, of South Carolina, formed a plan for the liberation of his fellow men. In the whole history of human efforts to overthrow slavery, a more complicated and tremendous plan was never formed. He was betrayed by the treachery of his own people, and died a martyr to freedom. Many a brave hero fell, but History, faithful to her high trust, will transcribe his name on the same monument with Moses, Hampden, Tell, Bruce, and Wallace, Touissaint L'Overteur, Lafayette and Washington.That tremendous movement shook the whole empire of slavery. The guilty soul thieves were overwhelmed with fear.
Someone replied to this with the tweet "fascinating parallel to how the Green Book was distributed/sourced by Afr-Am postmen https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Negro_Motorist_Green_Book" which makes a neat little introduction for what it's like to be denied a civil right.
You can map your route with the Green Book here: http://publicdomain.nypl.org/greenbook-map/
History, faithful to her high trust, will transcribe his name on the same monument with Moses, Hampden, Tell, Bruce, and Wallace, Touissaint L'Overteur, Lafayette and Washington.
Spot the odd one out!
The Green Book is fascinating. Never heard of it before - particularly interesting to read about Esso's policy.
Yes, that Wikipedia page in the Green book is fascinating.
I'm not at all surprised to see that Shell was assholes.
Wikipedia page *on* the Green book. Sadly, there was no Wikipedia page in the Green book, although that would have been even more fascinating.
Thanks for sharing that, Barry. I've looked at some of the archived copies and thought about looking for Green Book-approved places that are still around when traveling, but I'd put it off because I'm not sure the girls are ready for it. The map is an easy way to browse.
"These are the most ready to learn, and the most able to execute".
huh. i assumed "to execute [the task]" was modern biz-speak.
learned something.
||
SCOTUS declines to upend redistricting process.
|>
The Green Book is really fascinating. there are probably multiple PhDs into the intersection of personal security, the economy, and the development of taste there.
30 What a great idea to do that, Thorn. It also sounds like it would make for a fascinating blog.
Matt Ruff's new book, Lovecraft Country, has a fictionalized Green Book as a foundation. Ruff's book is about (in part) the horrors of Jim Crow. It was very effective, although I still can't shake the feeling that it isn't his story to tell.
34: I'm sure the blog part's been done and I don't travel enough (thank goodness!) to make it worthwhile. But it's something I think about when traveling, certainly.
The blog would be such a great project. A quick google doesn't turn up any prior publication.
If nothing else, I should bike around town to see if any of the (surprisingly few) sites are still there. From what I saw, none of the businesses are (unsurprisingly).
38: I meant to say, and make a little project of it, with pics and such. Ooh, if there's enough left, maybe I could enlist the Major Taylor Bike Club and Black Girls Do Bike to do a bike tour of Bike Fest.