No, the Founding Fathers did not make the right decision by avoiding the issue on slavery. The topic was going to come up agian whether they liked it or not. The Founding Fathers should have just dealt with the problem when it had came up. If the people wanted the slavery to go away bad enough then the were going to bring the issue back up. Even if it was 1799 or 1808. The north wanted to free the slaves and send them back to their place of origin, while the south wanted to keep them as slaves. The thing that confuses me is either way the slaves had no say in what was going to happen to them.
I believe that the founding fathers made a move that was very short-sighted and not thought out. However, in a situation like that where one government must be approved by a collection of states, sometimes things must be pushed aside to make untiy. I believe this issue should have at least been addressed, it could have lessened the consequences instead of just ignoring it. However, I guess if they did then none of the southern states would have gave this nation another thought. Politics like this must have made the Founding Fathers want to eat their own shoes.
No, the Founding Fathers did not make the right move at the Constitutional Convention. They believed that slavery would exist forever. By avoiding the topic, the Fathers thought that the issue would go away. However, if the Founding Fathers had dealt with the topic of slavery, fewer problems might have occurred. The north did not want people kept as slaves, but they did not want those people to come to the north. The Founding Fathers were unsure how to deal with the situation. So, by pushing it aside they thought they were doing what was right.
I think that given the circumstances the founding fathers did do the right thing, but not the moral. If they followed their moral instinct we would all be in New Europe not America, because the whole country would have split and after the north and the south split all of the states would want to be on their own, hence a second Europe. So by keeping the country safe while it was still under the shaky foundation of the Articles of Confederation, they did the right thing from a purley perserving standpoint.
Part 1: The Initiation The topic of slavery is not so simple that you can respond to it with the black and white standards of yes or no. While it may technically be true that you either believe that the Founding Fathers were right or wrong, to balance your terms on such a elementary see-saw is apathetic at best. I believe that the Founding Fathers made the right decision by delaying the issue of slavery. See? You don't even have to know me in real life to deduce that I'm an insensitive human being. Regardless, I could continue to defend my view with similarly shoddy "facts" and observations, but it wouldn't make one deal of difference in changing the conjecture you may or may not derive from such a statement; because you see, it isn't so much that I feel that the Founding Fathers did what was right, as much as they did what was necessary. *sigh* I understand that I'm supposed to state my opinion and proceed to explain my opinion, before I can even begin to delve into the opinions of you, my peers. I feel like a child who is about to jump into a ball pit, but withheld and reminded that he must first take off his shoes. The thing is, I'll just end up repeating myself as I address the your cursory conclusions, and while I understand that some require the mallet of reason to repetitively hammer the nail of competence into their thick skulls, you guys are frankly not worth my time. So with that prolonged introduction, I shove my way past the Chuck E' Cheese employee and dive headfirst into the endless mass of plastic spheres filled with joy, shoes intact.
Part 2: Putting our issues on a boat and casting them away. @ Chelsey Schaff You know what, you're absolutely right; slavery isn't just going to go away! In fact, it didn't, and was finally resolved at the cost of over a million human casualties in the Civil War. I'm not one to judge, but by observing your devout and unwavering stance on the rights of blacks, I don't thing I am stepping out of my bounds by saying that you are not like me, and are actually a very caring person. Now, I would pose the question of which is worse, a million dead or a million bound to the chains of servitude?- but some prefer to euthanize the horse. The fact is, from the time of the Articles of Confederation to the time of the Convention of "Demigods" , America was hardly a decade old. Even when the Constitutional Convention discussed the Quaker petition addressing the emancipation of slaves, it was only 1790. Sorry to take a moment to intervene, but you said 1799 to 1808, which is a fair timeframe since slave trade was promised to not be prohibited until 1808, but we're talking about the late 80's to early 90's here. I mean, I consider myself a fashionably late person myself, but even I would arrive before there was no more punch in the bowl. Now where was I? Oh yes, the emancipation of slaves at the cost of a million American lives. The United States was a new country loosely held together by the Articles of Confederation before they were replaced by the Constitution we still use to this day. Here, I'll humor you and pretend that the Founding Fathers did what was morally correct and freed the slaves, now what? Well I guess we all just sit down and enjoy some tea and crumpets (this is 18th century America, not 21st. They didn't have beer and buffalo wings quite yet). Let's just wait for the Southern States to ratify our Constitution giving us 5 of the 9 states out of 13 needed . Don't even mind that many of the southern aristocrats, who were ex-supporters of the British during our revolution until they Brits started promising freedom to their slaves, and their possible outrage. We made it through one revolution, surely we can withstand another. While we're at it, glory to the North!- for they are jolly good fellows, For they are jolly good fellows, For they are jolly good fellows! And nobody can deny.
Part 3: No more! Wow, that really put a strain on my sanity. I hate to admit it, but I cannot maintain these charades any longer. No, the Southern States would NOT ratify our constitution because they WOULD be pissed due to the fact that they WERE disgruntled by England's promises to their slaves and would not care for us doing the same, so our Constitution WOULD NOT get passed. Ahem, forgive the abundant use of the shift key, but regrettably, Blogspot does not allow me to show emphasis any other way. Back on topic: The North disliked the slaves as much of the South, but they realized that by it was hypocritical to deny slaves the same rights when our Declaration of Independence said "all men are created equal". The truth of the matter is, they just didn't want to feel the guilt, but had no idea what to do with the slaves. Sure, shipping them back to Africa from whence they came was an idea, but honestly?-Sending them out to sea in hopes of never seeing them again is practically a literal representation of the neglect you are so openly opposed to. And that is merely addressing the what, not the how. How were they supposed to free the slaves? They couldn't simply just take them from their masters without any compensation. Well, literally they could, but the American Revolution was in direct response to England's strong and oppressive government. What is a government that takes your physical property for not even a dime? Exactly. So compensation was needed, but it would cost Congress an estimate of over $200 million. Even selling its western land wouldn't give America enough funds to adequately emancipate slaves and continue to run a country bombarded by more pressing issues. What confuses me is how you can discard such insight, and be far more concerned about the feelings of the "animals" in this situation. Clearly the slaves wanted to be free, and if it was up to them, they would be. Questioning the obvious is futile, especially in a topic like this. We have a set of morals today that decry one and all equal to each other, regardless of race or creed. Like I said, this is not a simple "they were wrong because it is immoral" discussion, which leads me into...
Part 4: Short but sweet @This Guy How myopic of you, and I say, with the amount of waffling going on hear it appears that you are having a regular political cookout. @cmontgomery Again with the negligence, the generalizations? Thomas Jefferson, Fernando Fairfax, Benjamin Franklin, these are only several of the many that opposed slavery and did not want to leave the issue unaddressed. Not all of the Founding Fathers shared the same beliefs. And what problems? Why exactly did they feel like what they were doing was right? Why don't you agree? Where do you actually stand?! I'll be sure to get ahold of This Guy and tell him to shoot you an invitation.
Part 5: In Conclusion Chelsey was right, the issue of slavery wasn't going to go away. This Guy was right, because the South would not sign the Constitution and preserve unity. cmontgomery was right, the North didn't want the slaves either. These are all simple truths, but do not adequately defend your opinions that the Founding Fathers were wrong with their silence. They weren't short-sighted by any means, the topic of slavery was a painful, yet deeply debated, subject. The Founding Fathers needed to create a Constitution that would encourage the States to unite, not push each other away with a casual "oh well". As we will learn when we cover the Civil War, the resolution of this debate would be resolved at the cost of many lives, driving a nation to the brink of collapse. Should it have happened any sooner, while America was still merely an infant fresh out of the womb, we probably wouldn't be where we are today, writing on this blog as we are, discussing this very issue. Quoting James Madison who spoke these words when referring to slavery, the Founding Fathers' postponement of the slavery dilemma was "a necessary evil". Yes, it was morally wrong and hypocritical, but needed, for reasons I have already stated. Oh, and please, for the sake of my sanity and your own reputation, think before you state an opinion, and know why you hold such an opinion. It does you and this debate no good if you base your conjectures and presumptions of the men of our past solely on the morals that come standard to many living Americans to this day. On a side note, I understand that my unrelenting and harsh critiques may have you shaken, but if you want to roll with this cool cat, learn how to swing. Now excuse me, I am off to feast on shoes complete with delicious apple fritters with honey-hazelnut glaze drizzled on top of potato skinned peaches. Ha!- and I thought that this composition was a delectable mouthful. -Mr. Chat
No, the Founding Fathers did not make the right decision at the Constitutional Convention, by ignoring slavery. They taught avoiding the topic would be the best thing to do, but they didn't think of the possibility the problem would come up later on.I think the Founding Fathers should have just dealt with the problem when it came up. If they would have dealt with the situation of slavery in the Convention, there wouldn't have been so many problems to deal with later on, like the civil war. The Founding Fathers were unsure how to deal with the situation,and by pushing it aside they didn't solve anything.
The founding fathers made the right decision at the time. They knew that slavery was a very important and fragile issue. IT would have been national suicide for them to have a civil conflict only a few years after ending a war for independence. The country was not yet big enough or strong/united enough for such and issue to be fully delt with. They knew that they needed to focus on forming a strong united nation before they focused on smaller more heated issues. The congress was not yet ready to deal with the subject of slavery. Congress realized this and knew that in the future their country would deal with it once and for all.
I personally side with Mr. Chat in that if you leave all of todays moral standards out and look at the straight facts of that day, they needed to just leave it on a shelf and come back when they had a step-stool with hand rails for added stability. now, do not take this as a cure all for any hard issue that may be in discussion today, some things just simply must be delt with at the time it arrises, but in this case the move to put it off for a later generation to solve was the right move, but at the cost of many lives.
Where would we be today if they HAD opened up debate on slavery? Definitely not the world we live in today. With such a strong divide between the states unity wouldn't have happened for decades, maybe never. I think we can all agree You never want two large, aggressive, and contrasting lands next to each other. From our experiences and teachings of course we see slavery as barbaric and ultimately wrong, but sometimes there is a difference between what you believe is right and what needs to be done. The Founding Father's understood this and acted accordingly.
I have to agree with both cmontgoeary and chelsey. The founding fathers did not do the right thing by not talking about slavery in the conventions. But after reading joe's comment, i get what his trying to say, and it makes sense.
They should of talk about slavery right there and then because this issue would of been brought up any way and they were not going to be gone any time soon. They were also reproducing at a faster rate then whites which meant that they were going to be harder to get rid of then what they thought. It would also cost them a lot of money to send them back to Africa and even leave them in debt. But if they had solved this problem then they would not have more complicated problems in the future like rebellions or civil wars. Either way though Blacks had no choice but to obey what they were told to do. The founding brothers also left slavery out because they believed slaves were 3/5 of a human which made them practically an animal. They thought that they had done the right thing at that time but in later years, it costs the life of many.
Yes, the Founding Fathers did make the right decision because if they had faced the issue head on there is a possibility that they could have ended slavery but it would have ended in a civil war! The North had high intentions to end slavery, there is a possibility that they would get tired of fighting for someone else but the slaves would have joined the cause either way; and the South did not want to give their slaves the freedom they disserved, also the south did not want to loose their powers over their slaves and would there fore join the fight to ‘keep their rights”. Further on, by not fazing the issue the Founding Fathers gave those on both sides much to consider. The north was determined not to have slaves and therefore was making themselves prepared to live their lives without them, to look another way to solve their problem. The people became more modern, what used to once be disgraceful was now known as different cutlers, the people where able to know that even though some where whites they were not the same. There were many foreigners at that time and so the colonists were able to see many cultures, and see many different faces, and skin color. Those in the south could now see that even though they needed slaves they were recognizing the fact that slaves were humans, they were people. Continuing on, the Founding fathers did not have as much power because of the peoples distrust over them. Because of their resent independence over England, for the south by taking their slaves and giving them freedom it would have been as though being robbed of their property. If the Founding Fathers had continued and there is a possibility that the people would not follow the Articles of confederation and would be once again the thirteen colonies. The south seemed prepared to keep what they thought belonged to them. Lastly, the North would have won, there were more blacks then there were whites and had a more humane idea. Even those on the opposing line would have acknowledged it over time.
I agree with this Guy because I believe if the founding brothers thought the issue very thorouhgly they could of weighed the pro's and con's and they could of came up with a solution right there. But I also agree with Joe because the states weren't strong let alone united therefore slavery would have flopped. It is also good to let aside a delicate and fragile subject like slavery for futher conversation when everything got better.
Woah, this is getting heavy. Well, in my personal opinion, I belive by leaving out the topic of slavery at the Constitutional Convention was the right thing to do. Although putting off the issue and leaving it to a later date seems like an attempt to save themselves the trouble, the men at the Convention's decision turned out quite nicely...eventually.
Just as important as abolishing slavery was abolishing slavery at the RIGHT time. The Founding Fathers could not spend all of their time dealing with one of the biggest issues that would cause an uproar if abolished, but rather should tackle the issues at hand that COULD be solved. Overall, the outcome of it all worked out just fine....(once again, eventually.)
Similar to what Wiley said, the abrupt extermination of slavery would be to sudden for the shaky table that was the Colonies to handle. As the table is slowly teetering back and forth, kicking out one of its strongest legs is not the best idea.
And as for Jace- whoops i mean Mr. Chat, Je suis d'accord avec vous! (I agree with you) Despite your continuous ranting, you make some excellent points that hopefully one day will open the eyes of Americans everywhere. *finger snaps*
I do believe the founding fathers made the right choice is first avoiding the issue of slavery. Although the issue would come up again and again, they held off for as long as possible for the sake of the country. Even though slavery is definitely a terrible act made by the American's in the South, confronting the issue would have caused further problems, and would have jeopardized the future of America. Think of what happened in the later years when slavery was decided to be abolished. There was a Civil War, and the most American casualties EVER occurred. Could we have afforded a Civil War right after a revolution? In short, no. Slavery did have to end eventually, but choosing to adhere to other issues first was important in the survival of the colonies.
Ana, yes, the issue would come up later on, but at a more opportune time, when the country was stronger. Also, the Civil War would not have been avoided, in my opinion. Rather it would have come prematurely and the weak country was not prepared in the least for that massive of a conflict.
I also agree with Wiley, on every level. He pretty much worded it perfectly, because although the decision was short sided, it was the right thing to do.
I just logged on, and I must say was completly blown away by Mr. Chat's argument. It was very hard to pin down your exact view on things, shoes non-withstanding. I however was incredibly moved by his argument, and must say that a proper step back in my thinking is needed. As a side note, I was searching around the web, and found a nice liitle article about Roman Slavery, good to look at for a new idea or perspective. Now Excuse me while I leave the firing range.
I think that the Founding Fathers did not make the right decision by intentionally avoiding and not addressing slavery but, because America was barely starting out and not yet completely stable, it was one that would not cause more instability. There were Founding Fathers that were anti-slavery but it was what was best for the unity of America. If slavery would have been addressed things today would be waayyyy different and the United States of America probably would not exist.
Side note, I just found this quote, for kicks. "Besides the noble art of getting things done, there is a nobler art of leaving things undone. The wisdom of life consists in the elimination of the nonessentials." Lin Yutang.
My question is, does this apply here? Just a thought.
That quote could apply if the Founding Fathers were hoping that since slavery was nonessential and wrong it would eliminate itself?.. It depends on your opinion and how you see things.
Like Courtney and Wiley said and whoever else also agrees with them...
the Founding Fathers did what they could to keep everything stable. I really like the teetering table analogy with knocking out one of its legs since the South's economy was largely based on agriculture which slaves did all the work for.
Yes, i believe that our founding fathers did the right thing by leaving out the issue of slavery in the constitution. If the founding fathers would have spoken out about slavery how would the whole population of slave owners and farmers cope with the end of slavery.At this point of time slavery was a very important issue in the south because of agriculture, but if the slaves became free there would be a huge decrease in crop growth and plantations would slowly die. Just think where would the African Americans be right now if the founding fathers had debated to free the slaves? So by that being done is how the united states came to be.
i strongly agree with Mr. Chat about it was not just a black and white situation it was more. And yes, i agree that it wasn't necessarily the right thing to do but it was still necessary.
Mr. Chat, keep it pithy. That book of yours was quite an eye opener if not an eye sore. Although you did make some strong points in it. Also, you never gave a definitive answer on your opinion, and personally id like to see one if you don't mind. That is all.
P.S. You would make a darn good lawyer some day my friend.
I believe the founding fathers were correct when they decided not to address the issue of slavery in the Constitution. Although slavery was an evil practice that should have been eliminated as soon as possible, the union of the colonies was far more important. The colonies may have split over the decision of whether slavery should be abolished or not, especially since the south wanted to keep slavery intact. The north wanted slavery to be abolished as quickly as possible, much to the dismay of the south, and this division in thought could have fractured the loose conglomeration of colonies. The founding fathers chose to not risk a fracturing of the colonies, knowing that a future United States may not have formed if disagreement between the colonies occurred. Ultimately, the fathers were forward to a future of a united country among the colonies. We may not be here to day if it wasn't for the wisdom of the founding fathers.
I agree with Lord Voldemort when he says that abolishing slavery was as important as abolishing slavery at the right time. If the fathers had abolished slavery at the wrong time, this country may never have been formed.
I also agree with Wiley when he says that the founding fathers may have made the right political choice, but not necessarily the correct moral choice. The founding fathers had to balance the tough issue of balancing important moral choices with important political choices. Sometimes the best moral choice may not be the best political choice, and vice versa.
The Founding Fathers made the right decision for the temporary sake of the country, but not for the sake of the thousands of slaves who inhabited it. The South would never agree to a constitution that condemned slavery in any way whatsoever. Since the southern states relied on slavery to support their agricultural economy, the representatives from these states would obviously deny any clauses within the Constitution that suggested an end or restriction to slavery. In the end, the decision to remain silent on the issue of slavery was a compromise between the good of the infant country and the good of the enslaved. In the short-term, the Constitution's silence toward slavery provided for a document that both the North and South would agree to. However, by ignoring this issue, the conflict of interest between the two regions remained unsolved, leading to the culmination of bitter resentment between the North and South that manifested itself in the Civil War.
This Guy: I agree. The Founding Fathers regarded political unity as a greater priority than the civil rights of slaves.
ana: Yes, because the Founding Fathers failed to address slavery, the issue was resolved on the battle field instead of in congressional meetings.
Mr. Chat: You make a good arguement, but perhaps you could have proved it in less than three parts. You rival Madison.
The founding fathers made the right choice in excluding slavery from the constitution as the point of the Constitutional Convention was to form a country. The decision definitley had some negative consequences, but of course it had the most important consequence, forming a nation. There were definitley more important issues on hand, such as the issue of representation. Also, because there were five states who were in favor of slavery, and nine state-votes were needed to ratify the constitution. As mr. Max would say, you do the math. Another important thing to consider is the fact that the north did not necessasarily believe in integration. Even though today it is obvious that what happened was wrong, in their time they believed people of different colors were lesser. And we can't say that slavery was completely ignored. There was of course the 3/5 compromise, which coutned slaves as 3/5s of a white, and of course they also said that the slave trade could be abolished in 1807.
I agree with Chelsey, by ignoring the issue, they must have assumed that it would go away. If they truly wanted slavery to go on forever they would have done something about it. If someone wanted slavery to be abolished then they would try again and again. Did the Founding Fathers think that by pushing the topic aside, it would not resurface?
Joe, i velieve you made a great point, as the civil war was the bloodiest war in american history, and had that happened after the constitution, we may not be in a slave free country
And mr plath, i dont believe the north wanted slavery abolished as quickly as possible, as it would take many years for that to actually happen (1864 i believe)
In my opinion, the Founding Father's made the right decision in ignoring the issue of slavery in the Constitution. If they would have addressed slavery, the South would have been upset and separated from the Union. With the South bailing out, the United States as we know it today could very well be nonexistent. Even though the Founding Father's sort of passed off the responsibility of dealing with slavery, it was needed. Thanks to them, we now not only have no slavery, but we are also able to live in this country. Even though there were downfalls to ignoring the issue, in the end, it was the right decision.
Great job so far! I have thoroughly enjoyed reading your posts so far. I'm still trying to get my hands around Mr. Chat's train of thought but I'll figure it out! One thought for you to ponder. It's easy for you and I to say that the Founding Fathers did the right thing by ignoring the issue of slavery but try telling that to an African American who lived their entire life under the auspices of slavery. Just a thought. See you all tomorrow.
I really liked This Guy's quote.. "Besides the noble art of getting things done, there is a nobler art of leaving things undone. The wisdom of life consists in the elimination of the nonessentials." Lin Yutang. I think that it does apply to this situation. It was much better to "leave things undone" at that period in time.
Even though I feel that they did the right thing, Mr. Max has really made me think... How would you feel if you were a slave back then? The issue would have needed to be solved right then and there.
Mr.Chat, here is my opinion, you wrote way too much. Anyway, I suppose you had a good argument, the Founding Fathers (not including Thomas Jefferson, Fernando Fairfax, and Benjamin Franklin and others) did feel they were making the right decision. However, they were doing what they believed was best for them, without taking any time to think of how the slaves felt being treated like animals- because they didn't care. Perhaps some lives could have been spared, yet we will never know.
The founding fathers made the right choice at the time, excluding the issue of slavery. Our nation was at the time held together by thin string and it was important to get a government set up. Without the support of the pro-slavery southern states, the constitution would most likely not have been signed and our young nation would have fallen apart. It is sad to think that if we had sooner addressed slavery we could have avoided things like, the Civil War, in which many American lives were lost. If we had been divided right from the start our nation would not be what it is today. It seems that we fought through things like the Civil War to strengthen ourselves and become the strong united nation we are today. The founding fathers may have at the time just wanted to avoid the arguments the issue of slavery would have caused for the constitution, but in the long run it seems that it turned out to be the right decision. Our nation was too fragile to have conflict from within. Slavery and civil rights are issues that in some areas are still a problem today and I think that it is important to realize that are nation has become such a diverse place, emphasized by the election of the first Black President: Barack Obama. The issue of slavery was an important one, but I am glad that it was not included in our constitution when it was first put together, because we may have lost the support of the southern states, and the nation would have crumbled.
The Founding Fathers did make the right decision by ignoring the issue of slavery. Yes, it was bound to come up eventually, but they all knew that. However, if they had made the decision to talk about slavery, the Founding Fathers might not have gotten the Southern colonies’ approval at the Constitutional Convention-which would be needed since nine of the colonies must approve it first. If the Fathers would have had tried to resolve the issue of slavery at the Constitutional Convention, we might not have to result we do today. The Fathers could have had to compromise more and give into the Southerners’ ideas in order to get them to agree to approve the Constitution.
In my opinion the Founding Fathers did the right thing when they didn't address slavery in the Constitutional Convention. It might of looked like they were trying to just trying to ignore the issue completely but, by leaving slavery out of the Constitutional Convention they saved our country. Our Founding Fathers were very smart and could tell that the U.S. was not yet strong enough to deal with the issue presently. If the Founding Fathers took the problem of slavery head on there would have been lots of friction between the North and South and there would most likely be no United States today.
Courtney made a really god point about how the founding fathers held off the issue, even though it would come up again and again, for the sake of the Country. And America could not of handled a Civil War right after a Revolution.
Yes, I do believe that the Founding Fathers made the right decision despite their own virtues being a hypocrisy. With the American Revolution ending, and the Articles only winning by a margin- against Great Britain's "JV team"- it would be a termendous mistake to address a situation that had no offered solution, other than dividing an already young country. With the split of governments it would also decrease the control of it's citizens, a unified resistance to any foreign threats, and also escalate tension between the northern and southern states. The tension could very easily then break out into an unwarrented civil war, before our country had the economic or political stability to wage a civil war. The economic's were still at an early age within our country, only just now having the chance to prosper - and with a civil war, it would prevent it from blossoming. Politically the Articles had only just won the war with Britain solely because France and Spain stuck out their neck against Great Britain; by debating rights that only lead to internal conflict would show the world that we were immature and unable to have a unified front. And with this being displayed to the world, I can guarantee you that the French or the Spainish would ever come to our aid again.
While morally I disagree, the fact of the matter is that the Founding Fathers made the right choice by waiting for the right time to fight this controversal issue - the start of a country obviously not being the best time.
Chelsey makes a very good point. That despite the time at which they decided to discuss slavery, "either way the slaves had no say in what was going to happen to them." This is so true.
I agree with Jeffrey. There were more important things to deal with. Now that we look back on it of course slavery was completely wrong but they did think people were lesser because of there skin color. As a Country we have dealt with and still are dealing with the issue of race and indviduals will probably be doing this forever.
I agree with Jeffery on his opinion, but the only real reasoning the southern states made the push for the 3/5th's Compromise was to increase their population and balance the powers between the north and south. Southerns were afraid of the north having too much power and abolishing slavery all together, at that time the compromise wasn't a moral issue of equality for African-Americans, but a way to ensure the continuing enslavement of African-Americans
I think the founding fathers made the right choice in not mentioning slavery. Now before you jump me.... you have to understand that during that time period not only was slavery considered natural, it was considered necessary. America was still a young country who in NO WAY could afford to lose support on it's own turf and, even though the U.S. had just had a triumphant victory over Britain it wasn't all peace, love, rainbows, and unicorns, in fact in my opinion the U.S. was even more vunerable to a mutiny then before or during the Revolutionary War.Yes we all know ALL men are supposedly created equal, and racism is bad yadda yadda yadda. But, the founding fathers were stuck between a rock and a hard place, they could roll with their believes and flat out say slavery was an abomination, and risk losing the support of the rich, influential southerners, thus losing the economic powerhouse that was the south or....... hop to the other side of the fence and claim that slavery is delightful thus creating a situation that not only angers the politically strongwilled north but helps an even sicker enviroment for rebellion to flourish.The founding fathers chose the only rational desicion, that some politicians still make today,avoid a taboo subject to protect the nation.While some may call this move irresponsible and/or thoughtless i.e. "HOW COULD THE FOUNDING FATHERS LEAVE SUCH A LARGE PROBLEM FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS TO SOLVE?!" the truth is they didn't. Unlike some of our ummmmmmm presidents *cough* bush *cough* I believe they understood what they were doing, I mean elastic claus hello? The founding father chose to avoid this topic yes.... but they had set up a way to make it 10 no 30 no 66.66666 percent easier to politically remedy such a serious situation, the only question was WHEN was the country was actually economically, politically, and socially staple enough for such a change.
I disagree with ana, the thought of "avoiding the civil war" struck a chord with me. You're right, having the situation discussed and solved would have made the Civil War never happen - in 1861 that is. But it would have frankly pushed the date forward, causing a civil war earlier in our history. The Founding Fathers always knew that the situation of slavery would never fade away - which is why they were able to put it aside for a later date, knowing it would still be there.
so alot has happened while I last logged on, but replying to Mr. Max it wasn't a very light decicion to just push it off to a later time. they had practically more blacks in the south than whites, they were tredding on very thin ice when for after the war alot was promised to them(freedom) by several different sources.also the pure agony to the blacks when they realized that they and their children would still be under a foul ruling must have caused concern with the Founding Fathers since that too could cause a riot in an already loosly held together country.
On one hand, I can understand on some level why the Founding Fathers decided to avoid the subject of slavery at the Constitutional Convention. America was a newly founded country and to bring up such a touchy, controversial issue would not only be rather unwise, but would risk creating a rift between the North and the South. On the other hand, ignoring millions of sentient human beings based on the color of their skin and the country of their origin can be described as nothing less than myopic and insulting to the moral constitution of the Founding Fathers. America had fought for years to gain the rights and freedoms they knew that they should be awarded purely because they were humans. After experiencing the maltreatment that accompanied being colonists, it is completely inexcusable that the very same colonists would immediately turn around and balefully remain ignorant of the freedoms that were undoubtedly craved by slaves. Overall, I believe the Founding Fathers' actions towards slavery, while based on somewhat logical trains of thought, were reprehensible.
This is an iffy topic. If I say I think they did the right thing, I'm racist. If I say otherwise, I'm ignorant. Personally, I think both ways would have had positive outcomes, but which would have more? I believe the Founding Fathers did the right thing. Sure, its morally wrong and its tragic that we have that in our past, but look where we are now! Would we have all these equality laws if it weren't for their stubbornness to do anything on the topic? I don't think they were just lazy, I think the Founding Fathers actually had a clue what they were doing, and had good reasoning not to touch on the topic back then. The colonies were just getting started, just beginning to come together. If we had abolished slavery at what seems like the preferred time, all the work done to unite and bring the colonies together would have been erased and began to regress. We were too fragile at the time to worry about something that was helping us so much in our desperate time of need.
I do believe that during the Constitutional Convention, the Founding Fathers made the right decision in disregarding the issue of slavery. At the time, too many people were dependent on slaves. This subject came up quite a bit during the convention, and, though it was clear that a lot of the founders were opposed to slavery, it could not have been abolished because most of the southern states were in favor of it. The constitution couldn't have been put into effect without the support of the South. The slave trade was huge at the time, and it would have been hard to just end it like that. The Founders knew that it it was not yet time to try and resolve the issue of slavery in America.
I agree with Tub-O Jones in regards to Samantha's post. And might I just thank you. I guess some people just don't understand that a black today, and a black back then were muuuuuch different. Uhh, hello? The North didn't like them either, and they didn't necessarily think it was wrong to enslave them, they just didn't want them in their land. How is that so much better?
While I do not agree entirely with eblinn, I feel that he made a logical argument. I agree with his contention that bringing up such a controversial issue as slavery would probably have created friction between the North and the South.
Wiley, while I agree that the decision to ignore slavery was not entirely correct, I have to ask, do you honestly believe that their decision to ignore the topic of slavery was not thought out? I am, of course, not sure how thought out it was as I was not there, but I can only imagine that it was pondered long and hard before the decision was finally made. Let me know.
Samantha.. I don't know quite how to respond. I know that if I had been a slave back then, I would have wanted slavery abolished right then and there; yes, that is true. However, that's not the question. The question is whether or not the Founding Fathers did the right thing. I would never want to be in the position of the poor black souls, and thankfully, I am not. So that is rather irrelevant, and shouldn't influence your argument.
Hi yall, if you look at it from the founding father's perspective, they were still racist to a point, some more than others, and they put the problems of the economy, such as the nonuniform currency, and the crises with the inconsistent laws, and other problems that stemmed from the weak central government ahead of the problem of the enslavement of a group that some thought deserved less rights. I am not justifying, just explaining. From the aspect of the possibility of economy getting destroyed, we see that the dependency on slave labor only got worse in the south, but then again, hindsight is 20/20. Also, after the civil war, the economy didn't utterly collapse even though we had great expenditures and the slaves were no longer slaves. The South was incredibly hurt during the Civil War and it left its scars, but those who were enslaved didn't just pack up and leave. They had no place to go and thus became tenant farmers and the only pockets that got hurt were the farmers who lost land to the former slaves. Plus, at the time of the Civil War, the North was much wealthier, so slavery didn't make the South crazy rich or anything.
Tub-O Jones, as shown by many novels, especially Douglas' narrative, slavery was not better than being free, maybe for a small few, but freedom is priceless. Though your first statement of racism not ending is true. Even today there are still resentments in the South towards those of black skin.
Mr. Chat, your superfluous words and over-extended metaphors give rise to entertainment and maybe even intrigue, but also to tiredness as I read and wait for the point to all your words. I would like your opinion and the reasons behind them, not reasons for using the shift key or any other personal insights into your insignificant, yet bizarre, life. But I will agree with Lord Voldemort that you do have some good insight and so I will abstain from criticizing any more except to correct that slavery itself was called the "necessary evil" not the postponing/ignoring of the topic of slavery.
Ressul, it is impossible to know how the present could be different if they did make the other choice. Maybe the territory of a country would be different, maybe there would be 2 or three countries, but just because it would be different doesn't mean it would be worse. It could have been better or even similar. And the Founding Fathers must have known that they were being hypocritical, for the revolutionary idea of all humans being equal led to the French Revolution which led to slave revolts in present day Haiti which sparked action against the European presence in South America who treated the original residents as a lower breed, similar to the black status in America. Other nations and people realized the full extant of human equality, but not all dared to follow through with the actions associated with the idea.
I agree with Goofy Kid. If the Founding Fathers had tried to resolve the issue of slavery, they might not have gotten the Southern colonies’ approval, which was very much needed.
Mr. Potter also has a good point. Without the support of the Southern colonies, the constitution would probably have not been signed, resulting in the downfall of our young nation.
I believe that the founding fathers made the correct decision by ignoring the issue of slavery during the constitutional convention. At this point in time, America was not very closely knit and may not have been able to withstand the controversial issue of slavery. The chances are that if it was outlawed, the founding fathers would lose support of the southern states who were heavily dependent on slaves and would therefore have been unable to put the constitution into effect. Although slavery is indeed immoral and always has been, due to circumstances of the time period, allowing it to survive was vital to the formation of our country as we know it today.
Well, they did make the right decision, because if they had not given both sides a little of what each wanted, there would be no United States of America today. Obviously the North and South had different views on slavery, not so much of black people themselves, just the act of slavery; which is why the North and South ended up making so many different terms as far as voting and what not. Had both sides not made compromises and they had abolished it or kept going with it without some kind of expiration date of resolution to the problem; they would have seen a split down our blossoming country. The North was already threatening to secede from the rest of the colonies because they didn't want to be associated with slavery, it was filth to them. So yes, they made an excellent choice and ultimately people suffered, but that is just an unfortunate price we had to pay to keep our country strong. It's sad but it's true. Had they not made that choice, who knows what we would be today.
I agree with Alec, he said that though many of the founding fathers were opposed to slavery, they were aware that this was not the time to solve the problem. This decision was most likely based entirely off of circumstances, sometimes its just not the right time to take action even though it might be for good reasons.
Mr. Max said it is easy for any of us to say they made the right decision when we were not the victims in the situation, and i agree that if i were in their position i would probably think differently, however that was not the position the founding fathers were in. These men were forming a nation, In order to make something great sacrifice is absolutely necessary whether it be from this group or that, someone will usually suffer. Being a leader sometimes means making those hard decisions,stepping away from your human compassion and see the picture as a whole rather than close up. The slaves were wrongly forced into this postion, but by this point in time no one had an option anymore. Although it may be cold-hearted, it had to be done, the world isnt perfect.
I have to take the position that the Founding Fathers made the correct decision. While it is easy for us to look back in hindsight and say what a terrible or 'curious' institution slavery was, look at it from their perspective. They just got done fighting a war for their independence, the Articles of Confederation were not working out so great, and they knew that if they could just get the Constitution to pass, they would be creating the most powerful country in the world. They recognized the importance and the need for change and for a stronger central government. I mean come on, they were nearly overthrown by a couple of farmers! If slavery had been included, the Constitution would not have passed. There is no question about it. The odds were against it, and it was a miracle that it was ratified in the first place.
The Founding Fathers as they were known were, well, fathers. And let's just face the facts, fathers don't always know what's best for their kids. They did their best with the cards they were dealt and although millions died in the struggle based off their decision, everything worked out in the end. It's hard to say whether leaving the slavery issue up to future generations was the correct choice or not. who am i to say what is right or wrong when even some of the greatest minds in history who were actually alive during this time period were completely dumbfounded by the same question? If I had to choose though, I would have to say the Founding Fathers were right in what they did. Everything in this world comes with a sacrifice, nothing is ever fair. It wasn't fair that blacks had to be enslaved after the Founding Fathers didn't end slavery right then and there and the lives sacrificed in the Civil War may be viewed as an unnecessary loss but in reality, America would not be the same or may not even exist at all today if things had been any different. Their decision made on the slavery issue made logical sense. Morally.. not so much. Things usually always get worse before they get better which is exactly what happened with America.
I totally stand by what Ressul said. It was a tough decision by any standard, and if your conscious is telling you that it's wrong than awesome. That is what should be happening. I just cannot fathom the internal debates that went on within those incredible people because their decisions would change the course of history and they knew it!
To Samantha: I have been thinking about it and I still agree that they made the right choice, but they should have gone with Jefferson's idea of choosing a date in the future and saying that any slave born after that date was a free person. That way, it would not have affected the living generation.
I do believe that the founding fathers made the correct decision by avoiding the topic of slavery. I agree because at the time of the Constitutional Convention slavery was a large part of everyday life for the colonies. If they had decided to abolish slavery there would have been a great upset among the colonies. The start of America was weak to begin with. By trying to abolish slavery I am confident that the Constitution would have been a failure. By avoiding this there would be higher hopes that the colonies would be united and the Constitution would have been a success. Although I do believe slavery is wrong and that it is horrific that blacks were considered "animals", in that time period they were a good addition to hard working areas and they were easy to control. It was a common and widely accepted practice and by trying to start America by taking away slavery would have most likely concluded in a failure. The founding fathers did make the best decision at the time and because of it the Constitution came together despite the already shaky start.
I agree with Shea's thoughts on the colonies not being closely knit and that an issue so large as slavery could have completely torn them apart. I also agree on his comment on the founding father's losing support of the southern states. This would have been a huge lost to the founding fathers to not have that support, therefore, they made the right decision.
I disagree with CMONTGOMERY. She said that the founding fathers did not make the right decision because they just side stepped a huge problem which is partly true. But what would have happened if they put a stop to slavery? Everything that they couldn't afford to happen, lost support, anger, no stability, and definitely not unification. Maybe they didn't think the problem would go away, maybe they did, but at the time of the convention slavery was way to common to just be cut off. America wouldn't have happened. We needed the founding fathers to step back and see how things went. It was to early for them to make such a big decision.
I honestly believe that for the time being they had made the right decision. Being as it was, the colonies were still pretty weak in the unity department. If the Founding Brothers were to have raised the discussion about slavery at that point way early on, America as we know it would be nonexistent right now. First of all, the colonies had just got out of fighting with England for their independence. It may have only been purely out of luck on account of England concentrating their major war efforts with their other feuding European neighbors, like the Irish also seeking independence through a bit of rebellion, as well as the French just waiting for the perfect chance to strike. With a country like America a few thousand miles away, there was just no plausible way with everything else in their hands, which is why we technically won. With this though came a new controversy regarding the unity and power of the states. This unity, however, was so weak then, that if the Founding Brothers really had brought slavery into the issue, it would've resulting in another almost definite war this time between the North and the South. This would obviously eventually occur in the future and become known as the Civil War, but by then it would be the correct time to do so. The colonies only had their weak Articles of Confederation, which needed a lot of revising anyway, due to the colonies disliking it, fearing for their own individual power. Not wanting an all new government resulting in the same dominating one as they had sought freedom from in England just recently, the Founding Brothers were to simply revise them, yet they were scrapped and out from under them came the entirely original document that would soon become our present day Constitution, though of course revised a bit since its day considering much drastic change since then. Bringing the issue up so early, would've erupted a totally different society, most likely causing them to become so querulous regarding slavery that even after a war they would disperse elsewhere, sinking miserably into an era of disunity that they could in no plausible way afford. The Founding Brothers, as you can clearly infer, had made the best decision at the time. It may have been completely immoral, as Wiley had put, but it was the right choice because their good sense had saved this country an immense load of trouble during a time when it was least needed. For if they had, as Ciara suggested, they would've faced a most terrible truth, as I've mentioned earlier, which is why I don't quite comply with her theory. I remain with my original belief, however, i enjoyed reading their eloquently written responses. (:
I believe the founding fathers made the right decision to not bring up slavery at the Constitutional convention. At the time it was obvious the five southern states would not agree with abolishing slavery, it was also obvious the northern states would not agree with keeping slavery the way it was.Since the states could not agree on this subject, they made the right decision to not bring it up. At this time it was so crucial that the states not fall apart and separate, with abolished slavery not much would have been accomplished with just the eight northern colonies, and it is likely the south would have rebelled. With the looming threat of rebellion and separation, how could they bring it up? They did everything else in their power to set the Constitution up in a way that it would be possible for future generations to finally rid of it. I believe it was this decision that kept our country from turning into Europe, with many small countries instead being unified like the United States. Besides, during this time it was true that some rights were given to slaves. The south agreed to stop the slave trade (Not much of a forfeit, but still better than nothing) as well as counting each slave as 3/5 a person. These seem inhumane now, to count them as only 60% of a person, but at the time it was probably a big triumph for the slaves.
Michael Case wrote an interesting comment which pointed out something I did not think about. I agree with his statement. The colonies had just fought Great Britain and it was important to just get the Constitution passed and accepted. There was enough on the founding fathers' plate as it was, dealing with independence for the first time and trying to rebuild after the Revolutionary War, adding the issue of slavery on top probably would have been their undoing.
I just spent about ten minutes looking for Dex's stance on the subject, if he thought they made the right decision or not... I've yet to find it. He makes a good point, telling the facts without being influenced by his opinion to leave out certain things. However, this blog is to make an opinion based off the facts (Which most of us know thanks to Mr. Max, no need to say them all over again) to try to prove one way or the other. You talk down to Mr. Chat but you did not include a straight opinion either.
Leaving the issue of slavery for later discussions was a good decision by the Founding Fathers. If they had talked about it, and tried to argue the problem out, there would probably be no country. The slave states would have refused to give up their slaves, and the non slave states would never have agreed to have them. The states would have been more divided than they had in the civil war, and would have divided themselves into separate countries based upon their states as it had been with the colonies. The civil war would not have happened, and the United States would look more like Europe with small, separate countries strewn throughout. The divided countries would have started to fight over land, and their boundaries, and other wars would have risen up from that turmoil. If the founding fathers had discussed the issue of slavery, there would be no country to have a civil war in, and nothing to fight for. Slaves would probably still be allowed in the southern “countries” today, and life would be completely different. It was right of the founding fathers to ignore the slavery problem and to focus on uniting the new nation instead.
I disagreed with Peach, because the population really wouldn't have changed matters too much. The fact that they were disunified makes more of an impact on the issue of slavery, because if they had talked about it before being unifed there would be seperate countries, regardless of the population.
I agree with AFitzgerald, though I disagree on his stand. I don't think that the hardness of ending the slave trade had anything to do with their decision to ignore the slavery issue. The slave trade would have been difficult to overcome, regardless of the time period.
Well KatieLynn, just as the slaver owners were more superior than most of the slaves, I am more superior than most of you, and by you, I mean everybody else on this blog. I am not saying that slave owners and slaves were not equal on the human rights stance (though they were not treated that way), but obviously they were more superior in their education and their economic status. This was not because of who they are as people, but due to their positions, they had more access to education and were obviously more wealthy. Well, I may not be more wealthy, but I am rich, rich with insight and knowledge, something that due to your position you simply will not gain that level of intelligence, or more realistically cannot gain it. So as you criticize my lack of straight forward opinion may you note two things: 1. I never criticized Mr. Chat for not giving his opinion, just simply giving excess information irrelevant to the case at hand. 2. I need not give my opinion in such simple terms for my superiority deems it unnecessary to stoop down to your level giving baseless opinions. Though as I am not unreasonable I will admit that I purposefully omitted a opinion on the actual topic, instead giving time to try to point out facts that some may have not considered.
And now finally, I am sorry it took you ten minutes to read my little piece and realize that I did not agree or disagree to the Founding Father's decisions. Again, I will confess, my second paragraph of my earlier post was poorly written. May I also reiterate that many people say it was necessary to keep our nation together, but was it completely necessary. Do we think that Britain would suddenly come back and try to take control again after signing the treaty of Paris. In other countries all around the world slavery ended in the 1800s, so if the nation did split and the southern part became a slave holding country, it is possible it would have changed its ways on its own. We cannot say that everything would have been terrible if the country split. Who knows how things may have been if they did split and form the United States and then some other southern nation. Though I am sure territorial disputes would incur in the future and maybe the northern states would even usurp the south due to their technological advantages, but that is all speculation.
The founding fathers had no choice but to keep the issue of slavery out of discussion in the Constitutional Convention. If they had, It would have taken a long time to get the divided states to join the union on their own free will. 5 out of the 13 colonies did not want slavery to be abolished. The founding fathers decided to let the future generation decide the fate of slavery. Of course, the future generation, but through war. The founding fathers knew that the south would not approve of this even if it meant war. It was a matter of when the war was to be fought.
Oh my goodness, gosh Dex, I didn't mean to set you off, but wow... I didn't mean for my blog to insult you in anyway... I don't think you should have said some of the things you did though, I know you view yourself as 'superior' but this blog wasn't set up for you to talk down to others...
haha, KatieLynn, finely said. You are right, after all: "Insults are the arguments employed by those who are in the wrong." -Jean-Jacques Rousseau But I will not consider myself in the wrong considering all my comments were jocular.
the founding fathers did the right thing by not bringing up slavery at the constitional covention. it would of ended really bad if they had brought it up. i mean there would be no end to it. i think that by not talking about it, it amde our country what the great country we are today. the founding fathers had in mind that the north did not like slavery and that was it and that south did like slavery. they new the only way to become a whole, and great nation was not to bring it up.
i agree with shabbir an 100%. they new what they did at the convention it was going to be great for there great grand children. that they new they could come over any obsticale even if it cost alot of lives. they something greater than themselves in the court house.
i agree with kimberly. the colonies were in a tight fix with great britian. while they were fighting with gb who was going to grow and harvest the food. the woman sure were not going to do that because they had the children and the house to take care of. so they put it all on the slaves. do not get me wrong, slavery is wrong and inhumane. but if they would of abolished slavery who was going to go to war and grow crops. also the colonies were really weak to start off and they did not need a big argument to start after their independence. i stand right beside kim on this one.
I agree with Joe. I believe that it was right for the founding fathers to not adress the issue of slavery at the constitutional congress. At the time the country was to weak, and just starting out; it was to early to have started talking about issues that went against the concept of unity. If the topic of slavery would have been brought up during the constitutional congress, the North and South would have started fueding, at a time when the country lacked unity, which could have jeopordized the future of America.
No, the Founding Fathers did not make the right decision by avoiding the issue on slavery. The topic was going to come up agian whether they liked it or not. The Founding Fathers should have just dealt with the problem when it had came up. If the people wanted the slavery to go away bad enough then the were going to bring the issue back up. Even if it was 1799 or 1808. The north wanted to free the slaves and send them back to their place of origin, while the south wanted to keep them as slaves. The thing that confuses me is either way the slaves had no say in what was going to happen to them.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the founding fathers made a move that was very short-sighted and not thought out. However, in a situation like that where one government must be approved by a collection of states, sometimes things must be pushed aside to make untiy. I believe this issue should have at least been addressed, it could have lessened the consequences instead of just ignoring it. However, I guess if they did then none of the southern states would have gave this nation another thought. Politics like this must have made the Founding Fathers want to eat their own shoes.
ReplyDeleteNo, the Founding Fathers did not make the right move at the Constitutional Convention. They believed that slavery would exist forever. By avoiding the topic, the Fathers thought that the issue would go away. However, if the Founding Fathers had dealt with the topic of slavery, fewer problems might have occurred. The north did not want people kept as slaves, but they did not want those people to come to the north. The Founding Fathers were unsure how to deal with the situation. So, by pushing it aside they thought they were doing what was right.
ReplyDeleteI think that given the circumstances the founding fathers did do the right thing, but not the moral. If they followed their moral instinct we would all be in New Europe not America, because the whole country would have split and after the north and the south split all of the states would want to be on their own, hence a second Europe. So by keeping the country safe while it was still under the shaky foundation of the Articles of Confederation, they did the right thing from a purley perserving standpoint.
ReplyDeletePart 1: The Initiation
ReplyDeleteThe topic of slavery is not so simple that you can respond to it with the black and white standards of yes or no. While it may technically be true that you either believe that the Founding Fathers were right or wrong, to balance your terms on such a elementary see-saw is apathetic at best. I believe that the Founding Fathers made the right decision by delaying the issue of slavery. See? You don't even have to know me in real life to deduce that I'm an insensitive human being. Regardless, I could continue to defend my view with similarly shoddy "facts" and observations, but it wouldn't make one deal of difference in changing the conjecture you may or may not derive from such a statement; because you see, it isn't so much that I feel that the Founding Fathers did what was right, as much as they did what was necessary.
*sigh*
I understand that I'm supposed to state my opinion and proceed to explain my opinion, before I can even begin to delve into the opinions of you, my peers. I feel like a child who is about to jump into a ball pit, but withheld and reminded that he must first take off his shoes. The thing is, I'll just end up repeating myself as I address the your cursory conclusions, and while I understand that some require the mallet of reason to repetitively hammer the nail of competence into their thick skulls, you guys are frankly not worth my time. So with that prolonged introduction, I shove my way past the Chuck E' Cheese employee and dive headfirst into the endless mass of plastic spheres filled with joy, shoes intact.
Part 2: Putting our issues on a boat and casting them away.
ReplyDelete@ Chelsey Schaff
You know what, you're absolutely right; slavery isn't just going to go away! In fact, it didn't, and was finally resolved at the cost of over a million human casualties in the Civil War. I'm not one to judge, but by observing your devout and unwavering stance on the rights of blacks, I don't thing I am stepping out of my bounds by saying that you are not like me, and are actually a very caring person. Now, I would pose the question of which is worse, a million dead or a million bound to the chains of servitude?- but some prefer to euthanize the horse. The fact is, from the time of the Articles of Confederation to the time of the Convention of "Demigods" , America was hardly a decade old. Even when the Constitutional Convention discussed the Quaker petition addressing the emancipation of slaves, it was only 1790.
Sorry to take a moment to intervene, but you said 1799 to 1808, which is a fair timeframe since slave trade was promised to not be prohibited until 1808, but we're talking about the late 80's to early 90's here. I mean, I consider myself a fashionably late person myself, but even I would arrive before there was no more punch in the bowl.
Now where was I? Oh yes, the emancipation of slaves at the cost of a million American lives. The United States was a new country loosely held together by the Articles of Confederation before they were replaced by the Constitution we still use to this day. Here, I'll humor you and pretend that the Founding Fathers did what was morally correct and freed the slaves, now what? Well I guess we all just sit down and enjoy some tea and crumpets (this is 18th century America, not 21st. They didn't have beer and buffalo wings quite yet). Let's just wait for the Southern States to ratify our Constitution giving us 5 of the 9 states out of 13 needed . Don't even mind that many of the southern aristocrats, who were ex-supporters of the British during our revolution until they Brits started promising freedom to their slaves, and their possible outrage. We made it through one revolution, surely we can withstand another. While we're at it, glory to the North!- for they are jolly good fellows,
For they are jolly good fellows,
For they are jolly good fellows!
And nobody can deny.
Part 3: No more!
ReplyDeleteWow, that really put a strain on my sanity. I hate to admit it, but I cannot maintain these charades any longer. No, the Southern States would NOT ratify our constitution because they WOULD be pissed due to the fact that they WERE disgruntled by England's promises to their slaves and would not care for us doing the same, so our Constitution WOULD NOT get passed. Ahem, forgive the abundant use of the shift key, but regrettably, Blogspot does not allow me to show emphasis any other way. Back on topic: The North disliked the slaves as much of the South, but they realized that by it was hypocritical to deny slaves the same rights when our Declaration of Independence said "all men are created equal". The truth of the matter is, they just didn't want to feel the guilt, but had no idea what to do with the slaves. Sure, shipping them back to Africa from whence they came was an idea, but honestly?-Sending them out to sea in hopes of never seeing them again is practically a literal representation of the neglect you are so openly opposed to.
And that is merely addressing the what, not the how. How were they supposed to free the slaves? They couldn't simply just take them from their masters without any compensation. Well, literally they could, but the American Revolution was in direct response to England's strong and oppressive government. What is a government that takes your physical property for not even a dime? Exactly. So compensation was needed, but it would cost Congress an estimate of over $200 million. Even selling its western land wouldn't give America enough funds to adequately emancipate slaves and continue to run a country bombarded by more pressing issues. What confuses me is how you can discard such insight, and be far more concerned about the feelings of the "animals" in this situation. Clearly the slaves wanted to be free, and if it was up to them, they would be. Questioning the obvious is futile, especially in a topic like this. We have a set of morals today that decry one and all equal to each other, regardless of race or creed. Like I said, this is not a simple "they were wrong because it is immoral" discussion, which leads me into...
Part 4: Short but sweet
ReplyDelete@This Guy
How myopic of you, and I say, with the amount of waffling going on hear it appears that you are having a regular political cookout.
@cmontgomery
Again with the negligence, the generalizations? Thomas Jefferson, Fernando Fairfax, Benjamin Franklin, these are only several of the many that opposed slavery and did not want to leave the issue unaddressed. Not all of the Founding Fathers shared the same beliefs. And what problems? Why exactly did they feel like what they were doing was right? Why don't you agree? Where do you actually stand?! I'll be sure to get ahold of This Guy and tell him to shoot you an invitation.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletePart 5: In Conclusion
ReplyDeleteChelsey was right, the issue of slavery wasn't going to go away. This Guy was right, because the South would not sign the Constitution and preserve unity. cmontgomery was right, the North didn't want the slaves either. These are all simple truths, but do not adequately defend your opinions that the Founding Fathers were wrong with their silence. They weren't short-sighted by any means, the topic of slavery was a painful, yet deeply debated, subject. The Founding Fathers needed to create a Constitution that would encourage the States to unite, not push each other away with a casual "oh well". As we will learn when we cover the Civil War, the resolution of this debate would be resolved at the cost of many lives, driving a nation to the brink of collapse. Should it have happened any sooner, while America was still merely an infant fresh out of the womb, we probably wouldn't be where we are today, writing on this blog as we are, discussing this very issue. Quoting James Madison who spoke these words when referring to slavery, the Founding Fathers' postponement of the slavery dilemma was "a necessary evil". Yes, it was morally wrong and hypocritical, but needed, for reasons I have already stated.
Oh, and please, for the sake of my sanity and your own reputation, think before you state an opinion, and know why you hold such an opinion. It does you and this debate no good if you base your conjectures and presumptions of the men of our past solely on the morals that come standard to many living Americans to this day. On a side note, I understand that my unrelenting and harsh critiques may have you shaken, but if you want to roll with this cool cat, learn how to swing. Now excuse me, I am off to feast on shoes complete with delicious apple fritters with honey-hazelnut glaze drizzled on top of potato skinned peaches. Ha!- and I thought that this composition was a delectable mouthful.
-Mr. Chat
No, the Founding Fathers did not make the right decision at the Constitutional Convention, by ignoring slavery. They taught avoiding the topic would be the best thing to do, but they didn't think of the possibility the problem would come up later on.I think the Founding Fathers should have just dealt with the problem when it came up. If they would have dealt with the situation of slavery in the Convention, there wouldn't have been so many problems to deal with later on, like the civil war. The Founding Fathers were unsure how to deal with the situation,and by pushing it aside they didn't solve anything.
ReplyDeleteThe founding fathers made the right decision at the time. They knew that slavery was a very important and fragile issue. IT would have been national suicide for them to have a civil conflict only a few years after ending a war for independence. The country was not yet big enough or strong/united enough for such and issue to be fully delt with. They knew that they needed to focus on forming a strong united nation before they focused on smaller more heated issues. The congress was not yet ready to deal with the subject of slavery. Congress realized this and knew that in the future their country would deal with it once and for all.
ReplyDeleteI personally side with Mr. Chat in that if you leave all of todays moral standards out and look at the straight facts of that day, they needed to just leave it on a shelf and come back when they had a step-stool with hand rails for added stability. now, do not take this as a cure all for any hard issue that may be in discussion today, some things just simply must be delt with at the time it arrises, but in this case the move to put it off for a later generation to solve was the right move, but at the cost of many lives.
ReplyDeleteWhere would we be today if they HAD opened up debate on slavery? Definitely not the world we live in today. With such a strong divide between the states unity wouldn't have happened for decades, maybe never. I think we can all agree You never want two large, aggressive, and contrasting lands next to each other.
ReplyDeleteFrom our experiences and teachings of course we see slavery as barbaric and ultimately wrong, but sometimes there is a difference between what you believe is right and what needs to be done. The Founding Father's understood this and acted accordingly.
I have to agree with both cmontgoeary and chelsey. The founding fathers did not do the right thing by not talking about slavery in the conventions.
ReplyDeleteBut after reading joe's comment, i get what his trying to say, and it makes sense.
They should of talk about slavery right there and then because this issue would of been brought up any way and they were not going to be gone any time soon. They were also reproducing at a faster rate then whites which meant that they were going to be harder to get rid of then what they thought. It would also cost them a lot of money to send them back to Africa and even leave them in debt. But if they had solved this problem then they would not have more complicated problems in the future like rebellions or civil wars. Either way though Blacks had no choice but to obey what they were told to do. The founding brothers also left slavery out because they believed slaves were 3/5 of a human which made them practically an animal. They thought that they had done the right thing at that time but in later years, it costs the life of many.
ReplyDeleteYes, the Founding Fathers did make the right decision because if they had faced the issue head on there is a possibility that they could have ended slavery but it would have ended in a civil war! The North had high intentions to end slavery, there is a possibility that they would get tired of fighting for someone else but the slaves would have joined the cause either way; and the South did not want to give their slaves the freedom they disserved, also the south did not want to loose their powers over their slaves and would there fore join the fight to ‘keep their rights”. Further on, by not fazing the issue the Founding Fathers gave those on both sides much to consider. The north was determined not to have slaves and therefore was making themselves prepared to live their lives without them, to look another way to solve their problem. The people became more modern, what used to once be disgraceful was now known as different cutlers, the people where able to know that even though some where whites they were not the same. There were many foreigners at that time and so the colonists were able to see many cultures, and see many different faces, and skin color. Those in the south could now see that even though they needed slaves they were recognizing the fact that slaves were humans, they were people. Continuing on, the Founding fathers did not have as much power because of the peoples distrust over them. Because of their resent independence over England, for the south by taking their slaves and giving them freedom it would have been as though being robbed of their property. If the Founding Fathers had continued and there is a possibility that the people would not follow the Articles of confederation and would be once again the thirteen colonies. The south seemed prepared to keep what they thought belonged to them. Lastly, the North would have won, there were more blacks then there were whites and had a more humane idea. Even those on the opposing line would have acknowledged it over time.
ReplyDeleteI agree with this Guy because I believe if the founding brothers thought the issue very thorouhgly they could of weighed the pro's and con's and they could of came up with a solution right there. But I also agree with Joe because the states weren't strong let alone united therefore slavery would have flopped. It is also good to let aside a delicate and fragile subject like slavery for futher conversation when everything got better.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Joe the Founding Fathers knew it was a delicate issue.
ReplyDeleteWiliy was right considering the situation the Founding fathers did what they could.
ReplyDeleteWoah, this is getting heavy. Well, in my personal opinion, I belive by leaving out the topic of slavery at the Constitutional Convention was the right thing to do. Although putting off the issue and leaving it to a later date seems like an attempt to save themselves the trouble, the men at the Convention's decision turned out quite nicely...eventually.
ReplyDeleteJust as important as abolishing slavery was abolishing slavery at the RIGHT time. The Founding Fathers could not spend all of their time dealing with one of the biggest issues that would cause an uproar if abolished, but rather should tackle the issues at hand that COULD be solved. Overall, the outcome of it all worked out just fine....(once again, eventually.)
Similar to what Wiley said, the abrupt extermination of slavery would be to sudden for the shaky table that was the Colonies to handle. As the table is slowly teetering back and forth, kicking out one of its strongest legs is not the best idea.
And as for Jace- whoops i mean Mr. Chat, Je suis d'accord avec vous! (I agree with you) Despite your continuous ranting, you make some excellent points that hopefully one day will open the eyes of Americans everywhere. *finger snaps*
ReplyDeleteI do believe the founding fathers made the right choice is first avoiding the issue of slavery. Although the issue would come up again and again, they held off for as long as possible for the sake of the country. Even though slavery is definitely a terrible act made by the American's in the South, confronting the issue would have caused further problems, and would have jeopardized the future of America. Think of what happened in the later years when slavery was decided to be abolished. There was a Civil War, and the most American casualties EVER occurred. Could we have afforded a Civil War right after a revolution? In short, no. Slavery did have to end eventually, but choosing to adhere to other issues first was important in the survival of the colonies.
ReplyDeleteAna, yes, the issue would come up later on, but at a more opportune time, when the country was stronger. Also, the Civil War would not have been avoided, in my opinion. Rather it would have come prematurely and the weak country was not prepared in the least for that massive of a conflict.
ReplyDeleteI also agree with Wiley, on every level. He pretty much worded it perfectly, because although the decision was short sided, it was the right thing to do.
ReplyDeleteI just logged on, and I must say was completly blown away by Mr. Chat's argument. It was very hard to pin down your exact view on things, shoes non-withstanding. I however was incredibly moved by his argument, and must say that a proper step back in my thinking is needed. As a side note, I was searching around the web, and found a nice liitle article about Roman Slavery, good to look at for a new idea or perspective. Now Excuse me while I leave the firing range.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.unrv.com/culture/roman-slavery.php
I think that the Founding Fathers did not make the right decision by intentionally avoiding and not addressing slavery but, because America was barely starting out and not yet completely stable, it was one that would not cause more instability. There were Founding Fathers that were anti-slavery but it was what was best for the unity of America. If slavery would have been addressed things today would be waayyyy different and the United States of America probably would not exist.
ReplyDeleteSide note, I just found this quote, for kicks. "Besides the noble art of getting things done, there is a nobler art of leaving things undone. The wisdom of life consists in the elimination of the nonessentials." Lin Yutang.
ReplyDeleteMy question is, does this apply here? Just a thought.
for This Guy's quote..
ReplyDeleteThat quote could apply if the Founding Fathers were hoping that since slavery was nonessential and wrong it would eliminate itself?.. It depends on your opinion and how you see things.
Like Courtney and Wiley said and whoever else also agrees with them...
ReplyDeletethe Founding Fathers did what they could to keep everything stable. I really like the teetering table analogy with knocking out one of its legs since the South's economy was largely based on agriculture which slaves did all the work for.
Yes, i believe that our founding fathers did the right thing by leaving out the issue of slavery in the constitution. If the founding fathers would have spoken out about slavery how would the whole population of slave owners and farmers cope with the end of slavery.At this point of time slavery was a very important issue in the south because of agriculture, but if the slaves became free there would be a huge decrease in crop growth and plantations would slowly die. Just think where would the African Americans be right now if the founding fathers had debated to free the slaves? So by that being done is how the united states came to be.
ReplyDeletei think we all know who Mr. Chat is
ReplyDeletei strongly agree with Mr. Chat about it was not just a black and white situation it was more. And yes, i agree that it wasn't necessarily the right thing to do but it was still necessary.
ReplyDeleteMr. Chat, keep it pithy. That book of yours was quite an eye opener if not an eye sore. Although you did make some strong points in it. Also, you never gave a definitive answer on your opinion, and personally id like to see one if you don't mind. That is all.
ReplyDeleteP.S.
You would make a darn good lawyer some day my friend.
I believe the founding fathers were correct when they decided not to address the issue of slavery in the Constitution. Although slavery was an evil practice that should have been eliminated as soon as possible, the union of the colonies was far more important. The colonies may have split over the decision of whether slavery should be abolished or not, especially since the south wanted to keep slavery intact. The north wanted slavery to be abolished as quickly as possible, much to the dismay of the south, and this division in thought could have fractured the loose conglomeration of colonies. The founding fathers chose to not risk a fracturing of the colonies, knowing that a future United States may not have formed if disagreement between the colonies occurred. Ultimately, the fathers were forward to a future of a united country among the colonies. We may not be here to day if it wasn't for the wisdom of the founding fathers.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Lord Voldemort when he says that abolishing slavery was as important as abolishing slavery at the right time. If the fathers had abolished slavery at the wrong time, this country may never have been formed.
ReplyDeleteI also agree with Wiley when he says that the founding fathers may have made the right political choice, but not necessarily the correct moral choice. The founding fathers had to balance the tough issue of balancing important moral choices with important political choices. Sometimes the best moral choice may not be the best political choice, and vice versa.
The Founding Fathers made the right decision for the temporary sake of the country, but not for the sake of the thousands of slaves who inhabited it. The South would never agree to a constitution that condemned slavery in any way whatsoever. Since the southern states relied on slavery to support their agricultural economy, the representatives from these states would obviously deny any clauses within the Constitution that suggested an end or restriction to slavery. In the end, the decision to remain silent on the issue of slavery was a compromise between the good of the infant country and the good of the enslaved. In the short-term, the Constitution's silence toward slavery provided for a document that both the North and South would agree to. However, by ignoring this issue, the conflict of interest between the two regions remained unsolved, leading to the culmination of bitter resentment between the North and South that manifested itself in the Civil War.
ReplyDeleteThis Guy: I agree. The Founding Fathers regarded political unity as a greater priority than the civil rights of slaves.
ana: Yes, because the Founding Fathers failed to address slavery, the issue was resolved on the battle field instead of in congressional meetings.
Mr. Chat: You make a good arguement, but perhaps you could have proved it in less than three parts. You rival Madison.
The founding fathers made the right choice in excluding slavery from the constitution as the point of the Constitutional Convention was to form a country.
ReplyDeleteThe decision definitley had some negative consequences, but of course it had the most important consequence, forming a nation. There were definitley more important issues on hand, such as the issue of representation. Also, because there were five states who were in favor of slavery, and nine state-votes were needed to ratify the constitution. As mr. Max would say, you do the math.
Another important thing to consider is the fact that the north did not necessasarily believe in integration. Even though today it is obvious that what happened was wrong, in their time they believed people of different colors were lesser.
And we can't say that slavery was completely ignored. There was of course the 3/5 compromise, which coutned slaves as 3/5s of a white, and of course they also said that the slave trade could be abolished in 1807.
I agree with Chelsey, by ignoring the issue, they must have assumed that it would go away. If they truly wanted slavery to go on forever they would have done something about it. If someone wanted slavery to be abolished then they would try again and again. Did the Founding Fathers think that by pushing the topic aside, it would not resurface?
ReplyDeleteJoe, i velieve you made a great point, as the civil war was the bloodiest war in american history, and had that happened after the constitution, we may not be in a slave free country
ReplyDeleteAnd mr plath, i dont believe the north wanted slavery abolished as quickly as possible, as it would take many years for that to actually happen (1864 i believe)
In my opinion, the Founding Father's made the right decision in ignoring the issue of slavery in the Constitution. If they would have addressed slavery, the South would have been upset and separated from the Union. With the South bailing out, the United States as we know it today could very well be nonexistent. Even though the Founding Father's sort of passed off the responsibility of dealing with slavery, it was needed. Thanks to them, we now not only have no slavery, but we are also able to live in this country. Even though there were downfalls to ignoring the issue, in the end, it was the right decision.
ReplyDeleteGreat job so far! I have thoroughly enjoyed reading your posts so far. I'm still trying to get my hands around Mr. Chat's train of thought but I'll figure it out! One thought for you to ponder. It's easy for you and I to say that the Founding Fathers did the right thing by ignoring the issue of slavery but try telling that to an African American who lived their entire life under the auspices of slavery. Just a thought. See you all tomorrow.
ReplyDeleteI really liked This Guy's quote..
ReplyDelete"Besides the noble art of getting things done, there is a nobler art of leaving things undone. The wisdom of life consists in the elimination of the nonessentials." Lin Yutang.
I think that it does apply to this situation.
It was much better to "leave things undone" at that period in time.
Even though I feel that they did the right thing, Mr. Max has really made me think...
ReplyDeleteHow would you feel if you were a slave back then?
The issue would have needed to be solved right then and there.
Mr.Chat, here is my opinion, you wrote way too much. Anyway, I suppose you had a good argument, the Founding Fathers (not including Thomas Jefferson, Fernando Fairfax, and Benjamin Franklin and others) did feel they were making the right decision. However, they were doing what they believed was best for them, without taking any time to think of how the slaves felt being treated like animals- because they didn't care. Perhaps some lives could have been spared, yet we will never know.
ReplyDeleteThe founding fathers made the right choice at the time, excluding the issue of slavery. Our nation was at the time held together by thin string and it was important to get a government set up. Without the support of the pro-slavery southern states, the constitution would most likely not have been signed and our young nation would have fallen apart.
ReplyDeleteIt is sad to think that if we had sooner addressed slavery we could have avoided things like, the Civil War, in which many American lives were lost. If we had been divided right from the start our nation would not be what it is today. It seems that we fought through things like the Civil War to strengthen ourselves and become the strong united nation we are today.
The founding fathers may have at the time just wanted to avoid the arguments the issue of slavery would have caused for the constitution, but in the long run it seems that it turned out to be the right decision. Our nation was too fragile to have conflict from within. Slavery and civil rights are issues that in some areas are still a problem today and I think that it is important to realize that are nation has become such a diverse place, emphasized by the election of the first Black President: Barack Obama.
The issue of slavery was an important one, but I am glad that it was not included in our constitution when it was first put together, because we may have lost the support of the southern states, and the nation would have crumbled.
I think while mr. chat makes some excellent points, he may be talking circles....
ReplyDeleteThe Founding Fathers did make the right decision by ignoring the issue of slavery. Yes, it was bound to come up eventually, but they all knew that. However, if they had made the decision to talk about slavery, the Founding Fathers might not have gotten the Southern colonies’ approval at the Constitutional Convention-which would be needed since nine of the colonies must approve it first. If the Fathers would have had tried to resolve the issue of slavery at the Constitutional Convention, we might not have to result we do today. The Fathers could have had to compromise more and give into the Southerners’ ideas in order to get them to agree to approve the Constitution.
ReplyDeleteJeff made some really good points and it was important to see how things led to the Civil War.
ReplyDeletePlath made some really good points and I agree with what he said about the founding fathers not addressing the issue of slavery.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion the Founding Fathers did the right thing when they didn't address slavery in the Constitutional Convention. It might of looked like they were trying to just trying to ignore the issue completely but, by leaving slavery out of the Constitutional Convention they saved our country. Our Founding Fathers were very smart and could tell that the U.S. was not yet strong enough to deal with the issue presently. If the Founding Fathers took the problem of slavery head on there would have been lots of friction between the North and South and there would most likely be no United States today.
ReplyDeleteCourtney made a really god point about how the founding fathers held off the issue, even though it would come up again and again, for the sake of the Country. And America could not of handled a Civil War right after a Revolution.
ReplyDeleteYes, I do believe that the Founding Fathers made the right decision despite their own virtues being a hypocrisy. With the American Revolution ending, and the Articles only winning by a margin- against Great Britain's "JV team"- it would be a termendous mistake to address a situation that had no offered solution, other than dividing an already young country. With the split of governments it would also decrease the control of it's citizens, a unified resistance to any foreign threats, and also escalate tension between the northern and southern states. The tension could very easily then break out into an unwarrented civil war, before our country had the economic or political stability to wage a civil war. The economic's were still at an early age within our country, only just now having the chance to prosper - and with a civil war, it would prevent it from blossoming. Politically the Articles had only just won the war with Britain solely because France and Spain stuck out their neck against Great Britain; by debating rights that only lead to internal conflict would show the world that we were immature and unable to have a unified front. And with this being displayed to the world, I can guarantee you that the French or the Spainish would ever come to our aid again.
ReplyDeleteWhile morally I disagree, the fact of the matter is that the Founding Fathers made the right choice by waiting for the right time to fight this controversal issue - the start of a country obviously not being the best time.
I agree with Samantha. It was better to leave things undone, and let them happen in the right time period.
ReplyDeleteChelsey makes a very good point. That despite the time at which they decided to discuss slavery, "either way the slaves had no say in what was going to happen to them." This is so true.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Jeffrey. There were more important things to deal with. Now that we look back on it of course slavery was completely wrong but they did think people were lesser because of there skin color. As a Country we have dealt with and still are dealing with the issue of race and indviduals will probably be doing this forever.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Jeffery on his opinion, but the only real reasoning the southern states made the push for the 3/5th's Compromise was to increase their population and balance the powers between the north and south. Southerns were afraid of the north having too much power and abolishing slavery all together, at that time the compromise wasn't a moral issue of equality for African-Americans, but a way to ensure the continuing enslavement of African-Americans
ReplyDeleteI think the founding fathers made the right choice in not mentioning slavery. Now before you jump me.... you have to understand that during that time period not only was slavery considered natural, it was considered necessary. America was still a young country who in NO WAY could afford to lose support on it's own turf and, even though the U.S. had just had a triumphant victory over Britain it wasn't all peace, love, rainbows, and unicorns, in fact in my opinion the U.S. was even more vunerable to a mutiny then before or during the Revolutionary War.Yes we all know ALL men are supposedly created equal, and racism is bad yadda yadda yadda. But, the founding fathers were stuck between a rock and a hard place, they could roll with their believes and flat out say slavery was an abomination, and risk losing the support of the rich, influential southerners, thus losing the economic powerhouse that was the south or....... hop to the other side of the fence and claim that slavery is delightful thus creating a situation that not only angers the politically strongwilled north but helps an even sicker enviroment for rebellion to flourish.The founding fathers chose the only rational desicion, that some politicians still make today,avoid a taboo subject to protect the nation.While some may call this move irresponsible and/or thoughtless i.e. "HOW COULD THE FOUNDING FATHERS LEAVE SUCH A LARGE PROBLEM FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS TO SOLVE?!" the truth is they didn't. Unlike some of our ummmmmmm presidents *cough* bush *cough* I believe they understood what they were doing, I mean elastic claus hello? The founding father chose to avoid this topic yes.... but they had set up a way to make it 10 no 30 no 66.66666 percent easier to politically remedy such a serious situation, the only question was WHEN was the country was actually economically, politically, and socially staple enough for such a change.
ReplyDeleteI disagree with ana, the thought of "avoiding the civil war" struck a chord with me. You're right, having the situation discussed and solved would have made the Civil War never happen - in 1861 that is. But it would have frankly pushed the date forward, causing a civil war earlier in our history. The Founding Fathers always knew that the situation of slavery would never fade away - which is why they were able to put it aside for a later date, knowing it would still be there.
ReplyDeleteDEXTER MORGAN! whoever you are I like LOVE you right now! I agree 100%
ReplyDeleteso alot has happened while I last logged on, but replying to Mr. Max it wasn't a very light decicion to just push it off to a later time. they had practically more blacks in the south than whites, they were tredding on very thin ice when for after the war alot was promised to them(freedom) by several different sources.also the pure agony to the blacks when they realized that they and their children would still be under a foul ruling must have caused concern with the Founding Fathers since that too could cause a riot in an already loosly held together country.
ReplyDeleteOn one hand, I can understand on some level why the Founding Fathers decided to avoid the subject of slavery at the Constitutional Convention. America was a newly founded country and to bring up such a touchy, controversial issue would not only be rather unwise, but would risk creating a rift between the North and the South.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, ignoring millions of sentient human beings based on the color of their skin and the country of their origin can be described as nothing less than myopic and insulting to the moral constitution of the Founding Fathers. America had fought for years to gain the rights and freedoms they knew that they should be awarded purely because they were humans. After experiencing the maltreatment that accompanied being colonists, it is completely inexcusable that the very same colonists would immediately turn around and balefully remain ignorant of the freedoms that were undoubtedly craved by slaves.
Overall, I believe the Founding Fathers' actions towards slavery, while based on somewhat logical trains of thought, were reprehensible.
This is an iffy topic. If I say I think they did the right thing, I'm racist. If I say otherwise, I'm ignorant. Personally, I think both ways would have had positive outcomes, but which would have more? I believe the Founding Fathers did the right thing. Sure, its morally wrong and its tragic that we have that in our past, but look where we are now! Would we have all these equality laws if it weren't for their stubbornness to do anything on the topic? I don't think they were just lazy, I think the Founding Fathers actually had a clue what they were doing, and had good reasoning not to touch on the topic back then. The colonies were just getting started, just beginning to come together. If we had abolished slavery at what seems like the preferred time, all the work done to unite and bring the colonies together would have been erased and began to regress. We were too fragile at the time to worry about something that was helping us so much in our desperate time of need.
ReplyDeleteI do believe that during the Constitutional Convention, the Founding Fathers made the right decision in disregarding the issue of slavery. At the time, too many people were dependent on slaves. This subject came up quite a bit during the convention, and, though it was clear that a lot of the founders were opposed to slavery, it could not have been abolished because most of the southern states were in favor of it. The constitution couldn't have been put into effect without the support of the South. The slave trade was huge at the time, and it would have been hard to just end it like that. The Founders knew that it it was not yet time to try and resolve the issue of slavery in America.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Tub-O Jones in regards to Samantha's post. And might I just thank you. I guess some people just don't understand that a black today, and a black back then were muuuuuch different. Uhh, hello? The North didn't like them either, and they didn't necessarily think it was wrong to enslave them, they just didn't want them in their land. How is that so much better?
ReplyDeleteWhile I do not agree entirely with eblinn, I feel that he made a logical argument. I agree with his contention that bringing up such a controversial issue as slavery would probably have created friction between the North and the South.
ReplyDeleteWiley, while I agree that the decision to ignore slavery was not entirely correct, I have to ask, do you honestly believe that their decision to ignore the topic of slavery was not thought out? I am, of course, not sure how thought out it was as I was not there, but I can only imagine that it was pondered long and hard before the decision was finally made. Let me know.
Samantha.. I don't know quite how to respond. I know that if I had been a slave back then, I would have wanted slavery abolished right then and there; yes, that is true. However, that's not the question. The question is whether or not the Founding Fathers did the right thing. I would never want to be in the position of the poor black souls, and thankfully, I am not. So that is rather irrelevant, and shouldn't influence your argument.
ReplyDeleteHi yall, if you look at it from the founding father's perspective, they were still racist to a point, some more than others, and they put the problems of the economy, such as the nonuniform currency, and the crises with the inconsistent laws, and other problems that stemmed from the weak central government ahead of the problem of the enslavement of a group that some thought deserved less rights. I am not justifying, just explaining.
ReplyDeleteFrom the aspect of the possibility of economy getting destroyed, we see that the dependency on slave labor only got worse in the south, but then again, hindsight is 20/20. Also, after the civil war, the economy didn't utterly collapse even though we had great expenditures and the slaves were no longer slaves. The South was incredibly hurt during the Civil War and it left its scars, but those who were enslaved didn't just pack up and leave. They had no place to go and thus became tenant farmers and the only pockets that got hurt were the farmers who lost land to the former slaves. Plus, at the time of the Civil War, the North was much wealthier, so slavery didn't make the South crazy rich or anything.
Tub-O Jones, as shown by many novels, especially Douglas' narrative, slavery was not better than being free, maybe for a small few, but freedom is priceless. Though your first statement of racism not ending is true. Even today there are still resentments in the South towards those of black skin.
Mr. Chat, your superfluous words and over-extended metaphors give rise to entertainment and maybe even intrigue, but also to tiredness as I read and wait for the point to all your words. I would like your opinion and the reasons behind them, not reasons for using the shift key or any other personal insights into your insignificant, yet bizarre, life. But I will agree with Lord Voldemort that you do have some good insight and so I will abstain from criticizing any more except to correct that slavery itself was called the "necessary evil" not the postponing/ignoring of the topic of slavery.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteRessul, it is impossible to know how the present could be different if they did make the other choice. Maybe the territory of a country would be different, maybe there would be 2 or three countries, but just because it would be different doesn't mean it would be worse. It could have been better or even similar. And the Founding Fathers must have known that they were being hypocritical, for the revolutionary idea of all humans being equal led to the French Revolution which led to slave revolts in present day Haiti which sparked action against the European presence in South America who treated the original residents as a lower breed, similar to the black status in America. Other nations and people realized the full extant of human equality, but not all dared to follow through with the actions associated with the idea.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Goofy Kid. If the Founding Fathers had tried to resolve the issue of slavery, they might not have gotten the Southern colonies’ approval, which was very much needed.
ReplyDeleteMr. Potter also has a good point. Without the support of the Southern colonies, the constitution would probably have not been signed, resulting in the downfall of our young nation.
I believe that the founding fathers made the correct decision by ignoring the issue of slavery during the constitutional convention. At this point in time, America was not very closely knit and may not have been able to withstand the controversial issue of slavery. The chances are that if it was outlawed, the founding fathers would lose support of the southern states who were heavily dependent on slaves and would therefore have been unable to put the constitution into effect. Although slavery is indeed immoral and always has been, due to circumstances of the time period, allowing it to survive was vital to the formation of our country as we know it today.
ReplyDelete*Southern Colonies* not states.. sorry Mr. Max...
ReplyDeleteWell, they did make the right decision, because if they had not given both sides a little of what each wanted, there would be no United States of America today. Obviously the North and South had different views on slavery, not so much of black people themselves, just the act of slavery; which is why the North and South ended up making so many different terms as far as voting and what not. Had both sides not made compromises and they had abolished it or kept going with it without some kind of expiration date of resolution to the problem; they would have seen a split down our blossoming country. The North was already threatening to secede from the rest of the colonies because they didn't want to be associated with slavery, it was filth to them. So yes, they made an excellent choice and ultimately people suffered, but that is just an unfortunate price we had to pay to keep our country strong. It's sad but it's true. Had they not made that choice, who knows what we would be today.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Alec, he said that though many of the founding fathers were opposed to slavery, they were aware that this was not the time to solve the problem. This decision was most likely based entirely off of circumstances, sometimes its just not the right time to take action even though it might be for good reasons.
ReplyDeleteMr. Max said it is easy for any of us to say they made the right decision when we were not the victims in the situation, and i agree that if i were in their position i would probably think differently, however that was not the position the founding fathers were in. These men were forming a nation, In order to make something great sacrifice is absolutely necessary whether it be from this group or that, someone will usually suffer. Being a leader sometimes means making those hard decisions,stepping away from your human compassion and see the picture as a whole rather than close up. The slaves were wrongly forced into this postion, but by this point in time no one had an option anymore. Although it may be cold-hearted, it had to be done, the world isnt perfect.
I have to take the position that the Founding Fathers made the correct decision. While it is easy for us to look back in hindsight and say what a terrible or 'curious' institution slavery was, look at it from their perspective. They just got done fighting a war for their independence, the Articles of Confederation were not working out so great, and they knew that if they could just get the Constitution to pass, they would be creating the most powerful country in the world. They recognized the importance and the need for change and for a stronger central government. I mean come on, they were nearly overthrown by a couple of farmers! If slavery had been included, the Constitution would not have passed. There is no question about it. The odds were against it, and it was a miracle that it was ratified in the first place.
ReplyDeleteThe Founding Fathers as they were known were, well, fathers. And let's just face the facts, fathers don't always know what's best for their kids. They did their best with the cards they were dealt and although millions died in the struggle based off their decision, everything worked out in the end. It's hard to say whether leaving the slavery issue up to future generations was the correct choice or not. who am i to say what is right or wrong when even some of the greatest minds in history who were actually alive during this time period were completely dumbfounded by the same question? If I had to choose though, I would have to say the Founding Fathers were right in what they did. Everything in this world comes with a sacrifice, nothing is ever fair. It wasn't fair that blacks had to be enslaved after the Founding Fathers didn't end slavery right then and there and the lives sacrificed in the Civil War may be viewed as an unnecessary loss but in reality, America would not be the same or may not even exist at all today if things had been any different. Their decision made on the slavery issue made logical sense. Morally.. not so much. Things usually always get worse before they get better which is exactly what happened with America.
ReplyDeletei agree with basically everyone on something they each had to say. It was hard to even think of something to add that someone already hasn't said.
ReplyDeleteI totally stand by what Ressul said. It was a tough decision by any standard, and if your conscious is telling you that it's wrong than awesome. That is what should be happening. I just cannot fathom the internal debates that went on within those incredible people because their decisions would change the course of history and they knew it!
ReplyDeleteTo Samantha: I have been thinking about it and I still agree that they made the right choice, but they should have gone with Jefferson's idea of choosing a date in the future and saying that any slave born after that date was a free person. That way, it would not have affected the living generation.
I do believe that the founding fathers made the correct decision by avoiding the topic of slavery. I agree because at the time of the Constitutional Convention slavery was a large part of everyday life for the colonies. If they had decided to abolish slavery there would have been a great upset among the colonies. The start of America was weak to begin with. By trying to abolish slavery I am confident that the Constitution would have been a failure. By avoiding this there would be higher hopes that the colonies would be united and the Constitution would have been a success. Although I do believe slavery is wrong and that it is horrific that blacks were considered "animals", in that time period they were a good addition to hard working areas and they were easy to control. It was a common and widely accepted practice and by trying to start America by taking away slavery would have most likely concluded in a failure. The founding fathers did make the best decision at the time and because of it the Constitution came together despite the already shaky start.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Shea's thoughts on the colonies not being closely knit and that an issue so large as slavery could have completely torn them apart. I also agree on his comment on the founding father's losing support of the southern states. This would have been a huge lost to the founding fathers to not have that support, therefore, they made the right decision.
ReplyDeleteI disagree with CMONTGOMERY. She said that the founding fathers did not make the right decision because they just side stepped a huge problem which is partly true. But what would have happened if they put a stop to slavery? Everything that they couldn't afford to happen, lost support, anger, no stability, and definitely not unification. Maybe they didn't think the problem would go away, maybe they did, but at the time of the convention slavery was way to common to just be cut off. America wouldn't have happened. We needed the founding fathers to step back and see how things went. It was to early for them to make such a big decision.
I honestly believe that for the time being they had made the right decision. Being as it was, the colonies were still pretty weak in the unity department. If the Founding Brothers were to have raised the discussion about slavery at that point way early on, America as we know it would be nonexistent right now. First of all, the colonies had just got out of fighting with England for their independence. It may have only been purely out of luck on account of England concentrating their major war efforts with their other feuding European neighbors, like the Irish also seeking independence through a bit of rebellion, as well as the French just waiting for the perfect chance to strike. With a country like America a few thousand miles away, there was just no plausible way with everything else in their hands, which is why we technically won. With this though came a new controversy regarding the unity and power of the states. This unity, however, was so weak then, that if the Founding Brothers really had brought slavery into the issue, it would've resulting in another almost definite war this time between the North and the South. This would obviously eventually occur in the future and become known as the Civil War, but by then it would be the correct time to do so. The colonies only had their weak Articles of Confederation, which needed a lot of revising anyway, due to the colonies disliking it, fearing for their own individual power. Not wanting an all new government resulting in the same dominating one as they had sought freedom from in England just recently, the Founding Brothers were to simply revise them, yet they were scrapped and out from under them came the entirely original document that would soon become our present day Constitution, though of course revised a bit since its day considering much drastic change since then. Bringing the issue up so early, would've erupted a totally different society, most likely causing them to become so querulous regarding slavery that even after a war they would disperse elsewhere, sinking miserably into an era of disunity that they could in no plausible way afford. The Founding Brothers, as you can clearly infer, had made the best decision at the time. It may have been completely immoral, as Wiley had put, but it was the right choice because their good sense had saved this country an immense load of trouble during a time when it was least needed. For if they had, as Ciara suggested, they would've faced a most terrible truth, as I've mentioned earlier, which is why I don't quite comply with her theory. I remain with my original belief, however, i enjoyed reading their eloquently written responses. (:
ReplyDeleteI believe the founding fathers made the right decision to not bring up slavery at the Constitutional convention. At the time it was obvious the five southern states would not agree with abolishing slavery, it was also obvious the northern states would not agree with keeping slavery the way it was.Since the states could not agree on this subject, they made the right decision to not bring it up. At this time it was so crucial that the states not fall apart and separate, with abolished slavery not much would have been accomplished with just the eight northern colonies, and it is likely the south would have rebelled. With the looming threat of rebellion and separation, how could they bring it up? They did everything else in their power to set the Constitution up in a way that it would be possible for future generations to finally rid of it. I believe it was this decision that kept our country from turning into Europe, with many small countries instead being unified like the United States. Besides, during this time it was true that some rights were given to slaves. The south agreed to stop the slave trade (Not much of a forfeit, but still better than nothing) as well as counting each slave as 3/5 a person. These seem inhumane now, to count them as only 60% of a person, but at the time it was probably a big triumph for the slaves.
ReplyDeleteMichael Case wrote an interesting comment which pointed out something I did not think about. I agree with his statement. The colonies had just fought Great Britain and it was important to just get the Constitution passed and accepted. There was enough on the founding fathers' plate as it was, dealing with independence for the first time and trying to rebuild after the Revolutionary War, adding the issue of slavery on top probably would have been their undoing.
ReplyDeleteI just spent about ten minutes looking for Dex's stance on the subject, if he thought they made the right decision or not... I've yet to find it. He makes a good point, telling the facts without being influenced by his opinion to leave out certain things. However, this blog is to make an opinion based off the facts (Which most of us know thanks to Mr. Max, no need to say them all over again) to try to prove one way or the other. You talk down to Mr. Chat but you did not include a straight opinion either.
Leaving the issue of slavery for later discussions was a good decision by the Founding Fathers. If they had talked about it, and tried to argue the problem out, there would probably be no country. The slave states would have refused to give up their slaves, and the non slave states would never have agreed to have them. The states would have been more divided than they had in the civil war, and would have divided themselves into separate countries based upon their states as it had been with the colonies. The civil war would not have happened, and the United States would look more like Europe with small, separate countries strewn throughout. The divided countries would have started to fight over land, and their boundaries, and other wars would have risen up from that turmoil. If the founding fathers had discussed the issue of slavery, there would be no country to have a civil war in, and nothing to fight for. Slaves would probably still be allowed in the southern “countries” today, and life would be completely different. It was right of the founding fathers to ignore the slavery problem and to focus on uniting the new nation instead.
ReplyDeleteI disagreed with Peach, because the population really wouldn't have changed matters too much. The fact that they were disunified makes more of an impact on the issue of slavery, because if they had talked about it before being unifed there would be seperate countries, regardless of the population.
ReplyDeleteI agree with AFitzgerald, though I disagree on his stand. I don't think that the hardness of ending the slave trade had anything to do with their decision to ignore the slavery issue. The slave trade would have been difficult to overcome, regardless of the time period.
Well KatieLynn, just as the slaver owners were more superior than most of the slaves, I am more superior than most of you, and by you, I mean everybody else on this blog. I am not saying that slave owners and slaves were not equal on the human rights stance (though they were not treated that way), but obviously they were more superior in their education and their economic status. This was not because of who they are as people, but due to their positions, they had more access to education and were obviously more wealthy. Well, I may not be more wealthy, but I am rich, rich with insight and knowledge, something that due to your position you simply will not gain that level of intelligence, or more realistically cannot gain it.
ReplyDeleteSo as you criticize my lack of straight forward opinion may you note two things:
1. I never criticized Mr. Chat for not giving his opinion, just simply giving excess information irrelevant to the case at hand.
2. I need not give my opinion in such simple terms for my superiority deems it unnecessary to stoop down to your level giving baseless opinions. Though as I am not unreasonable I will admit that I purposefully omitted a opinion on the actual topic, instead giving time to try to point out facts that some may have not considered.
And now finally, I am sorry it took you ten minutes to read my little piece and realize that I did not agree or disagree to the Founding Father's decisions. Again, I will confess, my second paragraph of my earlier post was poorly written. May I also reiterate that many people say it was necessary to keep our nation together, but was it completely necessary. Do we think that Britain would suddenly come back and try to take control again after signing the treaty of Paris. In other countries all around the world slavery ended in the 1800s, so if the nation did split and the southern part became a slave holding country, it is possible it would have changed its ways on its own. We cannot say that everything would have been terrible if the country split. Who knows how things may have been if they did split and form the United States and then some other southern nation. Though I am sure territorial disputes would incur in the future and maybe the northern states would even usurp the south due to their technological advantages, but that is all speculation.
The founding fathers had no choice but to keep the issue of slavery out of discussion in the Constitutional Convention. If they had, It would have taken a long time to get the divided states
ReplyDeleteto join the union on their own free will. 5 out of the 13 colonies did not want slavery to be abolished. The founding fathers decided to let the future generation decide the fate of slavery.
Of course, the future generation, but
through war. The founding fathers knew that the
south would not approve of this even if it meant war. It was a matter of when the war was to be fought.
Therefore, I believe that they made the right decision.
ReplyDeleteOh my goodness, gosh Dex, I didn't mean to set you off, but wow... I didn't mean for my blog to insult you in anyway... I don't think you should have said some of the things you did though, I know you view yourself as 'superior' but this blog wasn't set up for you to talk down to others...
ReplyDeletehaha, KatieLynn, finely said. You are right, after all:
ReplyDelete"Insults are the arguments employed by those who are in the wrong." -Jean-Jacques Rousseau
But I will not consider myself in the wrong considering all my comments were jocular.
the founding fathers did the right thing by not bringing up slavery at the constitional covention. it would of ended really bad if they had brought it up. i mean there would be no end to it. i think that by not talking about it, it amde our country what the great country we are today. the founding fathers had in mind that the north did not like slavery and that was it and that south did like slavery. they new the only way to become a whole, and great nation was not to bring it up.
ReplyDeletei agree with shabbir an 100%. they new what they did at the convention it was going to be great for there great grand children. that they new they could come over any obsticale even if it cost alot of lives. they something greater than themselves in the court house.
ReplyDeletei agree with kimberly. the colonies were in a tight fix with great britian. while they were fighting with gb who was going to grow and harvest the food. the woman sure were not going to do that because they had the children and the house to take care of. so they put it all on the slaves. do not get me wrong, slavery is wrong and inhumane. but if they would of abolished slavery who was going to go to war and grow crops. also the colonies were really weak to start off and they did not need a big argument to start after their independence. i stand right beside kim on this one.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Joe. I believe that it was right for the founding fathers to not adress the issue of slavery at the constitutional congress. At the time the country was to weak, and just starting out; it was to early to have started talking about issues that went against the concept of unity. If the topic of slavery would have been brought up during the constitutional congress, the North and South would have started fueding, at a time when the country lacked unity, which could have jeopordized the future of America.
ReplyDelete