Skip to main content

View Diary: The Second Amendment was Ratified to Preserve Slavery (294 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Helpful points, but not buying the argument (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Robobagpiper, oldpotsmuggler

    I'm not sure how you would count two of the three states defining the Chesapeake Bay as anything other than southern states.  Those two English fellows Mason and Dixon helped draw their borders.

    And no, the point doesn't remain. Yes, there were slaves north and south, but the false equivalence of 'everybody was doing it' avoids the meaningful differences around slavery by region in the antebellum period.

    •  no one claimed "everybody was doing it"... (0+ / 0-)

      ...and no one claimed that there were no meaningful differences 'tween the regions. Matter of fact, I pointed to data that demonstrated some of the numbers behind the differences.

      Cheers.

      •  The numbers were wrong (0+ / 0-)

        You were off by 15%...in 1790 and that number plummeted as slavery disappeared from northern states.  

        I'm not sure I get your point.  It sounded like you tried to argue "slavery was a BFD north and south" but once you look at the bigger picture and corrections on this thread, it's not convincing.

        •  no, not really, I wasn't off at all... (0+ / 0-)

          Common usage of "northern states" in the US generally means those states in the Union at the time of the Civil War. This was also the context in which Gooserock made a statement about slavery being a southern thing.

          In 1790, there were 140,000 slaves in those northern states. So, my point to Gooserock, 'way above, was that there were slaves in the northern states at the time of the writing of the Bill of Rights. And, guess what? there were.

          So, maybe you can tell us how that means that slavery was just a southern states thing.

          Simple point, made and supported with data from a pretty good source - the 1790 US Census.

          Trying to make the point into something that it isn't - that's what you seem to be about. Talk about "not convincing".

          And course, no one seems to be addressing the issue of northern financial and shipping interests that were heavily involved in the slave trade.

          Cheers.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site