XIphos12 t1_jadct81 wrote on February 28, 2023 at 5:00 PM

Reply to comment by GenXer3383 in TIL Thomas Jefferson regularly attended many different churches and declared "I am of a sect by myself" unlike many of the other devoted founding fathers. by skylightyourlife

So level with me then: these people are ignorant by stating a simple fact about him. This frustrates you because it doesn't complete the picture. Yet I have to ask, if Jefferson "was at the forefront" as you say, why did he not start with his own slaves? If you're going to expect something from others, you should probably make it your own practice. In my mind, that makes him one of two things in regards to the abolition of slavery: foolish or insincere. We can't pretend he had no influence in Revolutionary America, and we can't we pretend he practiced what he preached. Honestly if he had started with his own (more than just 2 of his 600), it may have gone a long way. Yet speculation is just speculation and the facts remain: Jefferson owned slaves and used them. He freed a handful (including those freed before and after he died), and the rest were sold after his death to pay off his substantial debt.

GenXer3383 t1_jaderb7 wrote on February 28, 2023 at 5:12 PM

Laws were restrictive in freeing slaves at the time. Jefferson also believed in educating and training slaves so they were no illiterate and unskilled citizens destined to be desititue for life with little or no resources to build a life for themselves. Presumably, he lacked the resources to pursue his political career (including trying to end slavery), maintain his family and estate, and properly prepare more slaves to be freemen.

In the end, his efforts to curb slavery socially and politically didn't bear great fruit, though slavery was shrinking until the industrial revolution made slave labor more economically viable. Perhaps Jefferson would be looked upon more kindly if he had a time machine, knew his policies wouldn't end slavery, and had the foresight to free a greater amount of his own slaves. (Though again, pro-slavery politicians and landholders made freeing large numbers of slaves very difficult with laws and policies they successfully put in place.)

For people to just spew "hur dur, Jefferson had slaves" when he couldn't just wave his had and free all his slaves to live happy and productive lives is lazy and smears the legacy of a great leader in our history.

XIphos12 t1_jadl5ea wrote on February 28, 2023 at 5:52 PM

Oh, for heaven's sake, he wasn't restricted from freeing his own slaves. Robert Carter did it! George Washington did it! Nobody said anything about a magic hand wave. He could have just made the decision to let his own captives go. He seemed to have thought the event of complete emancipation would trigger great civil unrest at the time. His refusal to create an amendment for the gradual emancipation of slavery combined with his condemning/outlawing the international slave trade leads me to believe he was wishy-washy and selfish in his anti-slavery efforts, at best.

GenXer3383 t1_jado8l6 wrote on February 28, 2023 at 6:12 PM

You want to believe the worst of the man while refusing to acknowledge the conflicts he had to contend with to do so.

XIphos12 t1_jadq5d4 wrote on February 28, 2023 at 6:24 PM

Nope. He had many redeeming qualities and he did indeed make some legislative effort to remove the institution. I just think his own internal biases and uncertainties were his undoing in regards to slavery. He believed blacks were inferior to whites, and he thought they should be emancipated in Africa and that freedmen should colonize there, because doing it on American soil would lead to great social turmoil and violence. From an observational standpoint, he was correct in the latter thought, to his credit. Civil unrest and war broke out after the abolition of slavery.