Slavery

Misconceptions of History and the Reality of Slavery

Many prevailing misconceptions about the history of both Black and White Americans arise from attempts to conflate morality with causation. The profound moral evil of Slavery is frequently used as a causal explanation for contemporary negative social phenomena, even when these phenomena have distinct historical bases. For instance, the touchy pride and propensity for violence among White Southerners are often attributed to their perceived unbridled domination over slaves. However, these very same attitudes were present among their ancestors in Britain, where slavery did not exist, and also in parts of the South where slaves were virtually absent.

Slavery has become an all-purpose explanation for a range of social issues, from broken families to poor education, low labour force participation, and high rates of crime and violence. Yet, historical evidence often contradicts these assertions; for example, census data shows that non-White labour force participation rates were higher than those of Whites in 1920 and 1930. Regardless of its origin, counterproductive behaviour must be addressed if genuine progress is the goal.

The narrative often presented, particularly by those with incentives to magnify their own roles in racial progress, frames the advancement of Black people as primarily a consequence of the Civil Rights movement and political action. This conveniently overlooks a factual history showing more significant economic advancement before the Civil Rights Act of 1964 than after it.

Slavery in a Worldwide Perspective:

Contrary to popular portrayals, slavery was a worldwide institution that existed for thousands of years, not a peculiar evil of American society, the White race, or Western Civilisation alone.

While the horrors of transatlantic slavery should not be ignored, downplayed, or excused, the lopsided historical coverage often ignores the even larger numbers of Africans enslaved in Islamic countries, vast numbers of Europeans enslaved by North African pirates, and forms of serfdom and servitude within Europe itself.

Interestingly, Europeans, despite being leading slave traders in the 18th century, became the primary destroyers of slavery around the world in the 19th century. This abolitionist movement, driven initially by very conservative religious activists, coincided with the zenith of Western power and hegemony, making it essentially European imperialism that ultimately ended slavery globally.

Non-Western societies, by contrast, developed no such fervent anti-slavery movements, often viewing abolition as incomprehensible or even impious, given its acceptance in texts like the Quran. Africans were not innocent victims baffled by White men taking them in chains; the region of West Africa from which many slaves came was a significant slave-trading hub, and many Africans participated in the capture and sale of other Africans.

The abolition of slavery in the American South was a traumatic process, culminating in the Civil War, which cost one life for every six slaves freed. The "three-fifths compromise" in the US Constitution, which counted a portion of the slave population for representation, was a political compromise to achieve agreement, not a statement about the inherent value of Black individuals.

Historical figures like George Washington and Thomas Jefferson, often subjected to moral condemnation today, actively worked within the constraints of their times to limit and eventually end slavery, despite facing significant opposition. Abraham Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation was a strategic military necessity, not a purely moral declaration, carefully crafted to maximise its constitutional and political viability. These historical actions, taken amidst immense challenges, are frequently overlooked by those who judge the past by present-day moral standards and instrumental agendas.