A review of "Myths of American Slavery".
I'm a
Union man, as in labor union and Abraham Lincoln's union. This book didn't
change my mind.
Walter D. Kennedy is a member of the controversial League of the South, a "neo-Confederate" group that demands Southern independence. He is also co-author of the books "The South was right" and "Why not freedom". Kennedy constantly tries to prove that the Confederacy wasn't racist, and didn't wage war to defend slavery. So how come the League of the South wants to prohibit Blacks to wear arms in a future independent South? How come Kennedy wants to disenfranchise poor people? Read: mostly Blacks. Perhaps because the "new" South will be like...the Old South?
In this book, Kennedy defends the South by pointing out that slavery also existed in the North. But this is irrelevant. When the Civil War started, slavery had been abolished in the North but was still thriving in the South. The few slave states that supported the Union soon abolished slavery as well. Kennedy further claims that there were Black slave-owners in the South, not just White ones. First, most of these "Black" slave-owners were actually mulattoes, considered to be a kind of middle group, especially in Louisiana. Second, the total number of "Black" slave-owners was very small. Third, all slaves were Black! Kennedy attempts to prove that Blacks had White slaves, but fails completely. Of course he does. The claim is absurd. The truth is that all Whites in the South were free, most slave-owners were White, while most Blacks were slaves!!
Kennedy then points out that slavery has existed in every society through-out history, including in Africa. Quite true, but irrelevant. Once again: by 1859, the North had abolished slavery, not the South. Kennedy also writes that historically, color-blind slavery was the norm. For instance, Africans enslaved other Africans, White Europeans enslaved other White Europeans etc. Once again true but irrelevant. In the Old South, slavery was based on color: Whites very specifically enslaved Blacks. The exceptions were very few.
Note also that the South wanted to spread slavery to the Western territories, that the constitution of the Confederacy enshrined slavery, and that Jefferson Davies responded to Lincoln's Emancipation Declaration by threatening to enslave all Blacks even in the North, in the case of a Confederate victory. Note also that slavery was abolished in the South only when the North smashed the rebels.
Then, draw your own conclusions.
Walter D. Kennedy is a member of the controversial League of the South, a "neo-Confederate" group that demands Southern independence. He is also co-author of the books "The South was right" and "Why not freedom". Kennedy constantly tries to prove that the Confederacy wasn't racist, and didn't wage war to defend slavery. So how come the League of the South wants to prohibit Blacks to wear arms in a future independent South? How come Kennedy wants to disenfranchise poor people? Read: mostly Blacks. Perhaps because the "new" South will be like...the Old South?
In this book, Kennedy defends the South by pointing out that slavery also existed in the North. But this is irrelevant. When the Civil War started, slavery had been abolished in the North but was still thriving in the South. The few slave states that supported the Union soon abolished slavery as well. Kennedy further claims that there were Black slave-owners in the South, not just White ones. First, most of these "Black" slave-owners were actually mulattoes, considered to be a kind of middle group, especially in Louisiana. Second, the total number of "Black" slave-owners was very small. Third, all slaves were Black! Kennedy attempts to prove that Blacks had White slaves, but fails completely. Of course he does. The claim is absurd. The truth is that all Whites in the South were free, most slave-owners were White, while most Blacks were slaves!!
Kennedy then points out that slavery has existed in every society through-out history, including in Africa. Quite true, but irrelevant. Once again: by 1859, the North had abolished slavery, not the South. Kennedy also writes that historically, color-blind slavery was the norm. For instance, Africans enslaved other Africans, White Europeans enslaved other White Europeans etc. Once again true but irrelevant. In the Old South, slavery was based on color: Whites very specifically enslaved Blacks. The exceptions were very few.
Note also that the South wanted to spread slavery to the Western territories, that the constitution of the Confederacy enshrined slavery, and that Jefferson Davies responded to Lincoln's Emancipation Declaration by threatening to enslave all Blacks even in the North, in the case of a Confederate victory. Note also that slavery was abolished in the South only when the North smashed the rebels.
Then, draw your own conclusions.
No comments:
Post a Comment