American abolitionists (fl. 1829-1865) were those who worked to abolish slavery to free the slaves. Among others:
David Walker wrote “An Appeal to the Coloured People of the World” (1829) three years after the death of Thomas Jefferson, arguing against his racist ideas: “I say, that unless we refute Mr. Jefferson’s arguments respecting us, we will only establish them.” Walker said whites were keeping blacks down by denying them education and pushing a twisted, racist form of Christianity. Walker called for civil rights organizations, black self-help and the violent overthrow of slavery. The “Appeal” was a guiding star for many blacks. It even radicalized whites.
Nat Turner led a slave uprising in south-eastern Virginia. He went from farm to farm killing whites, freeing slaves and gathering men to his cause. It left 60 whites and 100 blacks dead. Whites killed another 250 blacks in the violent crackdown that followed. Ended any idea that blacks were contented slaves.
William Lloyd Garrison founded The Liberator, an abolitionist newspaper, in 1831, little read till Nat Turner’s uprising later that year. Garrison believed in the immediate abolition of slavery, in blacks and whites living together as equals – radical stuff. He made an appeal to the moral conscience of slave owners in the South only to find that even whites in the North were mostly for slavery. He ran junk mail campaigns, boycotts, speaking tours and his newspaper to turn public opinion in the North. He burned the Constitution, calling it an agreement with hell. His radical views made Lincoln seem like the voice of reason.
Frederick Douglass, a former slave and great public speaker, wrote the best known first-hand account of American slavery: “Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, an American Slave” (1845). While the backbone of the abolitionist movement was black, the leadership was largely white. Douglass gave it a black voice and a black leader. He talked Lincoln out of sending blacks back to Africa.
Harriet Tubman a former slave who was the most successful “conductor” of the Underground Railroad: during the 1850s she went back south to help over 200 to escape slavery. She brought men to John Brown’s cause.
Harriet Beecher Stowe wrote “Uncle Tom’s Cabin” (1852), a huge best-selling book that became a play. More than anything else it turned mainstream white opinion in the North against slavery. It did not use arguments or facts and figures. Instead it put white readers in the shoes of black slaves to show them what it felt like.
John Brown in 1859 took Harpers Ferry where the government kept 150,000 guns. He hoped to gain arms for a slave uprising in western Virginia. The government sent the Marines, put him on trial and hanged him. He became a hero throughout the North.
Abraham Lincoln as late as December 1862 was willing to let the South keep its slaves to make peace. In 1863 he turned: he championed the abolitionist cause in the Emancipation Proclamation and Gettysburg Address, in accepting blacks into the army. He pushed through the Thirteenth Amendment, outlawing slavery in 1865.
See also:
Walker’s “Appeal” is something that everyone should read.
LikeLike
Just wondering, did you create the photomontage yourself?
LikeLike
@ Abagond
I understand that by « American » here you mean « from of the USA », but one should never forget that the first state to abolish slavery in the New World was Haiti in 1804.
Toussaint, Dessalines and Christophe never get the credit they deserve as the first successful American abolitionists.
(Emphasis on “successful”. Many maroon communities and Quilombos all throughout the Americas never succeded in putting a end to slavery in their respective countries)
LikeLike
Excellent point Dahoman X
A narrow USA focus of slavery abolitionists ignores and diminishes the obvious global contributions and impacts of those outside its borders. Slavery abolition was more than just a Northern American institution.
LikeLike
Just so there is no misunderstanding:
My point was not to tell Abagond what he should write about on his own blog. I am not critical of his choice to focus on abolitionists in the USA.
I was just sharing some thoughts.
LikeLike
Did everyone see the documentary, “Slavery by another name”?
It documents how slavery didn’t end with the abolition of slavery, via the 13th amendment.
So slavery, didn’t officially end for a period of almost 80 years, between the civil war and world war II.
Yeah, they were, “free” in legal terms but not really.
The documentary explains how America, used the prison industry to force blacks into free labor, while incarcerated. Sounds familiar to today’s prison industry, eh? 37 cents an hour, you bet its slavery all over again.
Enjoy my brothas and sistas ^_^
LikeLike
Wow, I missed that documentary Sondis, but THANKS for the link!
LikeLike
@ Jefe
I did not create the photo montage. If you click in it you will see where I got it from. I used it to show that there were way more American abolitionists than the ones I listed.
LikeLike
@ Sondis….. Brother, I am going to call you our minister of information. Thanx for this.
LikeLike
Abagond, Thanx for this post.
LikeLike
“Dahoman X,
I understand that by « American » here you mean « from of the USA », but one should never forget that the first state to abolish slavery in the New World was Haiti in 1804.”
Linda says,
Trust , Dahoman, whenever someone says “American” it’s understood to mean USA because we islanders call ourselves “Caribbeans” 🙂
Good info…as far as the Haitians were concerned, they were free from 1791 before Haiti became a Republic nation in 1804. In 1794, the French government officially “abolished slavery by law in France and all its colonies and granted civil and political rights to all black men in the colonies.”
The Haitian rebellion that began in 1791 inspired the slaves in Jamaica and other Caribbean islands. The British outlawed the slave trade in 1807 — the Jamaican slaves took this to mean they were “free” but being held against their will by the white Jamaican plantation owners – thus began many mini-revolts leading up to the big one in 1831, then the British officially ended slavery in Jamaica in 1832.
Being a lover of duality (I’m a firm believer in “ying and yang”) I have to share this story:
There was a famous “almost” rebellion in Jamaica set for Christmas day, 1799. A Haitian Jew, Isaac Sasportas; a Catholic named Barthélémy Dubuisson, and a mixed-race French general named Martial Besse, decided to go to Jamaica to take the island from the British and free the slaves.
Sasportas went to both Cuba and Jamaica and contacted the Maroons, so that they could help him to get word to the slaves and get the Maroons assistance in the fighting. Besse’s job was to sail to Jamaica with 4000 Haitian soldiers.
In November 1799, Sasportas was captured by the British, put on trial and hanged. Dubuisson collaborated with the authorities, so he was spared.
And the person who betrayed the plot and told the British — Toussaint Louverture, the leader of the Haitian Revolution.
–why did he sell out Sasportas? Because he wanted the goodwill of his British-Jamaican neighbors since Haiti was on track to becoming a free black Republic nation.
I love history…it’s never as straight-forward as people believe.
LikeLike
@Sondis
I watched the documentary and I was very surprised at what was happening but it was the truth.
The documentary explains how America, used the prison industry to force blacks into free labor, while incarcerated. Sounds familiar to today’s prison industry, eh? 37 cents an hour, you bet its slavery all over again. ” ”
And America is still using the prison industry to incarcerate Black men in this country and it needs to stop. Does any have any solutions to the high jail population of Black men in this country? .
LikeLike
@ Dahoman X …. Thanx for dropping that knowledge. Something new for me to learn.
LikeLike
@ Linda….. Thanx for dropping that knowledge as well. I appreciate you. I am going to read up on that.
LikeLike
The truth is constantly being revealed. Thanks for this post and loved hearing about the Caribbean history lesson. Man, I would have paid more attention in my AP history classes if the subject matter was pertaining to this!
LikeLike
mary B, Lifelearner,
You’re very welcome… the history of the Americas / Caribbean is very interesting and colourful.
the European countries (Britian, France, Spain) were always in competition and fighting with each other…in this particular story, France was behind Sasportas because they wanted to stick it to the British and they were willing to arm the black slaves to do it.
The Americans supported, Louverture, because they were willing to do anything to keep free Caribbean blacks (and their revolutionary ideas) out of America and American slavery intact. (the British already knew their days were numbered)
LikeLike
@ Linda
Very, very true.
Wow. I never heard about this story…
@ Mary
You’re welcome.
LikeLike
I understand you’re talking about a specific period in history, but the American abolitionist movement began long before 1829.
Before 1800, Jonathan Edwards Jr’s sermon made people feel like the evil people that they were for owning slaves. And Benjamin Banneker directly petitioned Thomas Jefferson for equality, insinuating that Jefferson was a criminal who should be found guilty, and proving his intelligence w/ Banneker’s accurate almanac.
Also, it saddens me to see Abraham Lincoln in your post of Abolitionists even though Lincoln clearly stated: “My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is NOT either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it.”
Lincoln HAD to give Blacks a REASON to fight for the Union b/c the Union would not have won without their help. And that reason was emancipation. Lincoln being a man of his word, HAD to deliver on his promise.
LikeLike
abagond, Thank you for posting this article.
You’re very welcome, King,Mary burrell,King,Adeen, Bulanik.
This documentary is one of my favorites, i had to share it with my folks! 🙂
LikeLike
@Sondis
I am glad you shared the video and when I watched it, it really opened my eyes.
@resW77
Lincoln wasn’t an abolitionist but he was opposed to slavery. He was all for saving the Union from dividing even if it meant keeping Blacks in slavery. The Proclamation Emancipation didn’t free the slaves at all.
LikeLike
@ resw77
People quote that all the time. What they almost always leave out is the last line of that letter:
Source:
http://www.abrahamlincolnonline.org/lincoln/speeches/greeley.htm
Inotherwords, as president his DUTY was to save the Union, but his PERSONAL WISH was to free the slaves.
He wrote that letter in August 1862. As I noted in the post:
When that did not work he moved towards freeing the slaves. This is where he wins his place on the list:
If at that point he is not an abolitionist, no one is.
He is not as ideologically pure in his statements as the others on the list because he is a politician seeking votes. Some of Obama’s statements are profoundly contradictory for the same reason. But the Gettysburg Address shows that, as of 1863, Lincoln’s head was in the same place as the abolitionists.
LikeLike
@ Sondis
Thanks for the video. I have been wanting to do a post on that for a while. Now is as good a time as any…
LikeLike
Anytime, abagond…..
LikeLike
Something that strikes me as odd is that Black women abolitionists are never represented when these dialogues come up about who fought to ultimately dismantle enslavement…
but the real problem is that the Gullah Wars (lead by free Black men) that lasted almost 100 years in the self -freeing process for Blacks never, ever is mentioned.
LikeLike
@Abagond
You are right. Lincoln was never an abolitionist. He was for uniting a divided country not freeing the slaves.
If anyone disagrees with me, can debate with me but Lincoln didn’t care about freeing the slaves. He cared about uniting a divided nation. The topic of slavery was one of the topics that lead to the South breaking off and forming the Confederacy but it wasn’t the first thing on President(president at the time) Lincoln’s mind.
LikeLike
@Peanut
I do believe that he was a good president but the Emancipation Proclamation didn’t free the slaves. He was more into uniting the nation than ending slavery.
I could only give him credit for being a good president that tried to help unite America during the Civil War not freeing the slaves.
LikeLike
Sondis,
I saw that documentary a few months back. I must say that it was highly informative especially when you connect the dots from then until now.
LikeLike
@ phoebeprunell.. Sister, You just started something. I am reading about the Gullah Wars. I am interested in Gullah culture and I am learning about the Seminoles and the Gullah people. And I must say it’s quite compelling. I am watching Youtube videos as well. Thanks for this.
LikeLike
@ abagond
“Inotherwords, as president his DUTY was to save the Union, but his PERSONAL WISH was to free the slaves.”
Having a “personal wish” to free slaves does not make one an abolitionist. Abolitionists were fervent supporters and advocates of ending slavery. I have a personal wish for clean air and water, but wouldn’t dare call myself an environmentalist!
Lincoln’s reason for the Emancipation Proclamation and ending slavery had nothing to do with his “personal wish.” He clearly said:
“negroes, like other people, act upon motives. Why should they do any thing for us, if we will do nothing for them?”
Quid pro quo. That’s all.
LikeLike
I read David Walker’s appeal. He was an eloquent man of speech. A poignant description of the black man’s condition during that time. The phrase “Speaking Truth to Power. It might be clichéd and overused by where David Walker’s appeal is concerned it is appropriate. The gentleman was speaking truth to power. I believe it was after Thomas Jefferson had died that he made some excellent point about the so called whites they professed to be Christians yet participated in this evil practice of slavery. The hypocrisy of the times when they were professing Christianity. It is a powerful and poignant speech.He was bold especially during those times when a black man or woman had to be cautious when addressing the white authority. It was bold. And everything he said was the Truth.
LikeLike
@Legion
“Another example of manipulating and screwing around with history”
I already clarified that the Strabo quote I used represented a perception based on what he was told, regardless if it was an accurate perception or not. That’s what you don’t seem to understand.
I could easily suggest you were being even more manipulative by suggesting Strabo was “engaging in propaganda”. You have your opinion, and I have mine, but yours certainly isn’t more superiour than mine.
Moreover, this is COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT to American Abolitionists, and so you should just get over it and move on!
LikeLike
@Legion
”Another example of manipulating and screwing around with history, and relying on an assumed black dissaffectedness to get away with it, was a really extreme and vulgar implication introduced by resw77”
Well said. I agree.
@RESW77
Lincoln’s intention was never to free the slaves. He just wanted to unite the divided nation during the Civil War. Honestly I am sick of typing this because it seems like my point hasn’t come across to people yet.
Lincoln wasn’t an abolitionist.
John Brown and Frederick Douglass were abolitionists as well as Sojourner Truth and others.
LikeLike
@Adeen
Can’t you read that we are making the same points? I agree with you as to Lincoln, so why are you arguing with me? Abagond is the one calling him an abolitionist, not I.
LikeLike
@ Shady_Grady I think David Walker was calling the founding fathers and all the hypocritical whites that owned slaves who professed a belief in a Christian god out on their b.s. that’s what i got out of his appeal. It wa quite spot on. What say you?
LikeLike
*It was* typo
LikeLike
Lincoln worked to abolish slavery. That makes him an abolitionist – whatever his motives, whatever his faults.
LikeLike
@abagond
Bribing blacks with freedom for fighting in battle is not my idea of working to abolish slavery, and I certainly don’t see how he should receive ANY credit for the 13th Amendment for which real abolitionists tirelessly lobbied, Congress enacted and the states ratified.
LikeLike
[…] American abolitionists (fl. 1829-1865) were those who worked to abolish slavery to free the slaves. Among others: David Walker wrote "An Appeal to the Coloured People of the World" (1829) three yea… […]
LikeLike
@resw77
I am sorry, I got confused over your debate over Abagond but we do agree that Lincoln was not an abolitionist.
@Abagond
Lincoln wasn’t an abolitionist. He didn’t care about the slaves at all. His Emancipation Proclamation didn’t free the slaves. He was more concerned about uniting a divided country not freeing the slaves. In fact, he once said that he would keep the country together even if it meant not freeing the slaves.
LikeLike
One more thought on David Walker’s An Appeal to The Colured People of the World. In my humble opinion David Walker’s appeal reminds me of something Malcom X or Jerimiah Wright would say. His word are quite scathing and he is trying to appeal to white American’s of that era to do some self reflection and in respect to the oppression of black people of that time. This is just my opinion.
LikeLike
@Resw77
Bribing blacks with freedom for fighting in battle is not my idea of working to abolish slavery,”
Well said! Lincoln was not an abolitionist. He only cared about saving the Union from being divided and falling apart.
LikeLike
Lincoln is a difficult person to box in. Was he and active abolishnist I don’t think so because the constitution seem to favor slavery. Did he like the idea of it. However if I were Lincoln I would be more worried about the seperation of the south from the north. America as in the US would be radically different if it had been split asunder. Abolishnist
http://www.gilderlehrman.org/history-by-era/lincoln/essays/lincoln-and-abolitionism
Abolishnist could talk until the sun burnt out. With out Lincoln’s actions slaverly would have lasted a bit longer and how it ended might not have been so defining. Part of the spirit which underlays this country is that we fought to seperate ourself from the custom of holding slaves. While by no means did it make everyone equal it dis give us a conceptual ideal. Even if the situation force Lincoln’s hand this is the difference of a good campaign and one that has fallen flat. He used the abolishnist to protect the country in return a major victory for abolishnist was given. I know there was much more fight to go but a broken America would have had France, England, and Russia fighting on the mainland and on the East Coast. I don’t believe any of them would have govern better.
LikeLike
@ legion
“Hahaha!! In other words, “Shut up Legion, shut up now!”
No, more like what I said. “Get over it.” It was a long correspondence that occurred several months ago, and you can’t let it go. I already made my points, whether you like them or not. You just like beating a dead horse.
“This, of course, means that the advantage of “the last word”, should he choose to use it, will go to resw77, but that’s just the way it will have to be.”
That just shows what kind of person you are. First, the ARROGANCE of you to tell me what to say, how to respond to your questions and what my intentions were, and now the PETTINESS of you to bestow upon me the ‘last word’. Get over yourself!
LikeLike
Deleted some way off topic comments by B.R. and Bulanik.
LikeLike
“mary burrell
@ phoebeprunell.. Sister, You just started something. I am reading about the Gullah Wars. I am interested in Gullah culture and I am learning about the Seminoles and the Gullah people. And I must say it’s quite compelling. I am watching Youtube videos as well. Thanks for this.”
Linda says,
Yes, thanx for dropping the info on the Gullah, phoebeprunelle. I’ve heard of them and it would be great to include them as “freedom fighters” against white American slavery.
Mary, living in Florida, I’ve always been fascinated by the Seminole nation, who were originally a group made up of many several native American ethnic groups — Miccosukees, Choctowa, and Creek.
The US government had 2 full out war against the Seminoles and spent a lot of money and manpower fighting them and still could not defeat them.
One of the main reasons the American government went after the Seminoles is because they accepted the runaway black Slaves into their tribes.
The white US soldiers would attack the Seminoles to try and steal back the slaves. When this was happening, Florida was still Spanish territory, so the Americans justified their actions by claiming the Seminoles were robbing the white American plantation owners of their property.
After Florida became American territory, the US governments main objectives was to: Remove the Seminoles and send them West and force the black Seminoles into slavery. (the black Seminoles were sent north into the Southern states and the native Seminoles went on the Trail of Tears)
Mixed-raced Seminoles were kidnapped and sold into slavery as well — the US government used the “One Drop Rule” to justify this. Many native Seminoles with dark skin were also kidnapped and enslaved by the white Americans because they weren’t about their race and decided to just lump everyone together.
It’s a fascinating part of history, one that I feel is being lost because they barely teach the True history in Florida about the Seminoles… if you ask anyone living in Florida what they know about the Seminoles or the Miccosukees, they’ll mention the Hard Rock café or the Everglades.
nowadays, the Seminoles are famous for being rich and owning Casinos and not as one of the few tribes who fought against the American government and won
LikeLike
Linda, where did you get the impression that Louverture was planning to make St-Domingue independent of France? You speak of Haitians at a time when nobody dreamed of such thing as Haiti. The USA sold Louverture weapons and other stuff because St-Domingue was their biggest market. Toussaint, the British and the USA decided that commerce was more important than all the revolutionary noise coming out of France and acted accordingly. After Louverture forced the British to quit St-Domingue in 1798,he signed a treaty with them and didn’t want to disturb the trade with them. The US Congress passed the “Louverture clause” exempting St-Domingue from its trade embargo against France, since they were at war, for the same reason. The names of the abolitionists of Slavery on St-Domingue are Sonthonax and Polverel two Frenchmen initially sent with an army to suppress the slave uprising led by Boukman, Biassou, Jeannot and Jean-Francois in 1791. My objection to your calling these people Haitians before 1804 is due to the fact that doing so tends to blurr the meaning of the declaration of independence of Haiti as the rejection of slavery once and for all, and it creates absurdities such as calling Alexandre Dumas’s grandmother a Haitian slave when she and all like her were clearly French slaves.
LikeLike
“Gro Jo,
My objection to your calling these people Haitians before 1804 is due to the fact that doing so tends to blurr the meaning of the declaration of independence of Haiti as the rejection of slavery once and for all, and it creates absurdities such as calling Alexandre Dumas’s grandmother a Haitian slave when she and all like her were clearly French slaves.”
Linda says,
I was not trying to belittle or marginalize the importance of Haiti’s fight for independence.
My reasons for using the term “Haitian” is to simplify and tell a story to a wide audience of people who probably have never heard of St. Domingue, anymore than they know that St. Domingue used to be called Kiskeya.
Prior to 1794, was Toussaint considered African or French?
I do see what you are saying about Toussaint wanting St. Domingue (Haiti) to remain a French colony (since he did re-write the Constitution to reflect that) but he always maintained that he wanted the island to have more autonomy under his rule.
For all intent and purposes, the island was no longer under French rule or why would Napolean need to send Charles Leclerc (1802) to try and re-establish St. Domingue (Haiti) as a French colony
LikeLike
Linda, I never suspected you of trying to belittle Haiti’s independence. I understand your wish for brevity, but Haiti came about because whites refused to respect any rights blacks wished to claim. Shades of the Dred Scott decision. We can both agree with C.L.R. James that Louverture was the inventor of the concept of an associated state. Bonaparte sent his invasion force instead of accepting Louverture’s innovation for the same reason Louverture, the Brits and the Yanks continued to trade despite war having been declared between France,the US and Brittain, it was to his commercial advantage, so he thought. As the strangler of the French revolution Bonaparte felt he was entitled to restore slavery and French commercial monopoly over St-Domingue. His emissary General Richepanse succeeded in Guadeloupe by decimating the nonwhite population. You always hear about what a barbarian Dessalines was for culling the white population after independence but silence is observed when it comes to Richepanse and Bonaparte. Haiti would never have existed if Bonaparte had been reasonable, instead we would have had a majority black, autonomous St-Domingue a member of a French commonwealth with the same status as Canada or Australia vis-a-vis Brittain. White supremacist ideology played no small role in this affair.
LikeLike
Speaking of the term “American” I was surprised to learn that in 17th and 18th century France the white French often used that term to apply to any Black person (free or slave) from the “New World”. “The Black Count” was a pretty interesting adventure story/historical account of French black people, specifically General Thomas Alexandre, the famous author’s father.
http://www.theurbanpolitico.com/2013/02/february-book-of-month-black-count.html
LikeLike
“Gro Jo@
Haiti would never have existed if Bonaparte had been reasonable, instead we would have had a majority black, autonomous St-Domingue a member of a French commonwealth with the same status as Canada or Australia vis-a-vis Brittain. White supremacist ideology played no small role in this affair.”
Linda says,
For sure…don’t know what Napolean was thinking…as if black people were going to lay down and be re-enslaved without a fight.
It is said that LeClercs replacement, General Rochambeau, hated black people to the core of his being and because of his cruelty, Dessalines paid him back in kind with the slaughter of the French whites – they traded “tit for tat”.
Historians like to forget and “white wash” Rochambeau’s evil deeds in the name of “war” and only remember Dessalines for his deeds against the French whites – as if white peoples lives are/were more sacred than black people’s.
but to me, both sides committed disgusting acts during the war but Rochambeau’s over-the-top disgusting actions changed the course of islands history.
“In the war against the rebels, he (Rochambeau) turned out to be cruel sadist. His main weapons were terror and mass murder. He ordered prisoners to be burned alive, drowned in sacks, hanged, crucified or gassed in large groups with sulfur fumes. His favorite method was to have them torn apart by large dogs he had imported in great numbers specially from Cuba.”
When Rochambeau was winning, he restricted blacks from owning property and he prohibited them from being soldiers. His racist actions/ policies united the blacks with their long-time rivals, the “gens de colour” (mixed-race creoles) –he turned on and murdered the mixed-raced people and soldiers too. His actions gave Dessalines the support he needed.
LikeLike
Linda, I can’t totally agree with you in your even handed treatment of the combatants. As my example of Guadeloupe shows it was Napoleon’s policy that called for every underhanded deed in the book. Rochambeau wasn’t any worse that Leclerc or their boss Napoleon Bonaparte. Before he died of yellow fever Leclerc had advised Bonaparte he would need to kill off all blacks above the age of eleven. He even bragged that he could get Dessalines to do the dirty deed for him. Dessalines remains my hero because he did what needed to be done. If he hadn’t fought the French who outnumbered him ten to one at Crête-à-Pierrot, the French would have done what they did in Guadeloupe. Like all Haitians, I can only say merci Papa Dessalines.
LikeLike
Gro Jo, thanX for the info on Guadeloupe… I will read up on the island. I don’t know much about them except that they have an active volcano.
As a Jamaican, I am familiar with Haiti due to our islands “love/hate” relationship 🙂
We gave you Dutty Bookman (Bouckman), a literate Jamaican maroon who was captured by white planters and sold into slavery in Haiti because he taught slaves how to read … you all gave us Annie Palmer, (1820) the “White Witch of Rosehall” — a white woman raised in Haiti by her Haitian nanny.
not a fair trade at all since Bouckman played a part in the Revolution and Annie Palmer became our resident obeah (voodoo) queen and terrorized the MoBay countryside.
LikeLike
Linda, Surely you jest. We gave you Thomas Desulme the industrialist who started plastic manufacturing in Jamaica.http://jamaica-gleaner.com/gleaner/20040418/business/business3.html as payment in full for the most excellent Boukman, as for any hate, it doesn’t come from the Haitian side.
LikeLike
Can Lincoln be compared to De Klerk? Can anyone quote a speech uttered by De Klerk affirming the right of black south Africans to enjoy the fruit of their labor as Lincoln did in the Lincoln Douglass debate from which the following quotation comes from? ” I will say here,
while upon this- subject, that I have no purpose, directly
or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slav-
ery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no
lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so.
I have no purpose to introduce political and social equal-
ity between the white and the black races. There is a
physical difference between the two which, in my judg-
ment, will probably forever forbid their living together
upon the footing of perfect equality; and inasmuch
as it becomes a necessity there must be a difference, I,
as well as Judge Douglas, am in favor of the race to
which I belong having the superior position. I have
never said anything to the contrary, but I hold that,
notwithstanding all this, there is no reason in the world
why the negro is not entitled to all the natural rights
FIRST JOINT DEBATE 31
enumerated in the Declaration of Independence, — the
right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. I
hold that he is as much entitled to these as the white
man. I agree with Judge Douglas he is not my equal
in many respects, — certainly not in color, perhaps not
in moral or intellectual endowment. But in the right to
eat the bread, without the leave of anybody else, which
his own hand earns, he is my equal, and the equal of
Judge Douglas, and the equal of every living man”
LikeLike
I never heard of David Walker, Thanks
LikeLike
Bulanik, Thanks for the De Klerk quote. Note how vague his words are compared to Lincoln’s clear statement that when it comes to a man, of whatever race, enjoying the fruits of his labor he is equal to any man of any race. Lincoln made that statement in 1858, I think it’s churlish to refuse to recognize that the man held clearly abolitionist views. Was Lincoln a politically correct anti-racist, no. The South rebelled because he said: “…but I hold that,
notwithstanding all this, there is no reason in the world
why the negro is not entitled to all the natural rights
enumerated in the Declaration of Independence, — the
right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”
here is the link to the debates http://www.archive.org/stream/lincolndouglasde00link/lincolndouglasde00link_djvu.txt
LikeLike
@ Linda Thank you for responding to my querie. Thanks for the information
LikeLike
I am writing as a representative of the David Walker Memorial Project in Boston: http://www.davidwalkermemorial.org/
The image you are using on your website is not of David Walker. There are no know images of him. The image you are using is of James W.C. Pennington: http://www.amazon.com/American-Backbone-Pennington-Fugitive-Abolitionists/dp/1605981753. Wehave been working diligently for the past year to correct this error and I am hopeful that you will take this image off of your website. Our hope is that we can get to the point were this no longer comes up when people do a google image search for Walker. Thanks for your consideration in this matter and thank you for helping to spread the word about this amazing man.
In peace,
Paul Marcus
Executive Director
Community Change, Inc.
http://www.communitychangeinc.org
LikeLike
@ Paul Marcus
Too bad there is no picture of him. Thank you for the correction.
LikeLike
Another man who deserves more recognition is Austin Steward. His auto-biography, “Twenty-Two Years a Slave” taught me more, and brought me into his own time, more than all the lessons I remember from school. Being from the Rochester area he tends to be overshadowed by Frederick Douglass and Susan B. Anthony but his words and his life are a powerful a testament to the evils of slavery and the will to be free.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on Life in Anglo-America.
LikeLike