I thought this week’s readings were extremely interesting. Zinn talks about the abolition movement before and during the Civil War. In the 1820s and 1830s, there were several slave rebellion attempts that were unsuccessful and led to the execution of those involved, which was supported by the federal government. These rebellions caused tension within the abolitionist movement because some moderates thought that the rebellions actually set back the cause of emancipation. I thought it was interesting that poor whites were paid by plantation owners to oversee slaves while they worked and prevent them from running away. This reminded me of the Miller reading on domination and subordination. Although the circumstances of poor whites were not at all the same as slavery, they were in a position of inferiority relative to the wealthy. Overseeing slaves allowed them to act as the dominant group.
The article also mentions that Lincoln only began explicitly advocating against slavery once abolition became in his political interest. He even refused to denounce the Fugitive Slave Law and argued that the Tenth Amendment of the Constitution prevented the federal government from outlawing slavery in the states. He also did not believe that black and white people were equal and that freed slaves should be sent back to Africa. While I did not know this before, I actually wasn’t that surprised to learn that Lincoln held these views, because it seems like every major historical figure has done or said extremely problematic things that we never hear about.
Something that also stood out to me in both articles was the reluctance of the government to make any real change until there was some other political or economic reason for it. For example, President Truman wanted to address civil rights issues in order to maintain a good appearance on the international stage. It makes me think that in order to make progress as a society, we cannot only rely on elected leaders.
Be First to Comment