The Revolutionary War: The first war over slavery.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
23-05-2013, 10:29 PM
The Revolutionary War: The first war over slavery.
(23-05-2013 10:08 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(23-05-2013 09:28 PM)I and I Wrote:  Economic independence comes with political independence. One needs both to be truly independent, so as a form of economic warfare the freeing of slaves was a big issue during war. The guy goes In detail of writings by revolutionary leaders about this issue, and stopping this freeing of slaves was key to winning a war. When the British controlled New York they met with military commanders of the revolutionary army and discussed this very issue.

I watched the video. It was interesting to know that it's sort of forgotten history in the UK (I'd assumed it would be in the US anyway), but like I said, that element of the war of independence is mentioned as part of our history in Canada. Your OP was overly broad and needlessly provocative.

You said it [the whole war] was about slavery. Shall I remind you?

(23-05-2013 11:25 AM)I and I Wrote:  The revolutionary war was over slavery, the pro-slavery side won the first one.

Which is demonstrably untrue. The British weren't "anti-slavery" in any way. They were pro-"screwing with our opponents". If the American rebels had been defeated there would still have been slavery.

Since it was not a cause of the war, and not a goal of the war, and not an outcome of the war, it's unreasonable to say the war was about slavery. I would hardly have thought that conclusion controversial...

That isn't necessarily true. Adam smith in his wealth of nations books describes at that time (the 1700s) in England wage labor was rather new and in many ways was cheaper than slave labor. This transition from slave labor wage slavery (as I would call it) was only possible in the then advanced economic societies. Slave labor was on its way out in the British empire as as slavery was rather new in the early America's. England was on its way to developing a society based on cheap wage labor.

This one of the reasons why Karl Marx and many communists believe that morality is relative to society. Once wage labor was seen as a better replacement to slave labor, only then did humans start seeing slavery as "immoral". Morality is relative to society.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-05-2013, 10:49 PM
RE: The Revolutionary War: The first war over slavery.
(23-05-2013 10:29 PM)I and I Wrote:  That isn't necessarily true. Adam smith in his wealth of nations books describes at that time (the 1700s) in England wage labor was rather new and in many ways was cheaper than slave labor. This transition from slave labor [to?] wage slavery (as I would call it) was only possible in the then advanced economic societies. Slave labor was on its way out in the British empire as as slavery was rather new in the early America's. England was on its way to developing a society based on cheap wage labor.

This one of the reasons why Karl Marx and many communists believe that morality is relative to society. Once wage labor was seen as a better replacement to slave labor, only then did humans start seeing slavery as "immoral". Morality is relative to society.

Economics, yeah... There were very few slaves back in the UK itself, since it wasn't profitable (there was enough cheap labour that housing and feeding workers was a waste). There were very few slaves in Canada for the same reason. There were relatively few slaves in the northern United States for the same reason. And let's be honest, the difference between a house slave and an indentured servant were pretty minimal at times. Where slavery was profitable was in plantation agriculture. The American South, the Caribbean, and Brazil. And so that's where the vast majority of slaves were...

Slavery in the British empire continued for fifty years after American independence (and in the US south until the civil war, and Brazil until the 1880s), because it was still extremely profitable (for the British, in Barbados, Antigua, Jamaica, Trinidad...).

It did eventually take on a moral dimension in Britain, which is part of what led to the Empire-wide abolition, but at the same time, improvements in the mechanisation of agriculture meant it wasn't as big an economic advantage over free labour by then and the slavers on the islands didn't have the clout to stop it anymore.

Also the American Revolutionary war wasn't about slavery.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes cjlr's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: