Abolitionists in the Confederacy

Is there any way that we can have a number of the white population of the Southern States support emancipation of the slaves? Maybe a more industrialized south? How would this affect the Civil War, would there still BE a civil war?

Funeral arranagements

Lots of Thoughtful People in the South know that Slaverys was a Dieing insitution, But due to the $$$$s tied up , in the Slaves, Combined with certain Racial prejudices, prevented them from acting on the beleif. In a Real sense the ACW was over the How, & Who, whould pay for the Funeral.

There were abolitionist groups in the southern states, up until about 1832. Slaves and freed blacks like Nat Turner and Denmark Vesey really, REALLY turned off the limited numbers of abolitionist groups in the South. However, those same blacks had the reverse effect on the abolitionist groups of the north. Eliminate rebellions like that, and an emancipation group in the South would be much more powerful.

The Underground RR operated from the beginning of slavery to the end. After 1832 most expression of abolitionist sentiment in the South was deeply underground but it was still there and still strong.

Walter_Kaufmann said:

There were abolitionist groups in the southern states, up until about 1832. Slaves and freed blacks like Nat Turner and Denmark Vesey really, REALLY turned off the limited numbers of abolitionist groups in the South. However, those same blacks had the reverse effect on the abolitionist groups of the north. Eliminate rebellions like that, and an emancipation group in the South would be much more powerful.

Click to expand...

I would disagree with you about the "limited" nature of the Southern abolition movement and the reasons for it's demise. Actually, there was not a "limited" abolition movement in the South prior to the 1830s. It was a very strong movement, and counted in it's ranks many very powerful people. Even as late as the 1820s, bills were being introduced in Southern state legislatures for the abolition of slavery, and some came quite close to passage. Given more time, the Southern abolition movement would likely have been successful within 20 or 30 more years in the states of the upper South, and within a couple of decades after that in the Gulf States. There need not have been a war at all.

But then, beginning about 1830, abolitionists in the North began attacking slave owners, and by extension all Southerners, declaring them to be evil and morally reprehensible. Southerners who supported abolition could agree that the institution of slavery was wrong and ought to be eliminated. But when the Northern abolitionists began to focus their attacks on the owners rather than the institution, and to declare the entire South to be morally bankrupt because slavery was allowed to exist there, then support for abolition in the South died. The people of the South "circled the wagons," so to speak, and developed a siege mentality which eventually contributed to the coming of the war in 1861.

All you have to do to have a successful abolition movement in the South is to find a way to have the Yankees keep their big mouths shut and let the Southern abolition movement finish the job.

robertp6165 said:

All you have to do to have a successful abolition movement in the South is to find a way to have the Yankees keep their big mouths shut and let the Southern abolition movement finish the job.

Click to expand...

However, the slave revolts in the South brought the issue of abolition into the mainstream North. Before, it was supported mostly by radicals in the North. Slaves like Nat Turner brought it to the Northern public's attention, thus ensuring that the Northerners would raise a fuss, and, hence, cramping the Southern abolition movement.

Post-ARW POD

WI after the ARW there'd been some radical awakening among Southern plantation owners and ordinary ppl in the future Confederacy of the huge inconsistency between the rights enshrined in the Constitution, and their continued perpetuation of slavery ? Could this have facilitated a more active Southern abolitionist movement ?

Melvin Loh said:

WI after the ARW there'd been some radical awakening among Southern plantation owners and ordinary ppl in the future Confederacy of the huge inconsistency between the rights enshrined in the Constitution, and their continued perpetuation of slavery ? Could this have facilitated a more active Southern abolitionist movement ?

Click to expand...

The only possiblity is a revival with in the American Church, probably spreading from England. Abolition of slavery there was closely tied to the revival in England.

I've always thought that Southern slave owners were able to help slavery be accepted by other Southerners by perpetuating the myth that slavery was a moral issue, i.e. its in the bible and all that stuff. No one could hardly disagree with that and considering Southern religious attitudes it would be difficult at best to change their minds.

"The only possiblity is a revival with in the American Church, probably spreading from England. Abolition of slavery there was closely tied to the revival in England"

The Baptist Church, which really got entrenched in the South in one of the Great Awakenings (I think the second), could be the center of the POD. One of the Southern "great awakening" preachers condemns slavery and perhaps could be killed by an outraged planter. His martyrdom leads to widespread outrage against slavery and those who benefited from it. This leads to gradual-emancipation reforms in several Southern states as the gov'ts react to the widespread popular anger.

Raymann said:

I've always thought that Southern slave owners were able to help slavery be accepted by other Southerners by perpetuating the myth that slavery was a moral issue, i.e. its in the bible and all that stuff. No one could hardly disagree with that and considering Southern religious attitudes it would be difficult at best to change their minds.

Click to expand...

Oh, they could and did debate that issue. The type of "slavery" that was considered moral by the Bible is indentured servitude for the payment of debts, and only then for a finite amount of time. There were also guidelines for the treatment of those in servitude. It had very little resemblance to anything that went on in the United States. That beind said, it is amazing how millions of people who consider themselves Christians can turn a blind eye to that fact or never know it in the first place.

Southern opinions on slavery were not nearly as homogenous or monolithic as we typically think now, looking back on that time period. This is my opinion, but our impressions on Southern opinions of slavery and race comes more from exposure to post-Reconstruction and Civil Rights-era Southern culture, which was invitably galvinized by having to bend over and grab their ankles for an enraged Congress.

Matt Quinn said:

"The only possiblity is a revival with in the American Church, probably spreading from England. Abolition of slavery there was closely tied to the revival in England"

The Baptist Church, which really got entrenched in the South in one of the Great Awakenings (I think the second), could be the center of the POD. One of the Southern "great awakening" preachers condemns slavery and perhaps could be killed by an outraged planter. His martyrdom leads to widespread outrage against slavery and those who benefited from it. This leads to gradual-emancipation reforms in several Southern states as the gov'ts react to the widespread popular anger.

Click to expand...

Certainly possible, but let us flesh it out with a little more detail, i.e. it also sparks more debate on the issue and causes the more clear-sighted to rethink their opinions and share them with others. So, in parallel, it is both an emotionally and intellectual awakening for the South to the issue.

david3565 said:

Oh, they could and did debate that issue. The type of "slavery" that was considered moral by the Bible is indentured servitude for the payment of debts, and only then for a finite amount of time. There were also guidelines for the treatment of those in servitude. It had very little resemblance to anything that went on in the United States. That beind said, it is amazing how millions of people who consider themselves Christians can turn a blind eye to that fact or never know it in the first place.

Click to expand...

Not actually true. One of the more interesting things I have ever read on the subject was an essay written in the 1850s by an Jewish rabbi...who was himself an abolitionist living in New York...which went into great detail as to how slavery is sanctioned by the Bible. And it was not "indentured servitude for a finite period of time for payment of debts." The Rabbi, as I stated, was himself opposed to slavery, but was put off by all the pseudo-Biblical arguments being used by the radical abolitionists who were demonizing Southerners as morally bankrupt and reprehensible. If I find it again, I will post the link. Interesting stuff.

david3565 said:

Southern opinions on slavery were not nearly as homogenous or monolithic as we typically think now, looking back on that time period. This is my opinion, but our impressions on Southern opinions of slavery and race comes more from exposure to post-Reconstruction and Civil Rights-era Southern culture, which was invitably galvinized by having to bend over and grab their ankles for an enraged Congress.

Click to expand...

I agree with you there...Hollywierd and various trashy novels have contributed a lot to the incorrect views most people have too.

Raymann said:

I've always thought that Southern slave owners were able to help slavery be accepted by other Southerners by perpetuating the myth that slavery was a moral issue, i.e. its in the bible and all that stuff. No one could hardly disagree with that and considering Southern religious attitudes it would be difficult at best to change their minds.

Click to expand...

The reason Southerners started making this kind of argument was because of the change of tactics by abolitionists in the North after c. 1830, when, rather than attacking the institution of slavery itself, they began attacking Southern slaveowners (and by extension, Southerners in general), accusing them of being morally degenerate. When Northern abolitionists began to accuse Southerners of moral degeneracy because they allowed slavery to exist in the South, many Southerners used the Biblical arguments to say that the Northern abolitionists were moral degenerates because they opposed an institution sanctioned by God.

robertp6165 said:

Not actually true. One of the more interesting things I have ever read on the subject was an essay written in the 1850s by an Jewish rabbi...who was himself an abolitionist living in New York...which went into great detail as to how slavery is sanctioned by the Bible. And it was not "indentured servitude for a finite period of time for payment of debts." The Rabbi, as I stated, was himself opposed to slavery, but was put off by all the pseudo-Biblical arguments being used by the radical abolitionists who were demonizing Southerners as morally bankrupt and reprehensible. If I find it again, I will post the link. Interesting stuff.

Click to expand...

I'll have to read that. The problem is separating Talmudic tradition from the Torah. The Protestant tradition is "Sola Scriptura" or scripture alone. Operating from that position, the Bible only does outline only indentured servitude, or that is how I understand it.

robertp6165 said:

I agree with you there...Hollywierd and various trashy novels have contributed a lot to the incorrect views most people have too.

Click to expand...

Thank you Oliver Stone for continued JFK conspiracies.

david3565 said:

I'll have to read that. The problem is separating Talmudic tradition from the Torah. The Protestant tradition is "Sola Scriptura" or scripture alone. Operating from that position, the Bible only does outline only indentured servitude, or that is how I understand it.

Click to expand...

Here is the link...

http://www.jewish-history.com/raphall.html

It was actually written in 1861 by, as I said before, an abolitionist rabbi in New York City.

Remember laws were used against people in the South seeking to say that slavery was wrong.

There were certainly groups of white people in the South who thought that slavery meant unfair competition.

I suspect fears caused by violent risings were another factor in suppression of these views in the white community.


Is there an imaginable POD which has slaves seeking to use violence to free themselves without wishing to indiscriminately kill?