View original postYou're surprised that a middle-aged man from Texas in the early 1960s, infamous for his profane speech would use that term in a private conversation?
Fair enough.
View original postNor does it make sense to single out America for an aberration imposed on it externally, before there was even such a thing as America. IIRC, the article references the slave population of Virgina, but the colonial legislature in Virginia actually outlawed slavery at one point, before being over-ridden by the crown. Britain rightfully deserves a lot of the credit for stamping out the slave trade worldwide, but they were not only the ones who imposed it upon the American colonies, they also profited by it long after it had fallen out of fashion in the British Isles. Thomas Jefferson's original draft of the Declaration of Independence cited that imposition of slavery among the enumerated grievances against the crown, before it was excised for obvious political reasons. The entire plantation system was not particularly profitable for the plantation owners, despite their superficially lavish lifestyle (one detail that is generally overlooked but accurrate in 12 Years A Slave, is the apparent tight finanical constraints under which both Benedict Cumerbatch's benevolent planter, and Michael Fassbender's walking shitstain suffer), as they were in perpetual debt to British merchants & bankers. Though slavery is the major issue behind secession, the actual political crises that raised the idea in the South originated from tariffs. The South was vehemently opposed to tariffs, because their planter class survived on maintaining a trade relationship with England. Absent that, or facing reciprocal tariffs on cotton, they faced financial ruin. Among the issues contributing to George Washington's manumission of his slaves (and dedication to the cause of independence) was his discovery of how he was being victimized when he married into that class, and took over Mount Vernon from his wife's family. He switched to more profitable, less labor intensive food crops and weaned the plantation off the whole cycle, but was left with a large number of excess slaves with insufficient labor to offset their upkeep, whom he lacked the right to dispose of by the unwritten rules of society, or the inhumanity to liquidate as superfluous assets.
I quite agree that it doesn't make sense to single out America, I mentioned the European countries earlier. And sure, a large part of the history of slavery in what is now the US predates its independence, and so should be blamed on Britain or British citizens as they were at the time. For someone who advocates reparations, drawing such distinctions is obviously necessary; but then, I don't.
View original postThe point is that slavery was as much an affliction on the US as a sin committed by it, and was not remotely unique to this country. Nor is the mistreatment of ethnic minorities, or numerous other (legitimate) grievances of black Americans.
Certainly not unique, no.
I'd been typing replies to several of your points below, e.g. your curious defense of protectionism and how that compares to American dedication to free trade now (which I support, mind you), but in the end it can be summarized very simply, you figure that slavery has not contributed much to the current American wealth - that, basically, slavery was not only inhuman to the slaves but also of little value for the economy as a whole, not really benefiting anyone other than the slave owners. And I lack the hard data to disprove that, though that doesn't stop me from being sceptical.
If you look at things not from a reparations perspective so much as a perspective of acknowledging collective guilt (if such a thing exists - but if collective pride in one's country exists, you'd figure guilt should too), the question of how profitable slavery was becomes less important, anyway.
View original postWhich were these? Where, in Europe or North America, was mining or manufacturing done in any significant quantity by actual slaves (as opposed to low-paid white people) in the last 400 years?
I was just going for a broad description covering all kinds of work slaves were used for. You're right that mining wasn't really significant. A quick search showed me that there were some slaves involved in coal mining in Virginia, but the numbers are indeed negligible next to those in agriculture. I never even mentioned manufacturing as far as I'm aware, though as you suggest one could safely say that the condition of many workers in 19th century factories was as bad as the working conditions of slaves on the Southern plantations. In many cases even worse, but at least they weren't enslaved.