Comments by "sandgrownun66" (@sandgrownun66) on "A Different Bias"
channel.
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Of course the colonists and their leaders were disgruntled. In 1772, the Somerset case affirmed the decision, that slavery was illegal on British soil. Wouldn't you have wanted independence, if you thought that the practice of owning humans, as property, might be taken away from you, and you might be left out of pocket. Remember, 17 of the 55 delegates to the Constitutional Convention owned a total of about 1,400 slaves. Of the first 12 U.S. presidents, eight were slave owners. These men have traditionally been considered national heroes. Buildings, streets, cities, schools, and monuments are named in their honour.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Desert-Father "The Somerset case didn't end slavery in Britain". Correct, it had already been made illegal in England in the eleventh century. The first country, to outlaw the owning of people as property. The Somerset Case sought clarification as to right to own slaves in the British isles. The decision of the courts was, that it was indeed illegal, and that the air of England was too pure for a slave to breathe.
"The British are responsible for bringing slaves to the American colonies." These activities were offshore, and thus not subject to British domestic law. However, cases like Somerset, got the ball rolling for Britain to stop other European countries engaging in the slave trade. Something which they were content to continue. It also provided a stick with which it could beat its maritime rivals, and became the British project, at a great expense in lost revenue and loss of men.
"And the British backed the Confederacy in the American Civil War." Untrue. In May 1861, the British government issued a Declaration of Neutrality to signify its official stance on the American Civil War. This Declaration recognized the Confederacy's status as a belligerent faction, but not as a sovereign nation. She may have supplied arms and equipment to the South, but at the same time, did not wish to jeopardise her relationship with he Northern States.
1
-
1
-
@Desert-Father "You can't pretend that Virginia wasn't as much a British colony as Jamaica was." Yes, both were British Overseas colonies. As to the thirteen colonies, it's a fact that the British administration were guilty of wilful neglect, as they had to pursue conflict in Europe. Therefore, any laws relating to them often not enforced.
"You had nearly two centuries of slave trade in British North American colonies." Yeah. And what does that say about the mentality of the natives and colonists who lived there, and practised such immoral acts? Britain is a small island, not a vast continent, and so much easier to police.
"British absolutely did back the Confederacy." Still wrong. Not in any official capacity. It couldn't risk antagonizing the North. Also, Britain couldn't tell a large and powerful sovereign country, as the CSA, what to do, and interfere in it's internal affairs. Britain was able to end the global slave trade. Due their total control of the World's oceans at this point. The supply of slaves had been ended to the CSA, but it already had enough for its needs by that point. In the unlikely event that the CSA had been victorious, in their fight for independence. Then Britain have been obliged to recognise them. Slavery might have continued there for sometime longer, but due to the pressure from Britain and other countries, who now saw the same way as Britain did. It would have been made illegal too. Some of the British ruling class may have had some sympathy for the CSA, in its struggle for independence, which was not only about slavery, but the vast majority of the British populace did not, and with increasing suffrage, those in leadership had to follow the people's wishes, or pay the consequences.
1