Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: What About the Army Bases Named For Confederate Generals? [View all]TheOther95Percent
(1,035 posts)38. Several Biographies Are Worth A Read
George Washington's views on the institution of slavery evolved over his lifetime. In his last years, Washington believed slavery was a mistake and should be abolished.
I can recommend several biographies. His Excellency by Ellis is the most comprehensive. IMHO, the best treatment of Washington and slavery comes from Wienchek's An Imperfect God.
A quicker read on the evolution of his views on slavery can be found here:
Influenced by the rhetoric of the American Revolution and constant contact with anti-slavery men from the northern colonies and states, George Washington became increasingly critical of the institution of slavery. Tracing the details of his changing views and the reasons for it may not be possible, but there can be no denying the change. He became increasingly eager to see slavery put on the path toward ultimate extinction, although he cautioned, "Time, education, and patience were needed" in the struggle.
"I never mean (unless some particular circumstance should compel me to it) to possess another slave by purchase; it being among my first wishes to see some plan adopted, by which slavery in this country may be abolished by slow, sure, and imperceptible degrees."
After Lafayette purchased in 1786 a plantation in Cayenne to carry out his scheme of emancipating slaves, Washington praised the Frenchman: "Would to God a like spirit would diffuse itself generally into the minds of the people of this country," he wrote, "but I dispair of seeing it. . . . To set the slaves afloat at once would, I really believe, be productive of much inconvenience and mischief; but by degrees it certainly might, and assuredly ought to be, effected."
"I wish from my soul that the legislature of this state could see the policy of a gradual abolition of slavery. It would prevent much mischief."
" No man desires more heartily than I do [the end of slavery]. Not only do I pray for it on the score of human dignity, but I can clearly foresee that nothing but the rooting out of slavery can perpetuate the existence of our union." [And by the way, GW made clear that if slavery caused a break up of the union, he would cast his lot with the North!]
"The unfortunate condition of the persons whose labour in part I employed, has been the only unavoidable subject of regret. To make the Adults among them as easy & comfortable in their circumstances as their actual state of ignorance and improvidence would admit; and to lay a foundation to prepare the rising generation for a destiny different from that in which they were born, afforded some satisfaction to my mind, and could not I hoped be displeasing to the justice of the Creator."
These quotes, and others that could be given, while heartfelt, must be understood in context or one might reasonably conclude that the first President was an abolitionist. It is important to note that virtually all of GW's anti-slavery quotes were expressed in private correspondence or conversation. During his lifetime, the General never took a public stance against slavery or called for its end. If his growing opposition to slavery was genuine and internalized, why did he not take a more public stand against it and use his unparalleled prestige in the cause of human freedom? This was a calculated decision by the President. It was a matter of priorities. A critic might write, "the only true policy is justice; and he who regards the consequences of an act rather than the justice of it gives no very exalted proof of the greatness of his character," but George Washington knew it was not that simple. In Roger Wilkins words,
He was "politically shackled by the grating chain [racism and slavery] that snaked through the new republic and diminished every life it touched."
http://chnm.gmu.edu/courses/henriques/hist615/gwslav.htm
President Washington told Secretary of State Randolph that if the Union ever split, "he had made up his mind to remove and be of the Northern [side]."
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
90 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Or Pass A Law Making Confederate Service Ineligible for Naming Rights.
TheOther95Percent
Jun 2015
#9
That would only affect those who served exclusivly in the confederate military.
Angleae
Jun 2015
#33
Are you going to dig up the thousands of Confederate soldiers buried at Arlington?
former9thward
Jun 2015
#75
That is about right, when Washington reached Boston in 1775 he was shocked...
happyslug
Jun 2015
#63
Definitely not a great or even good general really. Plan A never survives the first shot so he
neverforget
Jun 2015
#25
Wonder what folks opinion on the Taliban and ISIS destroying historical artifacts
Telcontar
Jun 2015
#36
Changing the name of a military base is equivalent to the Taliban's destruction
bullwinkle428
Jun 2015
#42
Denying the government the ability to endorse a religion does not destroy that religion.
LanternWaste
Jun 2015
#51
Until we take Andrew Jackson off the $20 bill, we're just being hypocrites.[n/t]
Maedhros
Jun 2015
#57
I'd certainly be in favor of no longer naming carriers after politicians...
malthaussen
Jun 2015
#61