Turns out, slavery is good ... for the slaves

[ClearwaterVol]

I was recently in New Orleans and took a 2 hour Vodou tour through the quarter. It was a highly interesting tour. I have lived in New Orleans and never took the time. But they talked about various aspects of slavery. Marie Laveau worked with the catholic priest in the parish to interweave vodou symbols with catholicism to alleviate the persecution faced by its practitioners in the area. Many of the Haitian slave in the area practiced vodou and they trade the high priestess and doctors of the faith would trade their blessings and diagnosis for food and other wares created by the other slaves. It was not something encouraged by the whites, but something done for survival. Some slaves were taught to be blacksmiths by their masters, not a gesture of teaching but simple so they could do the work required to run the plantations. Obviously, this could be a valuable skill, but hardly something to celebrate. It all depends on how it is taught.

Back to the vodou, I always thought that vodou was something evil. The vodou dolls being a prime example on cursing people... this is something taught by whites. Vodou dolls were actually a way to avoid punishment by vodous doctors. Blacks were not permitted to read and so the doctors could not have patient charts. So, when a patient would come to the doctor with an ailment for the first time. The doctor and the patient would create a doll together. If the patient was there for a sore back... the doctor would provide an herbal treatment plan and mark the doll with a pin and place it on a shelf. The next time that patient came in the doctor would be able to look at the doll and know to ask about the back issues.

But I digress, it all depends on how the history is taught. When I attended school in the south, I was taught the evils of slavery but also about the benevolent slave owners that permitted their slaves to acquire skills. I still find this a bs way to teach it because it is essentially saying that although slavery is wrong it wasn't all that bad for the slave because they needed their white masters to take care of them.

 

[Vol8188]

I was recently in New Orleans and took a 2 hour Vodou tour through the quarter. It was a highly interesting tour. I have lived in New Orleans and never took the time. But they talked about various aspects of slavery. Marie Laveau worked with the catholic priest in the parish to interweave vodou symbols with catholicism to alleviate the persecution faced by its practitioners in the area. Many of the Haitian slave in the area practiced vodou and they trade the high priestess and doctors of the faith would trade their blessings and diagnosis for food and other wares created by the other slaves. It was not something encouraged by the whites, but something done for survival. Some slaves were taught to be blacksmiths by their masters, not a gesture of teaching but simple so they could do the work required to run the plantations. Obviously, this could be a valuable skill, but hardly something to celebrate. It all depends on how it is taught.

Back to the vodou, I always thought that vodou was something evil. The vodou dolls being a prime example on cursing people... this is something taught by whites. Vodou dolls were actually a way to avoid punishment by vodous doctors. Blacks were not permitted to read and so the doctors could not have patient charts. So, when a patient would come to the doctor with an ailment for the first time. The doctor and the patient would create a doll together. If the patient was there for a sore back... the doctor would provide an herbal treatment plan and mark the doll with a pin and place it on a shelf. The next time that patient came in the doctor would be able to look at the doll and know to ask about the back issues.

But I digress, it all depends on how the history is taught. When I attended school in the south, I was taught the evils of slavery but also about the benevolent slave owners that permitted their slaves to acquire skills. I still find this a bs way to teach it because it is essentially saying that although slavery is wrong it wasn't all that bad for the slave because they needed their white masters to take care of them.

On this we agree. It's for sure a touchy subject and has to be approached properly. But I do think there's value in teaching kids how that even during the worst of tragedies black people were able to survive and a select few even found ways to thrive.

 

[EasternVol]

I was recently in New Orleans and took a 2 hour Vodou tour through the quarter. It was a highly interesting tour. I have lived in New Orleans and never took the time. But they talked about various aspects of slavery. Marie Laveau worked with the catholic priest in the parish to interweave vodou symbols with catholicism to alleviate the persecution faced by its practitioners in the area. Many of the Haitian slave in the area practiced vodou and they trade the high priestess and doctors of the faith would trade their blessings and diagnosis for food and other wares created by the other slaves. It was not something encouraged by the whites, but something done for survival. Some slaves were taught to be blacksmiths by their masters, not a gesture of teaching but simple so they could do the work required to run the plantations. Obviously, this could be a valuable skill, but hardly something to celebrate. It all depends on how it is taught.

Back to the vodou, I always thought that vodou was something evil. The vodou dolls being a prime example on cursing people... this is something taught by whites. Vodou dolls were actually a way to avoid punishment by vodous doctors. Blacks were not permitted to read and so the doctors could not have patient charts. So, when a patient would come to the doctor with an ailment for the first time. The doctor and the patient would create a doll together. If the patient was there for a sore back... the doctor would provide an herbal treatment plan and mark the doll with a pin and place it on a shelf. The next time that patient came in the doctor would be able to look at the doll and know to ask about the back issues.

But I digress, it all depends on how the history is taught. When I attended school in the south, I was taught the evils of slavery but also about the benevolent slave owners that permitted their slaves to acquire skills. I still find this a bs way to teach it because it is essentially saying that although slavery is wrong it wasn't all that bad for the slave because they needed their white masters to take care of them.

Did they say how Haitian slaves got to Louisiana?

 

[ClearwaterVol]

Did they say how Haitian slaves got to Louisiana?

Does it matter?

 

[lawgator1]

Did they say how Haitian slaves got to Louisiana?

What is the relevance of that question?

 

[EasternVol]

Does it matter?

Yes.

 

[EasternVol]

What is the relevance of that question?

Think about it. Historical and cultural context, origin of voodoo in the US, maybe a link with the Haitian revolution, etc.

 

[volbeast33]

If they hadn't been born into slavery they would have acquired life skills otherwise. It's putting lipstick on a pig to say that slavery helped prepare them for the job market.

If I had to guess…. Someone scrolled through the curriculum and found anything they could find to turn into a big deal…. I’m almost positive it’s being turned into a much bigger deal than it really is.

 

[McDad]

...
essentially saying that although slavery is wrong it wasn't all that bad for the slave because they needed their white masters to take care of them.

Informative post, except for the sentence above.

You're inferring what "they" are essentially saying. You are assuming intention. I noticed LG does that a lot, too, so maybe attorneys are prone to ascribe intention to situations???
It is completely appropriate to call something that is horrible what it is AND acknowledge there are elements of benefit which came during a horrible time. For me, those benefits wrt slavery aren't even about the master teaching trades. The benefits are about the indomitable nature of human resolve and ingenuity. It serves as a testimony to all that people of all types have the capacity to overcome no matter the circumstances.

 

[ClearwaterVol]

Informative post, except for the sentence above.

You're inferring what "they" are essentially saying. You are assuming intention. I noticed LG does that a lot, too, so maybe attorneys are prone to ascribe intention to situations???
It is completely appropriate to call something that is horrible what it is AND acknowledge there are elements of benefit which came during a horrible time. For me, those benefits wrt slavery aren't even about the master teaching trades. The benefits are about the indomitable nature of human resolve and ingenuity. It serves as a testimony to all that people of all types have the capacity to overcome no matter the circumstances.

No, I was commenting on my education in southern schools.

 

[whodeycin85]

Would they have not potentially learned those skills had they not been enslaved? Farming, blacksmith, etc existed in Africa well before the US slave trade.

Would they have survived being enslaved but the tribe that sold them??? There is now way to know. Id say slaves in America had it better then slaves in Africa and probably those slaves today as well.

 

[bamawriter]

But I digress, it all depends on how the history is taught. When I attended school in the south, I was taught the evils of slavery but also about the benevolent slave owners that permitted their slaves to acquire skills. I still find this a bs way to teach it because it is essentially saying that although slavery is wrong it wasn't all that bad for the slave because they needed their white masters to take care of them.

If the context is "slave owners weren't all bad" then I would agree that this part of the curriculum is absurd.

But I'm not for ignoring human agency in the study of history. White slave owners didn't teach their slaves farming because they wanted to pass this benefit to their slaves; they wanted crops as cheap as they could get them. They taught ranching because they wanted their livestock to be tended as cheap as possible. They taught smithing because they wanted tools and horseshoes as cheap as possible. There was no benevolence in any of this activity. But history is not predicated on good or bad intentions. The bad intentions of the slave owners did not deprive their victims of all human agency, and history is littered with unintended consequences. That former slaves took what they had learned and applied it to their benefit is a fact, and it is a testament to the human spirit. It's in no way a positive reflection on the actions of slaveholders.

 

[ClearwaterVol]

If the context is "slave owners weren't all bad" then I would agree that this part of the curriculum is absurd.

But I'm not for ignoring human agency in the study of history. White slave owners didn't teach their slaves farming because they wanted to pass this benefit to their slaves; they wanted crops as cheap as they could get them. They taught ranching because they wanted their livestock to be tended as cheap as possible. They taught smithing because they wanted tools and horseshoes as cheap as possible. There was no benevolence in any of this activity. But history is not predicated on good or bad intentions. The bad intentions of the slave owners did not deprive their victims of all human agency, and history is littered with unintended consequences. That former slaves took what they had learned and applied it to their benefit is a fact, and it a testament to the human spirit. It's in no way a positive reflection on the actions of slaveholders.

It is all in the context of how it is taught.

 

[lawgator1]

Informative post, except for the sentence above.

You're inferring what "they" are essentially saying. You are assuming intention. I noticed LG does that a lot, too, so maybe attorneys are prone to ascribe intention to situations???
It is completely appropriate to call something that is horrible what it is AND acknowledge there are elements of benefit which came during a horrible time. For me, those benefits wrt slavery aren't even about the master teaching trades. The benefits are about the indomitable nature of human resolve and ingenuity. It serves as a testimony to all that people of all types have the capacity to overcome no matter the circumstances.

Intent is usually inferred. And here it's pretty obvious. It's an appeal to the MAGA resentment class.

 

[TNVOLNAVY]

I still find this a bs way to teach it because it is essentially saying that although slavery is wrong it wasn't all that bad for the slave because they needed their white masters to take care of them.

Well I’ll be damned if nothing’s changed and their White democrat slave owners are still taking care of them to this day!

 

[ClearwaterVol]

Would they have survived being enslaved but the tribe that sold them??? There is now way to know. Id say slaves in America had it better then slaves in Africa and probably those slaves today as well.

So American slavery was good and beneficial. Interesting approach.

 

[whodeycin85]

So American slavery was good and beneficial. Interesting approach.

Not what I said. But nice lefty slant...I said it could be argued that slavery in America was better then slavery in Africa where slavery still is... Does that say slavery is good.. Nope..

 

[ClearwaterVol]

Not what I said. But nice lefty slant...I said it could be argued that slavery in America was better then slavery in Africa where slavery still is... Does that say slavery is good.. Nope..

What you doing is attempting to minimize American slavery, by saying it was better than slavery elsewhere. You can see why this might rustle some jimmies when discussing slavery. It is a feeble attempt at justification.

 

[whodeycin85]

What you doing is attempting to minimize American slavery, by saying it was better than slavery elsewhere. You can see why this might rustle some jimmies when discussing slavery. It is a feeble attempt at justification.

I'm not. The question was about the skill learned from American slaves.. I'm simply pointing out there is a no way to know "if"they survived their enslavement had they not been sold by the tribe that already had enslaved them.. Or if they would have learned those skills... But I'll bet it's better to be a slave in America then in Africa back then... Period.. Already is still bad and always is... But applying today's which standard to a previous era is a waste of time.

 

[NashVol11]

On this we agree. It's for sure a touchy subject and has to be approached properly. But I do think there's value in teaching kids how that even during the worst of tragedies black people were able to survive and a select few even found ways to thrive.

Do we not already do this? Have you never heard of the Underground Railroad, Harriet Tubman, Frederick Douglass and instead need a “personal benefits” unit as your one example of Black survival?

This is being framed as some type of compliment to Black people, but if people are unable to fathom Black perseverance without teaching the personal benefits of slavery, I would say it’s closer to the opposite

 

[ClearwaterVol]

I'm not. The question was about the skill learned from American slaves.. I'm simply pointing out there is a no way to know "if"they survived their enslavement had they not been sold by the tribe that already had enslaved them.. Or if they would have learned those skills... But I'll bet it's better to be a slave in America then in Africa back then... Period.. Already is still bad and always is... But applying today's which standard to a previous era is a waste of time.

Still trying to minimize the evil that was american slavery.

Your entire argument is predicated on the argument that American slaves had it better than African slaves. Slavery is evil. Arguing degrees of evil is a fools errand and a transparent attempt to deflect responsibility.

 

[StillStanding]

I think the "personal benefit" language was added for political reasons. It's a bone thrown to the anti-woke establishment. To credit slavery for the developed skills of the enslaved is absurd ... but the anti-woke crowd will love it.

Do you mean teaching history with balance instead of only a certain narrative?

 

[ClearwaterVol]

And slaves in Louisiana had more rights than slaves in other states...

III. BLACK CODE OF LOUISIANA.
Law of June 7, 1806.

• SEC. 1. Slaves shall have free enjoyment of Sundays, and shall be paid fifty cents a day, or its customary equivalent, for their labor when employed by the free inhabitants – provided this privilege shall not be extended to slaves employed as servants, carriage drivers, hospital waiters, or in carrying provisions to market.
• SEC. 2. Every owner shall give to each of his slaves one barrel of Indian corn, or its equivalent, in rice, beans, or other grain, and one pint of salt, in kind, every month, under a penalty of a fine of ten dollars for every offence against this provision.
• SEC. 3. The slave to whom his master shall not give a lot of the ground he owns, to be cultivated by the slave for the slave’s own account, shall positively receive from his master one linen shirt, and one pair of line pantaloons for the summer, and a linen shirt and woollen great coat and a pair of woollen pantaloons for the winter.
• SEC. 4. Slaves disabled by old age, sickness or any other cause, whether their disease be incurable or not, shall be fed and maintained by their masters, in the manner prescribed by the second and third sections of this act, under the penalty of a fine of twenty-five dollars for each offence against this provision.
• SEC. 5. It shall be the duty of the master to procure for his sick slaves all kinds of temporal and spiritual assistance which their situation may demand.
• SEC. 6. No master shall be discharged from the obligation of feeding his slaves, by allowing them, instead of feeding them, to work certain days in the week for their own account, under a penalty of twenty-five dollars for every offence against this provision.
• SEC. 7. The slaves shall be allowed half an hour for breakfast during the whole year; from the 1st of November to the 1st of May they shall be allowed two hours for dinner, and the rest of the year one hour and a half; but if the masters shall cause the meals of the slaves to be prepared the time fixed for rest shall be abridged half an hour per day.
• SEC. 8. Slaves, disabled by old age or otherwise, having children, can only be sold with such of their children as they may think proper to go with.
• SEC. 9. Every person is expressly prohibited from selling separately from their mothers children slaves under ten years of age.
• SEC. 10. Slaves shall be considered as real estate, and shall be subject to mortgage, seizure, and sale, as real estate.
• SEC. 12. No master shall suffer on his plantation assemblies of any slaves but his own, under penalty of paying all the damage to the masters of the strange slaves, in consequence of permitting them to assemble.
• SEC. 14. Any persons finding a slave carrying corn, rice, pulse, (legumes,) or any other provisions whatever, for the purpose of selling them, without a permission in writing from his master, shall have a right to stop and seize the said provisions, for reward, provided they may take two dollars from the master, in lieu of the said provisions; but if it be proved that the master has given permission, in writing, to his slave to carry, &c., and that it was destroyed by the parties seizing, then such parties shall be punishable by fine of twenty dollars; of, if insolvent, by two months’ hard labor.
• SEC. 15. As the person of a slave belongs to his master, no slave can possess anything in his own right, or dispose in any way of the produce of his industry, without the consent of his master,
• SEC. 17. Slaves shall be prosecuted in criminal cases, without it being necessary to make their masters parties thereto, unless the master be an accomplice; and for this purpose slaves shall be indicted and tried, without appeal, &c.
• SEC. 19. No slave shall, by day or by night, carry any visible or hidden arms, not even with a permission to do so, on pain of such arms being appropriated to any person who shall seize them, &c.: Provided, That a slave may carry the arms of his master from the master to some one else, if authorized to do so by a writing to that effect.
• SEC. 20. Slaves employed in hunting shall always carry with them permission, in writing, to have fire-arms, such permission being renewed every day, and having no effect beyond the limits of the plantations of the masters,
• SEC. 21. As slaves may say they are free, free people of color who carry arms shall have with them a certificate attesting their freedom, or they shall be liable to lose their arms.
• SEC. 22. Masters, in case of robbery or other damage done by their slaves, shall, beside the corporal punishment to which the slave is subject, pay all damages, or abandon the slave to the person robbed, &c., within five days from the time of sentence.
• SEC. 23. A master, denouncing his slave as a runaway, shall be exempt from reparation for the injuries caused by his slave.
• SEC. 24. All persons are prohibited from selling to any slaves intoxicating liquors (des boissons eniorantes) without a permission in writing from their masters, which the sellers shall keep fifteen days for their justification, under the penalty of being answerable for the damages and paying a fine of twenty dollars, to go one-half to the county treasury and one-half to the informer; and any person who shall sell or furnish, in any manner whatever, to any slave, intoxicating liquor, either for cash or in exchange for provisions, shall forfeit and pay a fine not exceeding one hundred dollars, nor less than twenty dollars, &c.
• SEC. 25. Every slave found on horseback, without permission, in writing, from his master, shall receive 25 lashes, and be sent home to his master, who shall pay twelve and a half cents per mile for carrying back the slave.
• SEC. 26. Every master having runaway slaves shall report them to the judge of the county in which he resides, and the judges shall enter in a book the report of the master, &c.
• SEC. 27. The keeper of the county jail, where a runaway slave might be caught, shall pay to the captors, whether free or slave, three dollars for ever slave caught on the highways, &c., and ten dollars for every slave taken in the woods, &c., and delivered to the said jailer, which sum shall be reimbursed by the master of the slave.
• SEC. 28, 29. The slaves thus arrested shall be condemned to hard labor by the authorities of the county, &c., they providing for their maintenance, house-room, clothing, and medical attendance; and if after two years, &c., they shall not be reclaimed by their masters, the said slaves shall be sold, &c., and after paying expenses, &c., the balance of the money shall be paid into the public treasury, &c.
• SEC. 30. To keep slaves in order and lawful submission, no master shall allow them to go beyond the city in which they dwell, or beyond the plantation to which they belong, without a permission, in the following form:

“The bearer, (negro or mulatto,) named ______, has leave to go from _______ to _______ for _____ days (or hours).” Dated day of delivery. This order shall be signed by the master, &c., or some one by his, &c., authority; and every slave found beyond the limits of the city or plantation, &c., without such person, or without a white person accompanying him, shall be punished with twenty lashes by the person arresting him, and shall be sent back to his master, who shall pay one dollar, &c.

• SEC. 31. Any person, not authorized, giving a permission to a slave, shall be liable to pay fifty dollars for the offence, or suffer one month’s public labor.
• SEC. 32. If a slave shall be found absent from his usual place of working or residence without permission, or without being accompanied by some white person, and shall refuse to be examined by any freeholder, the said freeholder may seize and correct the slave,and if the slave shall resist, or try to escape, the freeholder is hereby authorized to make use of arms to arrest him, taking care, however, not to kill him; but if the slave shall attack and strike the said freeholder, the freeholder can lawfully kill the said slave.
• SEC. 33. If any slave, lawfully employed, shall be beaten by any person without cause or lawful authority, the person so offending shall pay for every such offence a fine of ten dollars; and if the slave so beaten shall be mutilated or rendered incapable of working, the offender shall pay the master two dollars a day, besides the fine. And if the slave be forever rendered unable to work, the offender shall pay the master the appraised value of the slave, or be forever maintained at the expense of the offending party; but if the offender shall not be able to pay the said fine, &c., then he shall be imprisoned for not less than one month, nor more than a year.
• SEC. 34. Every justice of the peace, &c., may order the assembly of the posse comitatus, to disperse runaway slaves, &c., and may authorize search for arms, ammunition, stolen goods, &c., and apprehend slaves suspected of having committed crimes, &c.
• SEC. 35. It is lawful to fire upon runaway slaves who may be armed, and who, being pursued, refuse to surrender.
• SEC. 36. Any person wounded or disabled, &c., in the pursuit of runaway slaves, or slaves charged with any crime, &c., shall be rewarded by legislative act, &c., and if killed in the pursuit, &c., his heirs shall receive the reward, &c.
• SEC. 37. Masters, either in person or by others, shall have power to pursue and search for their fugitive slaves, wherever they may be, without prior notice, except in the principal dwelling house, &c.

 

[hog88]

Do you mean teaching history with balance instead of only a certain narrative?

History should be taught as what happened, why it happened and what was the result of what happened all without a narrative. The best history professor I had took a historical event and brought the ramifications of that even into present day. With all the good, the bad and the ugly.

 

[ClearwaterVol]

So, in Louisiana to achieve a fair and balanced education it should be taught that slave owners provided pensions for their slaves before pensions were even a thing. The slaves there were paid and taught valuable life skills.