Tyler Jones- Discussion Paper 2

Hypocrisy and Early America

The distinction between the United States slave society and the Roman’s was clear from the very beginning of Professor Satterfield and Professor McKinney’s joint lecture.   The Roman slaves were not only educated but many were educators themselves whom helped rear the youth of these societies.  They were also doctors, secretaries, and philosophers.  While the Roman Slaves were still considered property and their freedoms were restricted, they had certain privileges within society and could even integrate and become Roman citizens once they had bought and obtained their freedom. [1]To say the American South was a vastly different slave society would be underselling just how ridiculous and sadly powerful the slave intuition was.  The thought of integrating slaves into mainstream society would have been considered a radical idea. So much so that segregation was the law of the land well into the 20^th century.  Slaves being able to read and write were dangerous and susceptible to revolt.  It was prudent for owners to constantly monitor dangerous behavior.  Religion among the devout southern Christians was skewed so as to conform to the institution of slavery.[2]  Contrasting the two societies even further it becomes apparent how drastically different American slavery was to Ancient Rome when discussing the American Revolution.  The Colonial’s fought for their rights against the British Empire while simultaneously excluding their slaves from those same fundamental rights. 

            The American Revolution does not happen if George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and the other Founding Fathers of the United States are laborers who would have to work their own lands.[3]  Instead they were each given the economic freedom necessary to discuss and congregate the empirical rule of the British. 

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness”[4]

The Declaration of Independence was obviously not a declaration for ALL men, as slavery did not “officially” end for another century after the Revolutionary War.   The diction and rhetoric were in stark contrast with the reality of slave life.  How could the colonialist write and support such a statement while at the same time oppressing and limiting the freedom of their slaves?  To say it is not okay for the British to impose “taxation without representation” and to simultaneously deny slaves the right to choose who they can and cannot marry is the height of absurdity.  The Revolutionary War offered slaves and ex-slaves a chance to use their oppressive society own words against them,

“we have in common with all other men a naturel right to our freedoms without Being depriv’d of them by our fellow men as we are a freeborn pepel and have never forfeited this Blessing by aney compact or agreement whatever[5]

The colonials having their own logic used against them, combined with the very real threat of slaves fighting alongside the British forced some colonies like Massachusetts to dissolve slavery and to allow slaves to “earn” their freedom if they fought alongside the revolutionaries.[6] It was small step, but a step nonetheless in some areas as slaves could potentially earn their freedom. 

            The Constitution is full of hypocrisy that shaped the early stages of American History.  David Waldstreicher noted that six of the American Constitutions clauses directly relate to slavery and their owners.[7]  Yet famously the word slavery is never used or mentioned.  The founding fathers were complicated individuals with mixed emotions on the topic of slavery.  It is clear at a fundamental level that they felt it was morally wrong or “slavery” would have been outright mentioned by name.  At the same time, clauses such as the three-fifths clause gave a great incentive for the southern slave owners to add more slaves, as it meant more power for the South within the American government. 

“Africans and their descendants were not being defined as three-fifths of a person, as is sometimes said, for that would have implied that the men among them deserved three fifths of a vote, when they had none, or had three-fifths of a person’s rights before the law, when they had much less than that”[8]

Slaves were being counted as a part of the population.  Yet they had no right to vote or lobby within this supposed democratic society as they were slaves.  The United States had just fought for this very freedom against the British.  The absurdity of being counted among the population but not having any of the right’s promised to every other American citizen was truly the peak of early American hypocrisy.