Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: bentway who wrote (360275)	1/16/2018 5:08:08 PM
From: cosmicforce	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 543165

Back then, pretty much everyone was a racist by modern criteria. I'm not sure how it moves us forward to apply contemporary labels to people, music, culture, etc. to things that far back in the past. Was he more or less racist than his peers? That might be useful to know if it weren't so speculative. There is considerable evidence to show he was MUCH less "racist" than his peers. He was also rationally fearful that if he freed his slaves, that they would be returned to slavery under worse conditions. That was not entirely unreasonable. Liberia was supposed to be a place of refuge where people of African origin could go and set up their own civilization and not be slaves. The people that left were so happy to be gone they made their flag look like the American flag and called their capital Monrovia after Monroe. They never bothered to change either. So - is that a good thing, bad thing? Was it empowerment or paternalism? We can look at it now and say things aren't all that great, but they have a huge merchant marine fleet.

To: bentway who wrote (360275)	1/16/2018 6:22:10 PM
From: koan	Respond to of 543165

I know. Maybe this answers some questions about why the south seems so uneducated. EDUCATION IN THE SOUTHERN COLONIES In the 1840's, the growth of state funded public education was blossoming in states from Connecticut to Illinois (see also "Normal Schools" in the Common School section of this web page). However, the Southern states did not have a tradition of public education to build on, as the North did, and in fact, it was well after the Civil War before the South legislated for state supported schools. This occurred for several different reasons. First and foremost, Southerners believed that education was a private matter and not a concern for the state. They were quick to point out that in all traditional societies the most important training a child receives is in the home where he/she is inducted into the values of the society he/she is about to enter. If the family fails in this endeavor, then how can the schools be more successful? They felt a priority should be placed upon creating a college-bred elite, if their traditions and way of life were to be successfully transferred to successive generations. This system helped to perpetuate the sharply defined social-class structure which existed in the South. There were planters (plantation owners) and there were slaves; no middle-class existed in the South to bridge the gap between upper and lower classes, and as such, there was no demand for services beyond that provided for those who could afford to pay. Another reason that public education did not flourish in the South was that the population was more dispersed than it was in the North, making it difficult to find enough children in one area to justify a school. Also, the Anglican religion of the South did not put quite as much emphasis on religious indoctrination through schooling as did Puritan New England. The final reason was the South's feeling about slavery, which will be mentioned below. www3.nd.edu