I am unsure of the validity of your statement:
"This nation gave an unfair advantage to whites over blacks (and others) for what?? Most or more of its history?"
This would imply the founding fathers somehow planned a society that envisioned discrimination which I feel is not true. It is true that the southern colonies became addicted to such things as the enslavement of African's but many slave owners were troubled by its existence including Washington and Jefferson. However many, Including John Adams detested the practice and actively tried to abolish it. However, in the effort to adopt our present constitution this effort at abolition had to be abandoned because the subject was simply too divisive. The American Civil War was ample testimony to this fact.
First, about the validity of my statement... I can't say that you really spoke to it. Was not slavery and Jim Crow segregation with explicit laws and sanctions granting Whites rights that Blacks did not have proof of my statement? Surely you can't be trying to suggest they were not.
Now, I'm not romantic nor do I revere "the founding fathers" for obvious reasons. However that does not make me discount their contributions... Nevertheless, when you say the "effort at abolition had to be abandoned" you're telling me that it was not successful and therefore NOT VALID or validated as to be put into action and enforced. That means it was not a reality... So you must answer what was?
Hence, my statement remains valid or rather true no matter what the professions or lifestyles/philosophies of some were. What did Adams' detestation do for the real life conditions and the real life consequences?
Sorry, I'm not one to make excuses for the history of our country.
When you say "too divisive"... "too divisive" for whom?
What I'm unsure of is what your point is?
Recognizing people who stood for principles of human rights is one thing but to pretend like those few like Adams who may have actually practiced what they preached reflected the actual order of the day is ridiculous.
You have just said yourself that other considerations out weighed the human right concerns in regards to slavery... So what does that say about the overall regard for the human rights for Africans?
It says that it was not compelling enough of a concern as the very arbitrary one you mentioned. It was "too divisive"???
So apparently enough of the "right-minded" people like Adams acquiesced or they were so few in number as not to have an effect. Like you said the effort was abandoned. ABANDONED! Hmmmm..... Matter of fact you said it "had" to be [abandoned].
What principles do you believe in that you "abandon" because of political or any other type of expediency? That would seem to suggest how important it was to the nation as a whole. IMO, both North and South profitted from slavery and Congressional exchanges, acts and compromises are evidence of how they worked together even in give and takes but the reality remains that African lives hung in the balance.
Again, you have not refuted my statement or the validity of it. You may have made some presumptions about what you think I'm trying to say by it. But the hard core reality is that is remarkably true. I don't understand what you are trying to argue.
Pointing out "good" White people or assuming that I think there were none... falls far short of challenging the validity of what I said. It is irrelevant to it; not an opinion that I hold; and not one that logically follows from what I said.
I don't think I need to cite laws and inititiatives to support what I said. All of it should be common knowledge and easily understood. So what really are you trying to say?
As far as what "the founding fathers" envisioned for society with respect to discrimination... you have to be honest. Citing one "founding father" or a few does not reflect the obvious consensus of them (you were talking in the plural as if many spoke as one which we both know they didn't when it came to certain issues). And you can spare me that somewhere down the line they hoped that would not exist.
Hmmmm.... Interesting.... "founding fathers"....
That would mean males right? What was explicitly said by them about women?
Again, I'm not romantic about them, though I respect sound principles from wherever they come from. I will however have to state, since you mentioned the Civil War, what Lincoln said that I believed plenty of Whites including "the founding fathers" believed (Jefferson for sure):
[i]I will say, then, that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races; that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, or intermarry with the white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I, as much as any other man, am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race. [/i]
So if this is the so-called "emancipator" saying this, one who "had" to clean up the slavery mess that the "founders" pawned off then what do you think they actually thought?
Now, note that Lincoln's was not without its relative positive, liberating and non-discriminatory points:
- I have no purpose to introduce political and social equality between the white and the black races. There is a physical difference between the two which, in my judgment, will probably forbid their ever living together upon the footing of perfect equality; and inasmuch as it becomes a necessity that there must be a difference, I, as well as Judge Douglas, am in favor of the race to which I belong having the superior position. I have never said anything to the contrary, but I hold that, notwithstanding all this, there is no reason in the world why the negro is not entitled to all the natural rights enumerated in the Declaration of Independence,—the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. I hold that he is as much entitled to these as the white man. I agree with Judge Douglas, he is not my equal in many respects,—certainly not in color, perhaps not in moral or intellectual endowments. But in the right to eat the bread, without leave of anybody else, which his own hand earns, he is my equal, and the equal of Judge Douglas, and the equal of every living man.
- I say upon this occasion I do not perceive that because the white man is to have the superior position, the negro should be denied everything. I do not understand that because I do not want a negro woman for a slave, I must necessarily want her for a wife. My understanding is that I can just let her alone. I am now in my fiftieth year, and I certainly never have had a black woman for either a slave or a wife. So it seems to me quite possible for us to get along without making either slaves or wives of negroes.