some thought pro-slavery arguments weren't pc? oh my gawd. if they weren;t pc, then maybe they deserve the fate or larry summers.
if i recall fogel and north, one of whom one a noble econ laureate, pointed out slaves actually had it pretty good, with respect to the non slave owning white class of the time (mostly moonshiners and nascar drivers, i assume) in terms of growing thier own food, saturday night parties etc . i did suspect this was written to counter reperations arguments of the time, which are still somewhat popular.
--- On Wed, 7/15/09, Gar Lipow <the.typo.boy at gmail.com> wrote:
> From: Gar Lipow <the.typo.boy at gmail.com>
> Subject: [lbo-talk] Abolition as self-help
> To: "lbo-talk" <lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org>
> Date: Wednesday, July 15, 2009, 4:14 PM
> Clio Bluestocking Tales
> Thursday, July 02, 2009
> Abolition as a Self-Help Movement
>
> http://cliobluestockingtales.blogspot.com/2009/07/abolition-as-self-help-movement.html
>
> I've been grading for the past two days. As Babu used to
> say, "I wept
> for the future of America, then I made pie." The grades
> didn't make me
> weep. Some did well, others did not. The usual. Their
> answers about
> ending slavery -- which are typical of answers that I have
> graded over
> the past several years -- made me weep.
>
> For example, in the past few years, I have read essays that
> refer to
> the conditions of slavery as a "lifestyle." I have read
> essays framing
> the strengths and weaknesses of the different methods of
> anti-slavery
> societies as the successes or failures of the members'
> determination,
> perseverance, and work ethic. I have read essays that say
> the failure
> of the abolitionists -- and they do seem to think that the
> abolitionist movement failed -- was the result of a failure
> to "work
> with" the white people, presumably the slaveholders. I've
> read essays
> that described pro-slavery arguments as "politically
> incorrect." I've
> read essays that say the mission of the abolition movement
> was to
> inspire the slaves to have better lives. I have read
> reports on
> emancipation as the slaves' reward for hard work.
>
> In my more fatigued moments, I have to restrain myself from
> outright
> snark. In my more inquisitive moments, I wonder how they
> could have
> come up with these ideas. Why are they describing slavery
> and
> abolition this way? The book doesn't describe either in
> these terms,
> so where are they getting this language? Then, I became
> painfully
> aware that my students, as part of the public at large,
> have been
> indoctrinated into a culture of "achievement" and
> "self-help" to the
> point that that they do not have the language to describe
> relationships of power or the fight for justice. I'm seeing
> the
> students attempt to evaluate abolitionist tactics -- the
> ways that a
> handful of people attempted to eradicate a system of human
> property --
> using a wholly inadequate narrative.
>
> In this narrative, if you work hard enough, if you believe
> enough in
> yourself, if you persevere, then you will succeed and have
> a better
> life. From students' introductory assignments -- the ones
> that I have
> them complete at the beginning of online classes to get an
> idea of who
> these faceless names are -- this is the narrative that gets
> them
> through their lives. Many use the very same terms about
> their desire
> to make good grades in school in order to have a better
> life as they
> do to describe the slaves' desire to be free or the
> abolitionists'
> desire to end the institution of slavery. They attempt to
> describe the
> failures of the abolitionist movement as the personal
> failures of
> individuals and using the same buzzwords that we hear in
> the
> sound-bite attacks of politicians who aren't getting their
> way.
>
> I don't mind them finding inspiration in the lives of
> historical
> figures like Frederick Douglass or Harriet Tubman because
> that is
> their own business; but I doubt that either Douglass or
> Tubman would
> see the problems facing slaves or abolitionists as personal
> weaknesses
> or a poor work ethic. They both spoke of systems of power.
> They spoke
> of injustice that prevented hard-working, determined,
> persevering
> people from being anything more than chattel. They intended
> to end
> that injustice by attacking the system, slavery. Examining
> the hows
> and whys of that is part of the purpose of studying
> history.
>
>
> The students are not stupid or blind for using this
> narrative. How
> could they not fit new information into this narrative
> given that it
> is the plot of every movie, every "X History" month story,
> every
> behind-the-music biography? It is the plot of heroism and
> the plot of
> achievement. It is the story to get children to do their
> homework and
> practice the piano. It is the story that gets students
> through a
> 25-hour day, 8-day week filled with family, work, and
> classes.
>
>
> Yet, while adherence to this narrative may get the students
> through
> their education, it inhibits the very purpose of their
> education
> because it prevents them from critically examining
> relationships
> between groups of people. It keeps them from looking too
> closely at
> injustice, and from learning about the strategies and
> tactics used by
> people who have attacked injustice in the past.
>
> More specifically, I find that the students who cling to
> this
> achievement narrative are unable to fully comprehend the
> material of
> the class. In understanding success and failure as a simple
> narrative
> based upon the character of an individual, they fail to
> understand the
> connection between the anti-slavery movement and the end of
> slavery.
> Like I wrote above, they think that the anti-slavery
> movement failed,
> despite the obvious fact that slavery is over and despite
> their
> arguments that everyone in the northern states supported
> abolition.
> They don't connect the dots because the dots don't align
> the way that
> they expect.
>
> As a result, they end up writing incomprehensible essays in
> answer to
> such questions as "who freed the slaves?" or "what ended
> slavery?" or
> "why did slavery last so long?" There was slavery, which
> was bad; an
> antislavery movement, which failed despite being a popular
> movement
> involving a majority of people in the northern states; a
> Civil War,
> which the north won; and emancipation, which Lincoln made
> happen. They
> have a difficult time connecting these events or the events
> of
> previous chapters and units; and therefore, they have a
> difficult time
> thinking critically, writing a persuasive argument, or
> simply
> understanding the material beyond flashcard memorization.
>
> When encountering new material, my students fall back upon
> the stories
> or outlines that they have learned since first grade rather
> than reach
> forward to incorporate that information into an argument
> that
> demonstrates understanding. I have to constantly work to
> turn that
> around, to combat the 5th grade Black History Month
> homework
> assignments and History Channel "documentaries" to get the
> students to
> think about the information as something more complicated,
> not
> empirically heroic nor ending neatly and happily. That, I
> suppose, is
> what makes me a college educator and makes what I do for a
> living
> important.
>
> I fear I'm framing this as "them against me," "their
> failings against
> my superiority." That's not what I mean, and if my words
> come across
> that way, then that is a result of a guilty conscience from
> my own
> sins in relying upon popular narratives rather than
> critical thought.
> I'm trying to describe what is going on here in order to
> figure out
> how to undo it, how to push them out of the rut of the
> heroic stories
> because all of this distresses me.
>
> Now, I must go make a lot of pie.
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>