by Lupus
A lot of people, from Democrats to Republicans, Tea Party to
Occupiers, talk about “taking America back” and “returning the nation to its
founding principles.” Clearly, there must be some confusion about what those
“founding principles” are, to be so widely claimed by so divergent ideologies.
Each sees within the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence their own
primitive utopia of tricorn-hatted supermen who omnisciently had all the
answers for all time. Such reactionary thought is ingrained into us as children
in school , learning the myths of our country’s founding in order to instill in
us the backwards pride of American Exceptionalism, and a blindness to our
nation’s imperialist actions around the world.
I’ve even heard Progressives talk about the problems of
social and economic inequality we face today, and “if we could only get things
back to the way things were” and “we never had this level of inequality from
the period between the civil war and the great depression.”
Really? So, Segregation, Poll Taxes, Women being unable to
vote, child labor (yes, made illegal in the latter part of that period, but
extremely pervasive), no social security, vast amounts of illiteracy, the
continuing genocide of native American peoples, and the rise of the robber
barons of oil, railways, textiles, and manufacturing with working conditions
that prompted Upton Sinclair’s book “The Jungle” – all of this is somehow
better than the conditions we face today?
And what of our “great founding fathers” and their incredibly
wise magical document, the Constitution? Let’s talk about them, shall we? Why not start
with the “great” George Washington – a rich, white, slave-owning, patriarchal,
intolerant, racist miser who had little regard for human life other than that
of other rich, white, slave-owning men.
The following quotes are from an article by Peter Henriques, “
The
Only Unavoidable Subject of Regret": George Washington and Slavery (
http://chnm.gmu.edu/courses/henriques/hist615/gwslav.htm
):
During the pre-Revolutionary years,
Washington's views toward slavery were [as far as the record reveals]
conventional, reflecting those of a typical Virginia planter of his time. He
undoubtedly shared the "engrained sense of racial superiority" so
common among white Virginians and did not emotionally identify with the slaves'
plight. There is an extant letter from Washington [1766] that leaves a flavor
of the nature of the institution and his rather routine acceptance of it."Sir: With this letter comes a Negro
(Tom) which I beg the favour of you to sell, in any of the Islands you may go
to, for whatever he will fetch, and bring me in return for him: one hhd [sic] of
best molasses, one of best Rum, one barrel of Lymes if good and cheap, … and
the residue, much or little in good ole spirits…That this Fellow is both a
rogue and a Runaway…I shall not pretend to deny. But . . . he is exceedingly
healthy, strong and good at the Hoe… which gives me reason to hope he may, with
your good management sell well (if kept clean and trim'd up a little when
offered for sale… [I] must beg the favor of you (lest he should attempt his
escape) to keep him hand-cuffed till you get to Sea."
**************
Washington tended to view slavery as a
commercial enterprise. It was simply an integral part of his desire to make
profits from tobacco and grain cultivation and keep debts to a minimum. In this
sense, MV slaves were his chattels, his human property. The language he used in
buying them might be applicable to livestock. He wished "all of them to be
strait limbed, & in every respect strong and healthy with good Teeth."
As the historian John Ferling notes in his often perceptive but essentially
critical study of GW, "He was not moved to express hatred or love or
empathy for his chattel. They were simply business propositions, and his
comments regarding these unfortunate people were recorded with about as much
passion as were his remarks on wheat rust or the efficacy of a new fertilizer."
GW unquestionably assumed that his slaves
would "be at their work, as soon as it was light, [and] work till it was
dark." Each bondsman "must be made to do a sufficient day's
work." GW's goal for his bondsmen and women was explicit: "that every
laborer (male and female) does as much in 24 hours as their strength, without
endangering their health or constitution, will allow." Or again: "It
has always been my aim to feed & cloath them well, & be careful of them
in sickness - in return, I expect such labour as they ought[!] to
render."…
**************
He lamented, "Lost labour can never
be regained," and overseers were urged to be constantly vigilant and to
always remember that the slaves were working for GW. In his words, "I
expect to reap the benefit of the labour myself." [He complained that
Peter who was responsible for riding around the plantation to check on the
stock was usually engaged "in pursuits of other objects… more advancive of
his own pleasure than my benefit." Again the interesting point is that GW
can complain about this while most of us would sympathize with Peter's
actions.]
Washington, however, to his constant and
growing frustration, found it was not easy in fact to reap the benefits of
their labor. Indeed, he increasingly viewed the system of slave labor as
inherently inefficient. He noted, "Every place where I have been there are
many workmen, and little work." [It might be mentioned in passing that GW
was a hard man to work for and he makes constant complaints about the quality
of his laborers - white as well as black] He had lots of complaints. Slaves
feigned illness, destroyed equipment, were often idle and regularly stole his
corn, meat, apples, and liquor. GW lamented that unless watched the slaves
would get 2 glasses of wine for every one served in the mansion. Everything not
nailed down was in danger of being stolen. And how could it be nailed down when
even the nails were disappearing? "I cannot conceive how it is possible
for 6,000 12 penny nails could be used in the Corn house at River Plantation,
but of one thing I have no great doubt and that is, if they can be applied to
other uses, or converted into cash, rum, or other things, there will be no
scruple in doing it." [from Jean Lee]
**************
There is some dispute about the living conditions
of the slaves at Mount Vernon as the evidence and testimony are in conflict.
Certainly, they did not live well. One visitor to Mount Vernon [a Polish
nobleman] was shocked by the living quarters of Washington's slaves referring
to them as "huts," adding "for one can not call them by the name
of houses. They are more miserable than the most miserable of the cottages of
our peasants. The husband and wife sleep on a mean pallet, the children on the
ground; a very bad fireplace, some utensils for cooking." GW himself
seemed to acknowledge their very rudimentary condition, for when he later
sought Europeans to work Mount Vernon's fields, he admitted that the slave
quarters at MV "might not be thought good enough for the workmen or day
laborers" of England. Clothing and blankets were carefully rationed. A
woman would receive an extra blanket if she had a child, but if the child died,
the woman would not get a new blanket for herself but was to use the one given
to her child. On clothing for the children, another French nobleman declared,
the Negro quarters "swarm with pickaninnies in rags that our beggars would
scorn to wear." [This might be from 19th century] The slaves' rations,
consisting chiefly of maize, herring, and occasionally salt meat, must have
been at least on occasion rather meager, for GW's slaves at least once took the
extraordinary step of petitioning their master, claiming they received an
inadequate supply of food.
Why do we revere this man? In
modern times, he would be viewed as despicable as the Grand Dragon of the KKK,
or decried for his abusive labor practices and boycotted by concerned citizens
groups. Does the excuse that “it was a different time” condone the attitudes
and actions of those involved? Nineteen-thirty nine was a “different time,” does
that excuse the holocaust?
The other “founding fathers” were
just as elitist and reactionary. John Adams, a Neo-Monarchist, “declared that
the distinction between gentlemen and commoners was the "most ancient and
universal of all Divisions of People" — conceived of the Senate as a
direct parallel to the British House of Lords, maintaining the interests of the
gentry as a counterweight to the common people's representatives in the House
of Representatives.” (Budiansky,
http://budiansky.blogspot.com/2010/10/george-washington-what-elitist.html
) Alexander Hamilton wrote in a letter to Theodore Sedgwick: “"... our
real Disease ... is Democracy, the poison of which by a subdivision will only be
the more concentrated in each part, and consequently the more virulent." (
http://www.masshist.org/database/207
). Even Thomas Jefferson, the author of the Declaration of Independence, spoke
of a “natural aristocracy” of people through merit. This probably should not be
surprising coming from a man who, like the others (with the exception of John
Adams), owned many slaves, and sexually exploited his personal concubine, Sally
Hemmings. This charge of course is vigorously denied by Neo-cons today, but the
circumstantial evidence together with the DNA evidence (which does not rule the
possibility out) paints a clear enough picture – (
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/jefferson/true/morgan.html
).
America was built on the backs of
slaves, the genocide of native nations, and the exploitation of immigrants and
the working class. Today, it is a repressive oligarchy of bourgeoisie elites, feeding
off the working people and nurturing and exporting Imperialist terrorism at home
and abroad. This must be recognized and publicly acknowledged before we can
hope to create the kind of nation we claim to aspire to be; one of justice,
freedom, and equality. We cannot build a future on a foundation of lies about
the past. Rather than reach back for a rosy history which never existed, let us
rise up and take the power into our own hands and end once and for all the
system of slavery to which we are bound with real and imaginary chains, and
work to create a better future.
