This is more or less the standard understanding of how the Founding generation in Virginia framed slavery, esp by contrast to its characterization by Calhoun & his followers as a positive good. https://twitter.com/AndyGrewal/status/1287567993795420161 …
-
This Tweet is unavailable.Show this thread
-
Dan McLaughlin Retweeted Josh Marshall
Where this sentiment came in at the constitutional convention was not that *slavery* was necessary, but that *compromises* over slavery were necessary. This is really just haggling over some verbal shorthand for familiar concepts.https://twitter.com/joshtpm/status/1287500446513467392 …
Dan McLaughlin added,
Josh MarshallVerified account @joshtpmFWIW, and pace Dingus Tom Cotton, no one at the constitutional convention or really at any other part of the creation of the American Republic said slavery was necessary to get the country off the ground but then later we'd get rid of it. No one.Show this thread3 replies 21 retweets 57 likesShow this thread -
IOW, 1) the Founders were divided on slavery, 2) most saw it as bad, 3) places like VA & MD argued they weren't ready for abolition as the North was 4) the Convention lived with compromises but 5) they still wrote a Constitution that enabled state-level abolition.
6 replies 18 retweets 54 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @baseballcrank
Abolition didn't come easily, even in the North.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.