It's Confederate History Month in Dixie

[drone]

Not buy anymore.

Pre-Revolution, several states/colonies tried to ban the importation of slaves, the British Privy Council overruled them. Post-Revolution, all states except Georgia banned importation by 1786, Georgia (which didn't allow slavery from 1735-1750) banned it in 1798.

You could also set them free as well.

And watch them either starve in the wilderness or turn to crime to survive? And watch the newly birthed nation dissolve in economic ruin?

And the States/British North America were not the main buyers in the slave trade. The colonies in Central/South America and the Caribbean bought way more slaves in the Atlantic trade. Climate, disease, and conditions for those plantations and mines chewed through laborers very quickly. The US South catches (rightly so) a lot of grief because they kept slavery legal longer than most, but if we are talking sheer volume (and body count), look no further than the Spanish, Portuguese, French, and English colonies south of the border.

[DisruptorX]

Those are the arguments that gradual abolitionists/slaveholders used back then, yes. I wouldn't say those are actually valid points, though. In reality, when freed, ex-slaves turned to agriculture, business, and politics, and were moderately successful in all before the big crackdown during "redemption".

I mean, they didn't take over the government of the South as pictured in "Birth of a Nation", but they didn't exactly sit around and starve to death like the gradualist/pro-slavery crowd claimed would happen.

[drone]

Those are the arguments that gradual abolitionists/slaveholders used back then, yes. I wouldn't say those are actually valid points, though. In reality, when freed, ex-slaves turned to agriculture, business, and politics, and were moderately successful in all before the big crackdown during "redemption".

I mean, they didn't take over the government of the South as pictured in "Birth of a Nation", but they didn't exactly sit around and starve to death like the gradualist/pro-slavery crowd claimed would happen.

No, they didn't. But the overall situation in North America was different in 1865 than it was in 1788. Of course we won't know for sure, but I'm guessing that westward expansion, industrial revolution/modernization, Reconstruction policies, and the buildup of national infrastructure helped the freed slaves in their new life.

[Megas Methuselah]

And watch them either starve in the wilderness or turn to crime to survive?

Yes. It was for their own good. Just like what you did to those dirty Indians.

And watch the newly birthed nation dissolve in economic ruin?

State or country. Not nation.

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

Pre-Revolution, several states/colonies tried to ban the importation of slaves, the British Privy Council overruled them. Post-Revolution, all states except Georgia banned importation by 1786, Georgia (which didn't allow slavery from 1735-1750) banned it in 1798.

And watch them either starve in the wilderness or turn to crime to survive? And watch the newly birthed nation dissolve in economic ruin?

Not that it was remotely likely to happen, but break up the plantations and divide the land up among the slaves. It would hardly have ruined the United States (especially counting the vast expenses of ending slavery as it did four score and seven years later).

[PanzerJaeger]

Not that it was remotely likely to happen, but break up the plantations and divide the land up among the slaves. It would hardly have ruined the United States (especially counting the vast expenses of ending slavery as it did four score and seven years later).

Land redistribution does indeed have a track record of success... err...

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

The slaves already did the work on those plantations, why shouldn't they be entitled to keep what they produced? It's quite a different kettle of fish from taking the land from someone and giving it to someone else who was never involved with the land in the first place.

I think it's quite clear that it is unjust to profit from another's work without contributing to the process, ala plantation owners. The easiest solution to that injustice is to limit the profit of that work to the person doing it.

Can you show me a historical example where what I described happened, and resulted in negative consequences? Because I'm not even sure I can name such a situation at all, nevermind the outcomes.

[PanzerJaeger]

The slaves already did the work on those plantations, why shouldn't they be entitled to keep what they produced?

Because it wasn't theirs.

It is one thing for society to decide that slavery is not right and should be abolished. It is completely different to then simply take land from property owners who legally owned their land and distribute it to other people.

It would be as if the president emancipated your dog, and, despite the fact that owning your dog was legal yesterday, today the government decides to take half of your possessions and give them to the dog. It screams of banana republic politics.

Just because you may happen to believe that the plantation owners were acting immorally does not mean that they were acting illegally, and they should not have been punished ex post facto. The US government quickly came to this conclusion after the war and reversed the "40 acres and a mule" nonesense Sherman enacted.

Can you show me a historical example where what I described happened, and resulted in negative consequences? Because I'm not even sure I can name such a situation at all, nevermind the outcomes.

One only needs to look South of the border.

[Beskar]

Because it wasn't theirs.

It is one thing for society to decide that slavery is not right and should be abolished. It is completely different to then simply take land from property owners who legally owned their land and distribute it to other people.

It would be as if the president emancipated your dog, and, despite the fact that owning your dog was legal yesterday, today the government decides to take half of your possessions and give them to the dog. It screams of banana republic Marxism.

What he said was more like hiring Slaves as paid Workers.