Race and Revolution by Gary B Nash - Book Report/Review Example

Race and Revolution” by Gary B Nash 2006 Thesis statement: According to Gary B Nash, the continuation of slavery in the south during the Revolutionary era was not so much because of the economic and political structure of the south but more because of the northern leaders’ hesitance to forcefully advocate for abolition in the south due to fear of a civil war. Introduction Gary B Nash, the University of California (Los Angeles) professor of history, looks at the American Revolution from a non-conventional approach. As in his other books on the American Revolution, Nash analyzes the attitude of the leaders during the 1790s in a dispassionate manner in Race and Revolution (1990). Shorn of the myths and glories, Nash contends that during the revolutionary era, when slavery was abolished in the north, the leaders could not exercise their libertine attitude in the south. Purpose of the Book Contrary to the usual glorification of the founding fathers of the United States of America, Nash indicts the heroes for compromising on their principles and enlightened views. The revolutionaries look rather weak and irresolute. Rather than the stiff opposition to emancipation in the south, Nash blames the lackadaisical approach of the northern leaders for the continuation of the system. The northern leaders understood quite as well that the continuation of slavery in the south was a contradiction to the egalitarian society they dreamt of. Yet, they failed to press for abolition in the south and compensate the southern slaveholders for a biracial country. This was irony of "the Revolutionary generation's early efforts to right the contradiction of slavery and the ultimate compromises that strengthened the institution after 1788", as Nash finds. Besides, it was unfortunate that the leaders could not capitalize on the anti-slavery public sentiments ruling both in the north and the south during the 1970s and 1980s. Organization of the book Nash based his analysis extensively on annotated documents and letters by revolution leaders. Written originally as a series of lectures at the University of Wisconsin, sponsored by the Merrill Jensen Lectures in Constitutional Studies in 1988 (Cox, 1993), Nash has collected nineteen documents, including leaflets, letters, sermons and speeches by revolution leaders like Anthony Benezet, Luther Martin, Absalom Jones, Caesar Starter and so on, to prove his point. Major theme Nash shows that leaders, particularly those from the north, wasted away the opportunity to abolish the cruel system in the urge to unite the country fast and prevent a civil war in 1790 when nearly 90 percent of the slaves were in the south. Jefferson understood the problem, as Nash quotes him writing, “if something is not done, and done soon, we shall be the murderers of our own children” (Nash, p30). However, the northern leaders did not about the growing crisis and wished that the slavery would die on its own. Jefferson, too, despite finding the system of slavery abhorring, inherently believed in the inferiority of the blacks and proposed shipping back the freed slaves to Africa rather than integrating them in the newly formed Republic. St. George Tucker, a Virginia judge, wrote in the preamble of the 1796 abolition resolution, "Whilst America hath been the land of promise to Europeans..., it hath been the vale of death to millions of the wretched sons of Africa. Whilst we were offering up vows at the Shrine of Liberty, we were imposing upon our fellow men, who differ in complexion from us, a slavery, ten thousand times more cruel than the utmost extremity of those grievances and oppressions, of which we complained" (Nash, p 152). Although Tucker wanted his state to show the way, he did not propose any concrete manner to bring about racial harmony. Instead, he advocated for a gradual emancipation and black equality and wished the slavery would be eradicated from America by a natural process (Merrell). However, the institution of slavery in the south was actually growing at the time. Till then, most of the slaves worked in tobacco and rice farms. In 1793, the invention of the cotton gin increased the productivity of short-staple cotton manifold and the southern states became the center of cotton-growing in the country. The industry, heavily dependent on the labor of the slaves, grew from the production of 3,000 bales in 1790 to 178,000 bales in 1810. The cotton grown with the labor of slaves, transported to the southern ports, was exported to Europe, with the federal government earning huge tariffs. Hence, as Nash writes, “slavery would remain a national problem, not a southern problem but northerners, with few exceptions, acknowledged no responsibility for solving the problem” (p 30). At this point, if the northern leaders insisted upon abolition, it would not be taken lightly in the south and would lead to a civil war. The northern leaders remained contented by vociferously advocating abolition in the north while keeping a blind eye on the south. Particularly in South Carolina and Georgia, the leaders threatened to abandon the union if anti-slavery laws were imposed. The northern leaders were more concerned with the formation of the union and felt more or less satisfied by pressing for abolition in the north and wishing away the system in the south. Minor theme Many of the northern abolitionists themselves continued to own slaves themselves hence was not much of an example, as Nash notes. Even in the north, most slaves, like those owned by George Washington who too believed that slavery would die a natural death (Nash, p 3-20), earned their freedom by absconding while their masters were busy battling with the British rather than being freed voluntarily. When Limus, a slave in south Carolina explained his rationale of leaving as “liberty is sweet”, his angry master retorted, "Though he is my Property, he has the audacity to tell me, he will be free, that he will serve no Man, and that he will be conquered or governed by no man" (quoted in Nash, p 179). Abolitionists from Pennsylvania, Benjamin Rush and Rev Francis Allison, owned slaves all their lives. In 1785, Alexander Hamilton, Aaron Burr and 30 other abolitionists proposed a resolution that leaders would begin by freeing their slaves. The resolution could not be passed. Nash comments on this, saying “[I]n the manner northern state governments dealt with the abolition of slavery, the South witnessed the central difficulty besetting the revolutionary generation -- how to put into practice beliefs that could be implemented only at personal cost” (Nash, p 31). However, the leaders of the new Republic did notice that the institution of slavery was quite at odds with Enlightenment, the ruling ideology then. During the Federal Convention in Philadelphia, some leaders, both from the north and the south, stated this quite clealy. Luther Martin, delegate from Maryland, argued that “slavery is inconsistent with the genius of republicanism, and has a tendency to destroy those principles on which it is supported, as it lessens the sense of the equal rights of mankind, and habituates us to tyranny and oppression" and demanded that the Maryland ratification convention in 1788 rejects the Constitution (p 142-143). In retaliation of the discrimination, free slaves created alternate black institutions like the black church, to create their own identity and to continue with the demands for abolition of slavery. The opportunity that the American Revolution gave for thousands of slaves from the south to abscond while their masters were away later became the backbone of the emancipation movement in the north (Waldstreicher). Conclusion It was unlikely that abolition would face very stiff opposition in the deep South despite the threats from southern leaders to leave the union in case anti-slavery laws were imposed, Nash argues. Especially, the two states that had significant slave population in the south – South Carolina and Georgia – were politically weak and could not afford to leave the union. Land sales in the west across the Appalachian had begun and the free slaves from the south could be colonized there, like those from the north were, and the revenues of the land sales could be used to compensate the slave owners. The enlightened leaders lost an opportunity to hasten abolition this way. Nash argues that northern leaders failed to view slavery as a national problem that required a solution “in which the North might have expected to take the lead” (Nash, p 30). Works Cited Cox, Stephen, Review, Gary B Nash, Race and Revolution, Journal of Early Republic, Vol 13, No 1, Spring 1993 Nash, Gary B, Race and Revolution, Madison, 1990 Waldstreicher, David, Slavery, Race and the Press in the 18th and Early 19th Centuries, http://www.amrevonline.org/museum2/index.cgi2?a=pageview&page_id=18 Merrell, James H., Revisiting, Revising, and Reviving America's Founding Era, http://specialcollections.vassar.edu/americana2/merrell-essay.html Read More