Why Thomas Jefferson Never Freed His Slaves

[@realryanchapman]

Thank you to everyone who supports these projects on Patreon. I wouldn't be able to devote so much time and so many resources to one video otherwise. I'm trying to make the best work I can and the donations really do make it possible. If you'd like to chip in and support me, check out www.patreon.com/rchapman. Video notes below: I've been trying to figure out how much evidence to provide on screen for what I say in the video. In the past year or so I've shifted towards showing evidence pretty continuously throughout the entire video. But then it seems like if there are only a few claims left with no evidence shown, and people single out those claims and believe I made them up. Showing evidence for literally every claim, I think, would be exhausting to watch, so I'm not sure how to solve that. For this one, I saw a number of people single out the section where I said according to my research, slavery persisted in the South because white Southerners didn't want to work outdoors in hot climates, and say it's absurd and I made it up. To explain why I constructed that section the way I did, I thought 1) it's not a key point for the piece, and 2) it's common sense. So I thought I'd give the audience a break on reading text for that section. I also showed some supporting text from Gordon Wood on how the philosophy of labor was shifting in both the North and South at the time. I figured that was enough, and if people were intrigued or skeptical on that point they could research it on their own. To address it here I'd start by asking: how else would you explain why the further south you went, the more adamant people became about keeping slavery? Why were those same people so work avoidant compared to people in the North? Why was the Deep South so firm on slavery, while the North gave it up within a generation? I'm curious if people have alternative explanations, because while researching for this piece I literally did not come across one. Every source that covered it said the same thing: climate. That was also the prevailing take when this was all happening. Perhaps some quotes from primary sources will do. In 1804, when senators were debating whether to restrict the importation of slaves into Louisiana, GA rep Jackson said: 'Gentlemen from north & the east do not know that white men cannot endure the heat of a vertical sun - they cannot cultivate and raise a crop of rice - negroes are necessary for that country.' and 'a white man cannot cultivate three acres of rice, and yet Georgia is not so warm as Louisiana. You cannot prevent slavery - neither laws moral or human can do it - men will be governed by their interest, not the law...' Jefferson himself in Notes on the State of Virginia: 'in a warm climate, no man will labour for himself who can make another labour for him,' after saying blacks are 'more tolerant of heat, and less so of cold, than the whites.' Some people also seem offended by my use of 'alleged' when talking about Jefferson and Sally Hemings, apparently because they thought it should be treated as fact. From what I can tell the evidence does strongly support the claim that Jefferson fathered children with her. The DNA test only says it was a Jefferson male (of which there were about ten at Monticello) who fathered one of her kids, but Jefferson was with Sally every time she probably conceived, which is considered strong evidence. Generally speaking, there was significant pushback/skepticism from the academic community in the '90s when Annette Gordon-Reed published 'Thomas Jefferson & Sally Hemings,' which was the work that got this conversation seriously going. The pushback was mostly based on the fact that Jefferson hardly ever mentioned her in his writing (I think 4 times in about 18,000 letters), that it seemed out of character for him to keep his children as slaves, that people around Jefferson hardly mentioned her, and that we know so little about Sally. Then the DNA test came out, and Gordon-Reed published 'The Hemings Of Monticello,' which basically said Jefferson's behavior step-by-step indicates he had a relationship with Hemings, and his silence on her is consistent with behavior of other white male Virginian slaveowners, and that people around him would also understand to keep quiet about her. Now most professional opinion (that I've read) does conclude that he fathered children with Sally, but I still thought it would be wrong to treat it as fact, knowing it's a controversial subject, and knowing I wasn't going to take the time in the video to go through all this. So I just said 'alleged' and left it to the comments in case people disagreed or were offended. Hope that cleared things up. I've seen a couple people flag Ben Franklin's anti-slavery activity to refute what I said about none of the Founders 'risking their careers' to end slavery. Franklin's activity was at the very end of his life, which meant 1) he wasn't risking his career over it, and 2) his activity was after the crucial time window I was talking about in that section, when slavery was being widely debated and the defense of it hadn't solidified. I also didn't claim that the Founders literally said nothing about the abolition of slavery. Only that in the years that crucially mattered they didn't press the issue. They overwhelmingly focused their efforts on other issues, like the formation of the union/constitution, diplomacy, and freedom of religion. From my research, in those years Jefferson was actually the most outspoken against slavery of them all (he attempted three major instances of it afaik), but he cared far more about other issues (like freedom of religion), and his 'anti-slavery' stance also came with his highly impractical deportation clause. Last note - many comments say it was Jefferson's debt that prevented him from freeing his slaves. I have never seen a professional make this claim. The reason why is because Jefferson said what he would do with his slaves if he ever got out of debt. He said he would improve the living conditions of his slaves. Not free them. Also he lived an extravagant lifestyle, for example constantly hosting guests and serving fine wine from around the world, and taking on huge expenses trying to turn Monticello into basically his dream home. He didn't live as someone trying to get out of debt in order to free his slaves. In short, the claim doesn't make sense if you study him. - Ryan

[@kaerakh4267]

As always, your work is appreciated Ryan, thank you.

[@Rat_8868]

May you do a video on anarchism?

[@gg_rider]

Some Black people today are red pilled that White society overall is superior (AK NATION NEWS) .. never to claim EVERY White is superior to EVERY Black. One book I'm reading that's from the 1980s says African Black people have no doubts that they could never have created the technology or social order that Whites create. They also aren't ashamed or offended by the topic. Only Africans _educated_ in White universities learned to manipulate White guilt, he explains. I have not had direct experience with Africans. I did read a story about a group of students at University of Nigeria who lynched (not hanging) a student, killing him, over accusations he stole a laptop. That was about two months ago. Look it up. That's Scientific Maximum Shishi. At least one South African Black woman published a video of herself asking White people to come back and run their country, because their electricity and everything else is collapsing.

[@paneraemployee12]

I love history and I love your content so please keep it up.

[@docjaramillo]

I hope you make 10x what a college professor teaching American history makes… not that I wish those ol guys ill. But you are a genuine Prof. Thanks for your erudition, sensitivity to the issue, and concise presentation of very complex issues

[@williewonka6694]

John Adams was also a product of his times. John and Abigail were given a slave as a wedding present, which they refused to accept. Both of them, and particularly Abigail, worked their small farm throughout their lives and their wealth and properties steadily grew, while Jefferson spent his life squandering inherited wealth and living on the backs of his slaves. Despite his narratives for freedom and liberty. Observing the lives of these two founders definitely provides insights into human nature. Pity that the Adamses are not better remembered.

[@byronhunt6124]

I was thinking exactly the same thoughts while watching this video

[@carlabroderick5508]

Jefferson’s insolvency is usually related to his indulgence in politics to the expense of his farm’s management. What is the evidence he squandered money?

[@warlordofbritannia]

Not even mentioning Sally Hemings was also an interesting choice. A good historian would address the flaws in his thesis-this is the first video from this channel I’ve seen but *something* tells me he’s just a partisan hack pretending to intellectualism… Edit: Yes, I know he mentions Hemings in passing at one point. If anything that makes it worse because he clearly knows about the whole situation but ignored it in this video specifically Jefferson the slaveholder!

[@VideoDefinition]

​@@warlordofbritanniaI think you may be the partisan hack who was hoping to find something to confirm you bias

[@benavraham4397]

Thank you for your enlightening comment. However, giving up one slave is very different from giving up over a hundred.

[@ericpeterson8732]

The more I hear about Jefferson, the more I think the Epic Rap Battle (ERB) guys got him pegged correctly. A man of principles that didn't risk his economic standing to live up to those principles. Having Frederick Douglass point these things out was brilliant.

[@jillfryer6699]

his first principle was his economic standing

[@tghays]

He lacked the courage of his convictions.

[@huntclanhunt9697]

To be fair, even great men of high principles can stumble when it comes to the well-being of their kids. He loved his kids, and as much as he hated slavery, he wasn't willing to risk his kid's wellbeing.

[@warlordofbritannia]

@@huntclanhunt9697 *his white kids. The children he sired on Sally Hemings he kept enslaved until his death.

[@lastcuneyt3334]

He enslaved hundreds of other peoples kids tho 🤣@@huntclanhunt9697

[@euphegenia]

As someone who has read a ton on Jefferson and his writings, this video is very very good.

[@2MinuteHockey]

why no mention of Tadeusz Kosciuszko donating his estate to Jefferson to buy the freedom of however many slaves it would afford and TJ pocketed the money?

[@Boethius411]

@@2MinuteHockey not the only thing left out. I guess not everything could be included, but it is interesting what made it in and what did. Jefferson was a complicated human. His words and actions seem irreconcilable at times. He did things like promote and sign the Act Prohibiting the Importation of Slaves, but still of course, profited from his own slaves. I suppose it is up to us to weigh both the good and the bad for ourselves.

[@2MinuteHockey]

@@Boethius411 sounds like "altruistic capitalism" of 1800s where he did what was "right" and profited by means that were obviously wrong. kinda like if the largest land owner in a monopoly pushes for land development/sale moratoriums

[@Boethius411]

@@2MinuteHockey as opposed to communist altruism in the 20th? You know, like collectivising everything down to 8 acres and sending all the kulaks to the gulag for hoarding grain? From each according to their ability eh comrade?

[@theproceedings4050]

​​@@2MinuteHockey You mean Thaddeus Kosciuszko? You do know he had multiple wills and because of the disputes the money never even made it to Jefferson, right? Pulaski never gave money to Jefferson.

[@curtisnewton2295]

After 5 minutes of watching this video, I'm not sure whether I'm joyfully surprised by its thoughtfulness and nuanced perspectives, or saddened by the very fact that this makes it so utterly unique on KZbin (or among *any* discussions of political topics nowadays). Thank you!

[@niclasnyberg4173]

you gotta look harder, there's a lot more thoughtful and nuanced content on youtube than corporate TV, i promise. you can find post grad dissertation videos from places like harvard and multiple hour lectures from oxford and the like on here as well as plenty of independent people who do good work. edit: no joke, my recommendations are brimming with similar content

[@Deepintent]

Start with Thomas Sowell.

[@ejkboxing]

There's no nuance. There are just lies & crimes.

[@curtisnewton2295]

@@ejkboxing And idiots too, yes.

[@amorales9613]

All this video did was confirm your beliefs. Dig Deeper.

[@jwestney2859]

Amazing the way you tell this story -- heart wrenching story -- with text on the screen. And you highlight each passage as you read it. Producing this video must have taken weeks and weeks. It must be part of a life-long labor. I really admire your work!

[@SolracCAP]

You are the kind of content creator and voice we need in this day and age.

[@2MinuteHockey]

why no mention of Casimir Pulaski donating his estate to Jefferson to buy the freedom of however many slaves it would afford and TJ pocketed the money?

[@xIQ188x]

@@2MinuteHockey because this isn’t about history, this is about telling lies so people will stop being mean to his favorite slaver.

[@maskedmarvyl4774]

Too bad his actions didn't match his many writings about man's basic right of freedom

[@hmm7258]

​@@2MinuteHockeywasn't it Kościuszko, not Pułaski?

[@andywomack3414]

According to one scholar I watched give a lecture on C-Span there is a draft of the Declaration that has in Jefferson's hand "life, liberty and property." On that draft, the word "property" had been struck through, and above it, in John Adams hand was the phrase "pursuit of happiness." Jefferson may have personally copied out the final version of the Declaration, but he is not it's sole author.

[@marykatherinegoode2773]

Most accurately, Adams should be credited as the editor of that document. Franklin I would wager would have been the one who understood the Court of St. James the best, and would have known what would and would not get the attention of the king and Parliament. His job was to be the wise owl telling how to make them listen. Adams I suspect was there to keep Thomas on the ball: “We cannot use that phrase, Tom. The counter argument would be that we are all propertied men and they could build a case that the colonists who have most whine the loudest. What is in it for everybody else that has been afflicted with the machinations of George III? “ Adams was the most mulishly stubborn, most out of his gourd when angry, and was the most cantankerous son of a bitch in Independence Hall. He was also a shade better at lawyering than Tom, largely because to him there was nothing he liked better than an argument. (If he had an all out loud fight with Abigail on his wedding night,the world should not be surprised: for John, that was his idea of foreplay. ) Adams made a rousing speech, the content of which is lost to time, just a few days before the vote. There was a thunderstorm outside. Independence Hall would have been darker than usual as this is a time before kerosene or electric lightbulbs. I am sure the effect of rolling thunder and blasts of lightning would have set up quite a show that only added to Adams's speech. It certainly helped with the final push. (Jefferson hated to speak in public, because he had a higher pitched voice than most men, and a slight lisp. At the time his wife was very ill due to miscarriage, so his mind was elsewhere.) Adams unfortunately got in his own way a lot with an uncontrollable temper and a bit of a sour exterior. He was hypercritical of others and not Mr. Friendly, unless you were a woman (he would not dare be as big of an asshole in front of a lady: women were too tender to be subjected to his usual grousing and grumping in his eyes.) For many years, no one knew there was a much nicer side to him that he kept hidden. One of his grandsons or great grandsons, one of those was the one to publish the letters between his wife and himself; his diary came later. It is one of the reasons why he did not get the credit he was due until much later than Jefferson. (Note: many scholars believe he had some sort of metabolic disorder, and possibly was bipolar as well. There were episodes during the Revolution where he would become incredibly sick: he literally would work to the point of collapse. In the play 1776, the opening number has a whole chorus of men singing for John Adams to sit down. In reality, they should’ve been singing, “Lay down, John, lay down!!”😊😊)

[@bwhog]

@@marykatherinegoode2773 Jefferson was the more articulate and better writer than the others. He was tasked with creating the document. Franklin and Adams acted primarily as critics and advisors and thus made only a few notable alterations. Most of the document that was submitted to the Congress was Jefferson's original text. It is there that the problem of hashing out the exact language and what should or should not be included took place.

[@davehug]

Very much he is what you are describing is an editorial alteration not an authorship of the body of work.

[@Ephisus]

A subject sorely needing the nuance that Ryan Chapman can provide.

[@drandrewm]

The real question is, who gets to be nuanced and for what purpose? We have decided that Hitler or Idi Amin, for example, should never be nuanced, but that the founding fathers be seen as "great but flawed" men. Why? I enjoyed the video and believed that this information should be widely taught albeit I did not agree with everything said. For the average Black American, however, I suspect that this video was just a bit too "nuanced."

[@QuixEnd]

​@@drandrewm It's impossible to disregard all nuance, we just choose when to and when not to focus on it, and for good reason. It feels wrong if I pointed out that MLK cheated on his wife, or that Nazi Germany _did_ have amazing scientists. But other nuances feel totally legitimate to point out. I think that's the harder question to think about. *Both sides are also just reacting to the others reaction at this point, so it always seems unnecessarily intense. We live in a clown world

[@BS-vx8dg]

@@drandrewm "We have decided that Hitler or Idi Amin, for example, should never be nuanced" Andrew, have you seen Ryan's video on Nazism? IIRC, it is more thoughtful than the typical treatment of Hitler and the Nazis.

[@drandrewm]

@@QuixEnd Take the idea that Jefferson was relatively more benevolent than the usual slave holder...that's beyond "nuance" to the point of being propaganda, and it was unnecessary. But, there are people who "needed" to hear Ryan say this for reasons I still don't understand.

[@drandrewm]

@@BS-vx8dg I haven't, but my point was aimed at American sentiments overall. Thomas Jefferson was a great American thinker, but he was also, extremely wealthy (via inheritance), which made him entitled, at times cruel, opportunistic, and hypocritical. His ideas about black inferiority were a personal convenience, but the effects were severe and long lasting. IMO I was actually fine with the post overall, but it seemed like Ryan was more than happy to recount select propaganda. (eg) TJ broke up families like all slave holders, especially when he needed money. Ryan suggested that TJ hired cruel overseers because the nice ones were in short supply (really?). I had a long conversation with a historian at Monticello about 10 years ago. He indicated that many visitors are often insistent (some to the point of being belligerent) that he tell them that Jefferson was "good." It seems like Ryan understands this dynamic and played to it a little. To be clear, I like and follow Ryan and will continue to watch his channel, and more importantly, will continue to appreciate the conversations his videos generate.

[@bretnicholson]

Excellent job. Thanks especially for the extensive use of primary resources. This is an excellent example of how history ought to be taught and learned.

[@lisaflint7027]

Although I was an avid American history enthusiast growing up, I had only a rudimentary understanding of Jefferson, that is until my father gave me the book 'American Sphinx' by J. Ellis. When I finished it my father asked my opinion, all I could say was that Jefferson was a very complicated and conflicted man, he smiled and said "Yes, he was". Also, I just finished 'Washington, A Life' by Chernow, (a most excellent book btw) and found that Washington was of the same thread as Jefferson, they were both men of their times. Excellent video! Your videos should be required viewing in classrooms. Thank you!

[@xIQ188x]

Lol your father didn’t do that, no one’s father sucks that hard.

[@warlordofbritannia]

The difference is that Washington freed his slaves while Jefferson kept his and probably had a gRapey relationship with one of them in particular. If Tommy J had followed Washington’s example there would be far less moral condemnation.

[@velindamitchell583]

Thomas Jefferson enjoyed living a grand lifestyle, which was far and away above his means. He left his surviving family with great debts. His slaves were sold off to pay thise debts. His extensive library of books were also sold to pay his debts. Actually everything was sold off and it was still not enough to cover his debts. His surviving grandson who "inherited" Jefferson's estate, paid on the debt the rest of his life.

[@Tht1Gy]

Thx for the book titles. I will endeavor to read them. Peace.

[@GunRunner3]

I am unable to comment on this video - THE CENSORS HAVE CHANGED MY IDENTIFICATION TO HITLER WITHOUT MY PERMISSION - BEAWARE

[@j.a.svoboda9805]

"...tragically human." One of the best descriptions of the man I've heard.

[@DaenerysStormborn-cw5ws]

How about "filthy RAPIST"? In an act of unfathomable cruelty, blackmailed Sally Hemmings into staying his slave by holding her (THEIR) children HOSTAGE. Hero worship is for FOOLS. Take the good with the bad but DON'T make excuses when your hero is a louse. CRUELTY is NEVER anything but CRUELTY, now, then or EVER.

[@huizhechen3779]

The phrase should be, I think, "inevitably human", for he was only human & not an "angel".

[@plaguedoctor_139]

Will humans always be imperfect?

[@BS-vx8dg]

Forgive me, Ryan. I saw the topic and, knowing its complexity and its capacity for stirring contemporary passions, doubted that you could successfully navigate the choppy waters. But once again you have proven to be *the* master at creating commentary that any open minded person on any side of this issue will respect. Beautifully done (as usual).

[@WetBoy]

Dumb and uninformed comment

[@Poosley]

*eyeroll*

[@candide1065]

Don't know if sarcasm or not but the dude is just reading books and articles on the internet and summs them up for stupid/lazy people who don't read books and need a half hour summary for everything like school kids. You're worshipping him like a god and even start your comment with a apology and a justification. Seek help.

[@Keiranful]

A very good and balanced review. My personal feelings on the subject tend to emphasize how radical the enlightenment ideas were in this regard. The culture in which a person grows up in forms the deepest and most immutable set of filters through which we view the world. It is a rare and special person who can challenge these filters, even to a limited degree in himself, let alone encourage others to do the same. It is easy for us to condemn slavery. It is far more difficult for us to challenge or condemn elements of our current culture, like the still prevalent belief in human superiority. In the vein of "judge not, lest you be judged", I refrain from judging people like Jefferson, because I seriously doubt I would have been better than him in the same circumstances. That is simply highly unlikely.

[@AngelaMastrodonato]

I try to take the same approach you take in evaluating historic people like the founders. I remind myself these people are dead and can’t address the critiques of modern day people. However, at risk of going off subject, I really hate John C. Calhoun. He sounded like an A-hole. He deserves much more contempt than Jefferson, in my personal opinion.

[@bunnybird9342]

@@AngelaMastrodonato actually straight up fuck John C. Calhoun he had zero redeeming qualities and the only thing he ever did was "WOW I LOVE SLAVERY!!!!!!!!"

[@alainaaugust1932]

The Sally Hemings story is also complex. Her father was the white owner of the plantation belonging to Jefferson’s father-in-law. Her mother’s parents were also a white father, black mother. So Sally and Jefferson’s wife were half sisters, looking very much alike. Upon becoming Jefferson’s wife, she took Sally with her to assure her sister would never have to work in the fields. Having suffered at the hands of her own step-mother, when dying she begged Tom to swear he would never put a step-mother over their children. He so swore. His children with Sally all looked very white. He educated the boys in a trade, the girls in the arts and graces expected of ladies. As each reached adulthood, he sent them west in a wagon with the tools of their trade-quite similar to how he wrote liberated slaves should be sent off. Of these children only one retained and passed down the memory that Jefferson was the patriarch of their family. It’s thought the others married white partners out west and never revealed who they were. It was more important for their children to be considered fully white than to be known as Jefferson’s grandchildren by a black woman. The one family who kept the black identity claimed for over a hundred years that they were descended from Jefferson. Historians declared them hoaxers. In the 1990’s at last DNA tests were run, their DNA and that of Jefferson’s known descendants through his daughter’s line, the Randolphs of Virginia. It was a match. Think of it: many of Jefferson’s descendants thrive in America today and don’t even know the author of the Declaration is their ancestor.

[@charlesyoung7436]

The DNA test only showed that one of Sally Hemming's children, her son Eston, had Jefferson family connections, and his descendants were not the branch that had had claimed this. Because Jefferson had no sons, the DNA results could not prove that Thomas Jefferson was Eston's father. He, or any one of his nephews might have been. Also, to answer the question put forth in the title of this video, Jefferson could not have freed all his slaves, because, when he died on the 50th anniversary of the Declaration of independence, Virginia law would not allow it. Slaves were considered chattel property, and were thus subject to sale to pay off a decedent's debts. Jefferson was a brilliant man, but had extravagant tastes, and many creditors who had to be paid out of his estate. before those slaves he had freed in his will could actually receive their bequests. His heirs barely kept Monticello briefly before having to sell it off.

[@mnfowler1]

@@charlesyoung7436 You buried the lead here. Yours is, indeed, another way to literally answer the question posed by the posted video. It is often pointed out that George Washington freed his slaves while Thomas Jefferson did not, but Washington had more discretion than Jefferson in this matter, not only because Jefferson was in debt while Washington was not, but because the laws had changed between the deaths of Washington and Jefferson, restricting the right of a master to free his slaves in his will. Jefferson's daughter, in fact, freed slaves as instructed by her father outside of his will because freeing them in his will would have invited his creditors to challenge the will.

[@isaacclark9825]

@@mnfowler1 Jefferson was able to free his slaves. The law only required that the free slaves would have to leave Virginia. I think it is total nonsense to make money by participating in slavery, and then to pretend that you are now in debt if you free them. You created that situation.

[@andylangeland496]

@@isaacclark9825 You are correct on the first point - the newly freedpeople would be required to leave the Commonwealth without explicit permission from the county of residence... but I believe the issue with the slaves being a part of the mortgage of the land was that if TJ sold the land to pay his many debts, the slaves would have been sold with the land, as they were part of the collateral on the debts. They were not held in title as separate property (something to that effect anyway)

[@isaacclark9825]

@@andylangeland496 And yet some slaves were eventually freed. I think that shows that you are mistaken.

[@austinmaurer1776]

I just got my bachelors in history a few months ago but have been in a funk of disinterest. Finding and watching your videos has got me excited again. Thank you, you're you're doing important work.

[@sampson1952]

Another excellent piece of work. I appreciate your skills in research and perspective.

[@thebreeze6765]

I just found this channel and am so happy I did. I've been asking these kinds of questions about kinds of governments and you explain everything so thoroughly. I will be joining now. Hope to be able to join Patreon soon. Thank you so much!!

[@scottsaige]

Well done. This is how the subject should be taught in high school history. It highlights the push and pull between ideals and reality and the difficult decisions our founding fathers had to make while presenting an honest picture of the contradictions and flaws they (like every other human being) possessed and the context of the time. Though none of it was new to me, it was a well presented. I'm curious, how do you choose your subjects?

[@abhijitkurse53]

Well said- nuance is the key word, but far too many lack the patience to incorporate into dialogue, much less school curricula, where it is much needed.

[@alphacat9302]

I highly recommend reading the entire screenshots throughout this video. Some of the unread passages are important, such as Jefferson's repeated assertions any differences he did note were quite possibly a result of their terrible education, unfortunate position, etc. Given the time period, this seems quite an honest position to take - noting the differences but providing a rather progressive explanation for those differences.

[@4spooky8u]

Exactly, the context as to why Jefferson felt this way is often (as in this video) overlooked. What else was he supposed to think of a uneducated slaves who couldn't read or write. Critics of Jefferson and the Founders also severely downplay their fears of a race war, Americans in the early 19th century were all well aware of what had occurred in Saint Domingue and did not want that repeating here as well.

[@SuperStella1111]

It wasn't progressive, he was conservative. There were (largely working class) movements to end slavery all over the world. Ending the slave trade was a question that could get MILLIONS of people in places like England to sign petitions (which also happened). The reason we think it's "progressive" is because rich men's writing dominates our understanding of the time period. Poors always knew slavery was wrong. Good people always knew it was wrong.

[@LastBrigadier]

@@4spooky8u лмао сеемс лике тхеы фаилед.

[@alphacat9302]

@@SuperStella1111 yes, I see you can read the mind of all past '"poors".. they all looked at the slaves and wished they had that job, if only.

[@DaenerysStormborn-cw5ws]

Jefferson was a filthy rapist who, in an act of unfathomable cruelty, blackmailed Sally Hemmings into staying his slave by holding her (THEIR) children HOSTAGE. Hero worship is for FOOLS. Take the good with the bad but DON'T make excuses when your hero is a louse. CRUELTY is NEVER anything but CRUELTY, now, then or EVER.

[@T30-z5w]

Seems to me Jefferson was a brilliant idealist, a hyper pragmatic man with deeply held rational beliefs, and a man who was prone to compromise his own rational thought when his self interests where on the line. Not much different than many people today.

[@MWhaleK]

Agreed, Jefferson's ideals at least should be celebrated and he should be remembered for them as well as for the bad stuff. We can't let the slave owning and treatment of slaves like Sally Hemmings to overshadow the good parts, at least not completely.

[@kisha1682]

What good parts. He’d die all over again seeing the freedom blacks have today!

[@JohnSmith-hs1hn]

E.g a hypocrite lol. Idealist and pragmatist, are mutually exclusive.

[@michaelpcoffee]

Everybody is a product of their times. The natural rights enlightenment is all the more miraculous because of that.

[@Doug_M]

Yeah, when looking at these historical people, you have to keep in mind that slavery had been a worldwide institution for thousands of years. Arabs did it. Africans did it. Asians did it. Europeans did it. It was everywhere. It was the West that mostly eradicated slavery, though it still goes on in parts of Africa and the ME.

[@marleybot9848]

Slavery is not mostly eradicated in the west at all, it just changed form and got disguised under other terms.

[@emberspirit6375]

Switch on ur brain...u dont have to be a rocket scientist to determine that slavery isnt good...ppl in ancient Greece knew that and i guarantee u that 99% of slave owners knew that too.Jefferson was just hypocrit and/or had tiny balls to stop doing what he believs is wrong. U must admit this simple FACT with neccessity or just admit that Jefferson was stupid like a chicken not being able to find whats right to do knowing that slavery is wrong😂😂😂

[@shawnpatton3795]

People are just typically sheep then?

[@An_Attempt]

@@Doug_M It still happens in the west, granted it is extremely illegal.

[@jamesdoerr4318]

Ryan, you are an excellent writer and an even better presenter. Because of how my brain is wired, it is hard for me to focus for very long, but you do such a good job that you make it easy to consume.

[@biggerdoofus]

I'm skeptical that the anti-slavery passage being left in would've caused slavery to end sooner. I feel like it could've just as easily caused the entire revolution to fail or even caused the south and north to end up as different countries.

[@An_Attempt]

That is part of why that section was removed. It was a risky passage. It it was allowed to stay then the US would have been more ready to end the practice sooner but there was serious risk involved.

[@drmodestoesq]

And if the revolution failed the slaves would be freed sooner. The British Empire engaged in anti-slavery legislation long before post-revolutionary America.

[@reasonablespeculation3893]

@@drmodestoesq Maybe... . Or maybe the British, seeing the density of the black population in Southern regions, would have employed Jefferson's process of education and relocation. The British could see that the American Colonies were potentially the most valuable holding of the Empire. Sudden and dramatic disruption would not be in their interest.

[@RexFuturi]

​​@@drmodestoesq Bullsh!t. Britain promoted slavery in all of its colonies and trade partners until long past the point when they claimed to oppose slavery. Britain nearly intervened on behalf of the Confederacy to keep its supply of cheap cotton flowing.

[@chase_saddy]

@@reasonablespeculation3893 or you know just admit America was founded on awfulness and trying to get out of it with speculation is pretty silly. Like the English were literally on an anti slavery bend like most of the world. Why would they conveniently be as evil as Americans when it comes to slavery specifically?

[@ZackeryCampbass]

In this day and age, we need content creators and voices like you.

[@austinmorris3422]

It's sad that your videos get so little views, comparatively speaking. Your content is of the highest quality. I hope this channel gets the exposure it deserves!

[@ronalddesiderio7625]

Because of the quality the views are limited. The masses want simple and easy. Like Goerbels propaganda in Nazi Germany

[@donaldbutcher1260]

I appreciate your arguments for why we need to see Jefferson in the context of his times, still I am amazed by the fact that a man so enlightened could not come to the simple conclusion that he must free those he keeps in bondage and encourage others to do the same.

[@warlordofbritannia]

Cognitive dissonance is one helluva drug.

[@pickybusiness8549]

Humans are complicated creatures, sometimes we cannot see the truth right in front of our own eyes. I dont think he was a bad man, in fact I would say he was a good man, but he was a man of his time, and that comes with many problems.

[@Doutsoldome]

The necessity of freeing everyone as quickly and as fully as possible is and was, _logically,_ a *simple* conclusion. But this wasn't an *easy* conclusion to get at in those days, considering that no other known society, in the entire history of the world until that point, had ever reached it. A completely new idea may require some serious mental rearrangements, and I think that's clearly such a case. Sometimes, being able to see a simple truth can be very difficult - and especially so for seeing it for the first time ever.

[@tesmith47]

The profit was great, and he knew there ain't no god to exact punishment.

[@briggy4359]

Where were your clothes made?

[@bloston95]

i love your content. Always brings clarity to things that are very often thrown around without any context.

[@An_Attempt]

Excellent video. Though it leaves one with a complicated set of feelings and ideas. There are so many different hands that are to be consider: the ideals of liberty, the practical ramifications of freeing the slaves, the self interest, the fact that most with power would have slaves, the creation of a new form of government, the brute realities of the time. There really is a lot to think about.

[@artawhirler]

Excellent video on a complicated topic! Thanks! I especially like that you actually show the pages of text from which you are quoting, with the relevant sentences highlighted in yellow; and that down in the corner you show the book from which they are taken. After seeing this done just once, it is amazing to me that every history-related KZbinr doesn't do it. Again, thank you for an excellent video!

[@manisthemeasure2205]

Our problem with the likes of these men that seemingly knew what was right but still went with the “flow” of their time is whether we should celebrate them today or simply regard them as products of their time, without judging them with the ideas of today. I cannot blame Jefferson for being born in a time of ignominious darkness but I am ambivalent about considering him great or venerable, even.

[@tesmith47]

some DID free their slaves

[@timothypaulino8454]

For history nerds, we don't see it as celebrate or condemned. We see a flawed man who has done great things all the while enslaving people. An act that even him growing up in the South knew was wrong. celebrating him isn't an endorsement or free pass on everything he did. Just recognition of certain aspects and achievements that are relevant to us today

[@mrD66M]

This poses the question back to us. Do we go with the flow of society when it suits us, and only talk about ideals when it does not? Knowing "the right thing to do" is immaterial and pointless. There is only *doing* the right thing (not once or twice, but consistently) - or not.

[@Sound557]

Whenever I watch your videos I like to think if there are extra points to include. You always beat me to it, like mentioning the cotton gin. Keep up the good work.

[@Ephisus]

Of course, the people who want to change the world struggle with the change.

[@shirleybanks277]

...Jefferson is a prime example of intellect conflicting with Wealth /Greed and Power.

[@DavidPysnik]

This treatment is reasonable, honest, and well researched. The work put into this and the product created is much appreciated and sorely needed in our current politically polarized environment.

[@josue24]

It’s sad that facts are now politicized because people would rather believe memes etc.

[@heronimousbrapson863]

Jefferson, like most of us, was faced by a moral dilemma. On the one hand, he could see the injustice inherent in the institution of slavery, yet he benefitted economically from it.

[@warlordofbritannia]

That’s called being a coward. Jefferson could have done the right thing, but he *chose* not to. With such a clear decision, all this talk about his apparent internal conflict is laughably shallow.

[@VideoDefinition]

​@@warlordofbritanniaOr he felt he could take care of his slaves better than if they were free in America.

[@davidlafleche1142]

Jefferson found an easy way to get a date.

[@darksu6947]

​@@chopvansuey Plants are just as alive as animals. Have you never heard the lettuce scream while chewing up your salad?

[@lif3andthings763]

@@VideoDefinition Well no he did separate families, he did rape a teenage girl, and he did have his slaves whipped.

[@sunamcm1]

It is a shame that such a thoughtful and thorough examination of a topic should be so rare - but it is. Thank you for providing food for thought without rancor or bias. You are a treasure.

[@leslovesliberty1776]

Wow, I learn more from you in 30-minute videos than I did from 16 years in the education system... thank you!! 🙏

[@carolinem1698]

Realistically, very few of us retained much of what we were taught in school as children. As adults we are more interested in learning about what we are curious. my point is we are too quick to blame schools, especially public schools.

[@marenomorgan]

Such a great video. Our flattened understanding of history is not only toxic in 2023, but I'm also always surprised that people tend to flatten it in the first place when the truth is always so much more interesting and helpful than the dogma.

[@kate2create738]

Too many are guilty of distorting history to believe it is an excuse for what they advocate for. The tragedy in all of this is that part of the Enlightenment Age was coming into understanding the qualities of being a person. The Founding Fathers mainly understood to be human you inherit flaws, yet there was an idealism about giving people the liberty to learn of their mistakes to help improve their lives to become morally sound. Self responsibility was a driving force for this new age; however, we are in a time where too many are quick to give in to avoid sustainably be an individual. And there is little push back for those who have the authority to correct this as if anything it give excuse to take more power from the people.

[@warlordofbritannia]

The history profession is more sophisticated than ever. Only partisan hacks with an axe to grind are flattening our collective understanding-looking at you, DeSantis.

[@ethanthibodeaux9599]

So refreshing to hear an account of Jefferson that gives a fair assessment of his flaws and his accomplishments.

[@ZackeryCampbass]

Exceptional work. I want to especially thank you for using so many primary sources. This is a great illustration of how history should be taught and studied.

[@smulanx3]

This is a good channel. I love that you list all your sources.

[@zachmorgan6982]

History is so messy when u study it, and it takes tons of research to put together a video like this. Not just the textbook history. But a deep dive on Jefferson and his nuanced beliefs in a strange time in American history. An uncertain future lay ahead, and with the benefit of hindsight, we sit in outer chairs and judge men who were creating a country from scratch. Based on fairly new principles that had yet to be truly tried in earnest in any country. Great video and arming ones self with nuanced facts is what every student of life needs.

[@s.l.george7348]

An excellent assessment of Jefferson that captures and explains the contradictory and dichotomous nature of the human condition. What an ace of an historian!

[@BearRiverBooks]

Extraordinary effort. Should be an assignment in high school and college American history classes. The essence of good historical analysis is the ability to cut oneself free of one's own time and see the world as our forbears saw it. This requires deep knowledge of the past and a kind of intellectual fluidity that is rare. This lecture demonstrates both qualities in abundance.

[@3Girliez]

Yet again, Amazing video!! I love you present both sides without any bias. ❤

[@limerickman8512]

Incorrect, slavery was waning in the south, until the cotton gin was invented, thus gave renewed life to slavery, to pick cotton in the sun. It was true that the cotton gin reduced the labor of removing seeds, it did not reduce the need for enslaved labor to grow and pick the cotton. While more industrialisation through mechanical machines reduce slavery In fact, the opposite occurred in demanded labour when it came to cotton. Cotton growing became so profitable for enslavers that it greatly increased their demand for both land and enslaved labor.

[@namastewellness]

Slavery was not waning. Picking cotton was not the only work enslaved people did and the demise of that industry definitely wasn't going to make people change their cries on the condition of an entire racialized group of people.

[@oopurpledove]

Very interesting commentary on Jeffers. Thank you for sharing your thoughts with us.

[@orionwhite8429]

Love this content, I completed Benjamin Franklin: An American Life, and it went over some of how Benjamin's view on race and slavery adapted over the years and he was also coming up at the same time as enlightenment. It is sad to learn that things that seemed to be progressing in the 1700s halted or went backward during the 1800s. Jefferson had a great influence on USA and his conflicting views show how others likely disagreed on slavery and race at the time. I am interested in a Jefferson biography on audible someone had mentioned American Sphinx which is on there.

[@Nathan-hs2ut]

One of the best youtubers out rn

[@benjaminirarrazaval9944]

Infinite thanks for your work!!!! all and every single of your videos are amazing. I am an engineer who never liked history but only inclined to learn about math and sciences... Lately I have picked interest in politics, and therefore history. your videos started to appear on my feed and what a surprise I can stop watching them, they are incredible, your work is fantastic, I wished you would have been my history teacher...

[@jamiebusch9406]

Thank you for this thoughtful, and intellectually honest appraisal of Jefferson's attitudes. He has long been a hero of mine, as he should be for every American. I do have to ask you to consider that it was not simply "Southerners" who changed the grudging tolerance for slavery held by most Americans into a strong support and advocacy for its spread. That change also happened as a result of politics. A small oligarchy of plantation owners in the southern colonies became fabulously wealthy after the invention of the cotton gin.. They poured money and support into the Democratic party, and as a result, the Democratic Party began to advocate for slavery as a positive good, and worked to expand legalized slavery into the territories, and even into Northern states that had expressly outlawed it! This had nothing to do with 'climate' or 'lazy' white people... this was political action by a wealthy elite to protect their source of income. This political action was well understood at the time, and resulted in the breakup of the Whig party in the 1840's and the founding of the first anti-slavery party- the Republicans. The Civil War was the result of the Democratic party refusing to allow the Republican candidate to appear on the 1860 ballot in most southern states they controlled. When that candidate, Mr. Lincoln, won the election, the Democratic party in the south chose treason and succession over accepting as President a man who had pledged to keep slavery out of the new territories in the West. The typical "Southerners vs. Northerners' analysis is very superficial, and does not really explain the situation... I look forward to your future videos- as you seem to be honestly in search of a deeper understanding of history... thank you for your work.

[@tesmith47]

you do have a angle of truth, but it really did boil down to southern wealthy whites and some northern whites vs the north

[@MrPastaTube1]

Ryan, I am always delighted by the depth of your research and the clear structure of your videos.

[@EarlHayward]

Maybe because I am much older, but this was high school history back in my day!

[@JohnEricksonYYZ]

The great irony of the American Revolution is that it was the Loyalists led by John Graves Simcoe, the first governor of Upper Canada, who passed the first laws to end the slave trade in 1791 in what later became Canada.

[@trystdodge6177]

​@GMAngelone ah yes Haiti, maybe the best remembered revolutionary French genocide in history. Leftist- genocide can be a good thing, if it frees slaves. Also how do you suppose Haiti would look today if it were still under French rule? Whatever, freedom comes at a price, the price of which is barbecue today. Progressive history is so messed up.

[@trystdodge6177]

@@koschmx you're right screw Haiti. Those people were meant to live in chaos and anarchy. In all seriousness, I have no clue what European lies you're referring to and genuinely am curious. Could you elaborate please.

[@RebeccaOre]

@@trystdodge6177 , Haiti was paying France reparations into the mid 20th century.

[@tesmith47]

@@trystdodge6177 Haiti revolution was not a genocide, it was the elimination of racist, imperialist, invaders, which is ENTIRELY justified

[@tesmith47]

@@trystdodge6177 racist america has hated, and done everything to destroy the FIRST BLACK democracy in the Americas

[@johnperez2346]

Ryan, will limit my respect to a weak comment. Seriously objective, factual, professional and beautifully presented. Each video could be a thesis or white paper. Love your content!

[@bridgeforth]

Excellent piece my man. I live near Monticello, and have been there more times than I can count, and Jefferson's paradoxes of slavery have always been a mystery, however, you very succinctly shed light on some grey areas.

[@D.S.handle]

19:46 here you are a bit wrong. By the end of his life Benjamin Franklin has begun to openly campaign for the abolition. From the National Archives website: > Franklin did not publicly speak out against slavery until very late in his life. As a young man he owned slaves, and he carried advertisements for the sale of slaves in his newspaper, the Pennsylvania Gazette. At the same time, however, he published numerous Quaker pamphlets against slavery and condemned the practice of slavery in his private correspondence. It was after the ratification of the United States Constitution that he became an outspoken opponent of slavery. In 1789 he wrote and published several essays supporting the abolition of slavery and his last public act was to send to Congress a petition on behalf of the Society asking for the abolition of slavery and an end to the slave trade. The petition, signed on February 3, 1790, asked the first Congress, then meeting in New York City, to "devise means for removing the Inconsistency from the Character of the American People," and to "promote mercy and justice toward this distressed Race."

[@Matt-kt9nm]

When did he mention Franklin?

[@D.S.handle]

@@Matt-kt9nm the timeframe is a bit wrong, but at 19:40 you can hear him saying “ultimately none of the founders risked their careers to end it [slavery]”. Edit: corrected the quote

[@realryanchapman]

Hi, I'm aware of Franklin's anti-slavery activity. In the video I said 'none of them risked their careers to end it,' quoting from a Jefferson bio. The crucial period that I was talking about was in the 1770's and early-mid 1780's, when the abolition of slavery was being seriously debated and the South hadn't hardened in their defense of it. Franklin missed that window. Also speaking out at the very end of his life isn't risking his career.

[@D.S.handle]

@@realryanchapman that is fair.

[@drandrewm]

@@realryanchapman It's good to see you deep in these replies. You are to be commended. You have generated great discussion and dialog on this topic. I really appreciate what you've been doing.

[@ninaenamorada079]

So for simplicity, he was into the idea of abolishing slavery when it was viewed as acceptable by his peers in college, but when it was inconvenient to his indulgent lifestyle/political aspirations, he changed his stance

[@HOLYOKEFLATS]

he was straggling the fence 🥅🥅🥅🥅🥅🥅🥅🥅🥅🥅🥅🥅🥅🔗🔗🔗⛓️⛓️⛓️⛓️🥅🥅🥅

[@thenathanimal2909]

It's almost like humans are complex, nuanced, flawed, virtuous, and often endure cognitive dissonance.

[@Greenday5494]

I love your content man. You put so much rigor and work into this.

[@shadowmann9]

FANTASTIC video. Thank you so much for collecting the information, doing great research and writing such a compelling narrative. Many of these things about Jefferson, I did not know and that information sheds enough light on his legacy for me to re-grind my lens on him. Subbed and liked!

[@TheFluffyDuck]

You take people from west coast tribal Africa, and are surprised that they don’t immediately grasp current European mathematics, science and philosophy, in their ample downtime during cotton picking. Like seriously what was he expecting?

[@demejiuk5660]

😂😂

[@Michael-qe1xo]

maybe because they had hundreds of years to evolve equal to the English yet they accomplished nothing.

[@MWhaleK]

As I understand? It was because his first memory was of being served by slaves, he was born into a family that owned slaves and raised in a slave owning society as well as being bad with money. So it's more surprising that he spoke out about slavery than that he didn't free his slaves. Not that it make him being a slave owner much better (especially in the context of the whole Sally Hemmings thing), but it does make it more understandable.

[@RebeccaOre]

He promised to free her children. I believe a majority of free blacks were children of their masters.

[@Greg-fs8np]

This is a truly excellent, well documented and balanced discussion of Jefferson and slavery. While Jefferson had sincerely held concerns about increased conflict and violence if slaves were freed, I agree with Ryan that the main reason he did not free his slaves was self interest, pure and simple. He was addicted to his life style and property that could not be maintained without slaves. The idea that he would free the slaves and then do what, relocate to a two bedroom condo in Philadelphia? That was not going to happen.

[@neiloler]

Excellent work here, thank you for the time and detail of citations and lack of overt editorializations.

[@mateoparvex-switzer725]

You’re work is what everyone needs please keep doing what you do.

[@MrTeff999]

Reflecting on this piece, I find myself thinking about how hard it is for people-including me - to sacrifice our luxuries for the sake of preserving the environment. We know what causes pollution, yet we still drive, fly, drink bottled water, and keep our homes the perfect temperature all year long. Why should we suffer while our neighbors do not?

[@shableep]

Very interesting reflection.

[@archieharris6825]

Because the environment can be seen as an amorphous harm based on our individual actions. Owning, whipping, and raping another human being is in your face harm and not an esoteric exercise of thought.

[@brianfox771]

With regard to the environment. I'd say the average individual in the Western world is really a captive of the larger industrial and corporate interests at play. You personally or even your entire household could go carbon neutral for the rest of your lives and all of that would be undone by the activities of any single oil company in a matter of seconds.

[@oboogie2]

@@brianfox771 and I'm sure the same argument could be advanced that for one to release their measly 11 slaves would have zero effect on the larger evil of institutional slavery.

[@archieharris6825]

@@oboogie2 you wouldn't be so glib if the "measly" 11 slaves were you and your family.

[@thucydides7849]

One of the lines you skipped over from Jefferson’s letter is very important. 12:59 Jefferson acknowledges that even if it is so that blacks have inferior intelligence to white men, that this has no bearing whatsoever on whether or not they have rights. He said “ Isaac Newton was superior in understanding, he was not therefore lord of the person or property of others”

[@richardpage9502]

The plantation business model came to depend on essentially zero cost labor (slaves, more accurately viewed as assets that were purchased and had resale value). As the demand for their output grew (eg cotton), the was no way that plantation owners would willingly shift to a paid labor model.

[@darksu6947]

I believe we would have been much better off picking our own damn cotton.

[@RebeccaOre]

Neither farm labor or domestic labor were covered by New Deal era Federal Minimum wage laws. It’s always cheaper to do sharecropping than anything other than slavery. Slaves raised the food, built the buildings, and made their clothes and all household textiles, and raised the cash crop.

[@duppyshuman]

It seems to me he consciously pushed things in both direction to such a degree the necessity to end slavery could not be denied. His approval of slavery was simplistic, and motivated by economics, but his comparing the potential for upward mobility among Blacks to that of whites was nuanced and filled with humanity in his writings. The ever evolving lasting power of our Constitution that's brought about so much change that's legacy.

[@TheMikemedia]

As a 70 year old Black man, deep hot rage against the hypocritical injustice of this country is as much a part of me as my color. As a human, I know self interest has, and may always, trump all other considerations. This has been evidenced in Hans J. Morgenthau's 1949 publication, The Primacy of the National Interest, and more recently, Malcolm Gladwell's Outliers Revisited experiment exposing the unanimous resolve of 75 Wharton School of Business seniors to maintain their privilege even when confronted with the unfairness it entails. This may be the honest summation of Jefferson's life. I don't know if the actual can ever be overcome by the ideal.

[@PFJung]

Commenting for the algorithm

[@BS-vx8dg]

Could you explain that to me? How does this affect the algorithm?

[@PFJung]

@@BS-vx8dg Commenting on a video (as well as liking it) are forms of engagement that the KZbin algorithm takes into account when determining which videos to promote. More comments and likes means it's more likely other people will see it

[@BS-vx8dg]

@@PFJung Thanks. I knew about the likes, but did not realize that the quantity of comments also made a differnce.

[@TitterpigRancher]

THANK YOU for presenting a balanced and real look at Jefferson, the greatest thinker of his day (and my personal favorite of the Founding Fathers), without attempting to skew it towards one side of the political spectrum or the other. He was obviously, from his own writings, a man tormented by the dichotomies of his own beliefs on human freedoms and the social strictures of his day. This video essay puts that into clear relief. Jefferson was a complex man and the workings of his mind are not always obvious through is actions. Great work.

[@carmaela2689]

He was a very complex man. So much that he wrote is very inspiring but so much of the way he lived is difficult to understand in our 21st century mindset. I think the enlightenment was such a fascinating time.

[@warlordofbritannia]

Even at the time he was castigated for the apparent hypocrisy-that’s *why* we have so much evidence on what he thought about slavery, he was constantly trying to justify it in his letters. I think that’s the most poignant point, that the same man who wrote “all men are created equal” spent decades defending his right to keep men unequal.

[@onionknight2239]

Another very insightful overview. Thanks Ryan

[@yourfavoritesteve]

This had the ring of truth rather than politics. Well done.

[@howardroark3736]

I’m Black, but also the biggest Jefferson nerd you never met. I enjoyed this well researched video, but there were a couple of points I wanted to add. 1) The biographies by Dumas Malone indicate that he was financially unable to free his slaves. We have to understand that many (perhaps most) of the Virginia planter class were heavily indebted. Jefferson’s land was likewise encumbered with heavy debts, and although he repeatedly attempted to pay off his debts, he was never out from under them, and he died in debt to the point of insolvency, pushing for a legislative act that would allow him to sell his property via a lottery scheme so that he could pay off his debt on his deathbed when he had been unable to in life. 2) Although he held some (very common for the time) racist beliefs, his Notes on Virginia explicitly advocated for the abolition of slavery. I don’t think it makes sense to ascribe any blame to him for other people using his words to justify slavery, when the larger set of his writings were unambiguously against it. Calling it a “hideous blot” on society says it all. There is no reason to think he ever stopped opposing it, and he banned the importation of new slaves once he was President, at least putting a stop on expansion of the practice (besides natural population growth). 3) It remains a matter of controversy whether Jefferson fathered any children with Sally Hemings. There has been genetic testing done, but all that can prove is that a male Jefferson relative is related to the descendants of Sally Hemings. As for who that is, there are a few possible candidates. The Jefferson family has had their own family lore (that it was his nephew), while the Hemings family has their tradition that Sally and Thomas were in love (per what she allegedly told her son), weird though it sounds given that she was not free to leave once she returned to the United States. Either way, the Hemings family are Jeffersons, but if they’re not descendants of Thomas specifically, his hypocrisy is much less.

[@1998halflife]

what npr/pbs should be today, thank you sir.

[@NicolasPeschek-b5m]

„Hardly ever whipped“ is a statement that shouldnt positively frame someone, even within context it is still and onjectively bad action, that should be framed as such. And no mention of the freed slave in his well having a very good likelihood (including dna evidence) of being his children born out of his enslaved lover… All in all decent video but I was missing some of the caviats and the ending seemed to much to be trying to put him in a positive light using things that shouldnt be used for such. Overall love your videos and hope you understand where Im coming from.

[@ronalddesiderio7625]

That was excellent. In my humble opinion. As with everything else I learned in school . I wish that this was taught in such a complete manner. You would make an excellent Teacher or college Professor 👍🏾

[@thefreeman8791]

I just came across your channel and so far I am intrigued. Most people fail to understand what it means to say that someone like Jefferson was a man of his time. You touched on Jefferson’s idea of emancipation coupled with deportation. That was an idea that was very much a granted premise in his time and much later. That idea was also supported by Abraham Lincoln. Both Jefferson and Lincoln were members of The American Colonization Society whose purpose was to deport all black people out of the US. Lincoln himself often spoke of sending black people to Africa back to “their native clime”. Lincoln often rebuked the idea of integration and openly said so during the Lincoln Douglas debates. The genetic inferiority of black people was granted by abolitionists like Theodor Parker and Ralph Waldo Emerson. Emerson once said that the plantation system had “artificially supported an inferior species”. I provide those quotes to demonstrate that the views of Jefferson on the genetic inferiority of black people were the norm even among those that we view as abolitionists today. That is how prevalent of a belief it was back then. A few minor corrections here, Thomas Sowell and many other scholars have pointed out that if a plantation was in debt then the ownership of the slaves was in the hands of the banks that the money was owed to. Jefferson could not legally free his slaves because Monticello was in debt and the slaves could only be freed by the bank not by the head of the household. On the flip side example, Robert E. Lee inherited Arlington with a huge debt, $2 million in today’s money. He was able to use the slave labor there to pay off the vast majority of the debt so when the date of emancipation came for the slaves of Arlington they were freed by a Virginia court and Lee filed their manumission papers freeing them in November of 1862. If he had not worked diligently to pay off that debt and Arlington was still in debt, then the slaves would not have been freed as Arlington would have still owed the banks that Lee’s father in law owed money to. But, unlike Monticello and Jefferson, Lee paid off his debt so the slaves at Arlington were freed. My point is that even if Jefferson wanted to free his slaves he could not. Another correction here is that when the Declaration says that “all men are created equal”, it did not mean it in the egalitarian sense. In an exchange of letters between Jefferson and John Taylor of Caroline, Jefferson wrote of that part of the Declaration and said that the issue at root of the Revolution was that they were Englishmen but were not granted the rights of Englishmen simply because of their location. American society back then viewed black slaves as a totally foreign element. They were not Englishmen and therefore they are not afforded the same rights as Englishmen. Jefferson also echoed John Locke in his view of equality when he said that in a vacuum we all have the same rights but as soon as we enter into society then we are unequal in our social status, skills, education, etc. my point here is that when Jefferson wrote that in the Declaration of Independence, he did not mean it in the 19th century abolitionist/egalitarian sense. Overall, I really like your content that I have seen so far. Keep making these videos.

[@wheediesmanchild5229]

So he was a pragmatist who wanted to focus on the main problems of the time, that being American unity, over comparatively lesser and more device issues. And he saw that believing in innate freedom and (social) 30:31 equality was a separate idea to everyone being equally physically and mentally.

[@jhonklan3794]

Eh, I think this is being overly charitable. Its more that unity occupied his mind more, not that he rationally decided it was more important. He was provided ample evidence against his views, but actively shut those out. His faint glimmers of self reflection act as deeper condemnation of his acts than anything else. It suggests that he knew what he as doing was wrong, but chose to do it anyways; his selfish desires were overriding. He was at best hypocritical, at worst completely barbarous. Especially knowing that he personally ordered whippings. Our founders were not perfect people, even for their time. That doesn't mean their wisdom is useless or that we should throw away what they did accomplish.

[@mostreal907]

Calling slavery not a main problem is an interesting choice of words.

[@wheediesmanchild5229]

@@mostreal907 he didn’t take any real formal action on it and didn’t make much talk about it in writing outside of one work. That sounds like he didn’t concern himself with it more than he had to because it wasn’t a nominal problem that seemed prudent to address.

[@juniperlovelace5262]

If your self interest is more important than the freedom of a human, then you cannot claim, or it cannot be claimed, that this person maintained that ideal.

[@VR36030]

A modern version of this is most people in developed countries today aren't actually against child labor because they get many of their clothes from Bangladesh sweat shops. So it's really just being against child labor in developed countries that they're actually against while outsourcing child labor to developing countries is acceptable.

[@juniperlovelace5262]

@@VR36030 That feels like a false equivalency. So you’re saying Thomas Jefferson couldn’t simply not do all the things he did with his slaves? Just, you know, live wealthy with no slaves? Free them if he believed they were so equal? I’m not sure “buy from elsewhere” or “make your own” for clothing is a valid retort since there are many more complex pressures causing people’s behaviors today (e.g., people living below the poverty line and asking them to buy ethically sourced clothing.)

[@VR36030]

@@juniperlovelace5262 It is a false equivalency in the sense that there are more and better justifications for buying clothes from child labor in sweatshops than owning slaves. I simply think it's analogous as how we view buying clothes made from child labor is how everyone before the 1770s saw owning slaves. To address your point, I'd put it like this (not as a perfect equivalency but as an analogy of actions and outlooks between two periods of time). Slave owners back then could do what they did without slaves and pay all their workers and still be rich. But they'd be less rich. So they choose the slave owning route. Wealthy clothing executives could have their clothes made under humane conditions with more than dirt pay and still be rich. But they'd be less rich so they choose the inhumane child labor route. It is important to realize that during Jefferson's time, the amount of slave owners who owned plantations was as small of a percentage of the total population as wealthy clothing executives who use child labor today.

[@juniperlovelace5262]

@@VR36030 I agree with you! But that’s the point! It’s immoral nonetheless. Unless, you support allowing executives exploit labor offshore under inhumane conditions? As for your last point, in order for that to be relevant, you’d have to show that the percentage of slave owners relative to the world population was NOT close to the percentage of CEOs doing that in relation to the rest of the world population. Without this information, your point is meaningless.

[@gregmumbai333]

@@VR36030 There's a huge difference between participating in a system which includes the suffering of others and being a direct controlling factor in this suffering. The person who owns the sweat shop and those who buy its clothes are not the same. Far less one who buys clothes through a chain of distribution which may have included the sweat shop with out direct knowledge of the purchaser. I mean this is the very silly end of the no ethical consumption meme used as apologea for abuse.

[@TheForeignersNetwork]

I think that your assertion that the "climate" was the reason that the US kept slavery after the 18th century is extremely naive at best and dangerous at worst. You have to remember that the enlightenment was bolstered by capital owners who wanted to increase their personal profits (rather than be subjects of royalty), and the upper class capital owners in the US were no exception. This goes for capital owners in both the North and the South--Slavery was a profitable institution in the South because slaves produced raw materials for a low cost, and white commodity owners made their living by selling their goods to the North. It was also a profitable institution in the North, because the ample supply of raw materials from the South ensured that the textile industry could increase their profit margins by lowering production costs. Though the upper class in the North may have thrown around the idea of emancipation because of their education in enlightenment-era philosophy, it was not an institution that they seriously considered eliminating until it became unprofitable for business transactions. In addition to bolstering the economy, slavery also produced a racial hierarchy in the US that served the interests of the upper classes. Racism ensured that the lower classes would not unite and turn against the richer capital owners, even if they had a new legal document that "provided equal rights" to them. The Declaration of Independence seems to be a rather progressive document until you notice that it was primarily a means of securing sovereignty rights over the profits produced by capital owners in the colonies. The only way they could keep all of their profits was by asserting that King George didn't have any sort of divine lineage, and that therefore he didn't have a claim over the profits that they felt they produced outright. By creating a document that asserted the rights of commoners, they were essentially trying to demote the monarchy from its divine status by stating that "actually, all men are equal and God-given rights don't just belong to the King." If they didn't do this, they would have no other logical rationale for opposing the king and the British parliament on their policy decisions related to taxes and the de facto British ownership of goods produced by the colonies.

[@STho205]

Chattel slavery came late to the British colonies of America in relation to other empires, and it was outlawed only a few decades after other European nations did. The Transatlantic Trade was outlawed in the UK and US simultaneously in late 1807 (Jan 2 1808). The UK abolished slavery in their colonies in 1838 by the 1833 Act, but not in colonies ruled by their state corporation The East India Company. In doing so the UK Treasury bought the slaves and freed them...aka paid the owners for loss of property. This is only three decades before 1862 and 1865...plus the US made it unconstitutional and also unconstitutional to reimburse slave owners. It was only two decades after the East India Company relinquished and were recompensed for their chattel slaves in the 1840s. It wouldn't be till the late 1880s that chattel slavery ended in Cuba. We tend to have a provincial way of seeing the world as if we are in a vacuum...invented our sins and held them beyond all reason and time.

[@TheForeignersNetwork]

@@STho205 Okay so the fact that the British empire adopted chattel slavery "late" doesn't excuse the fact that it happened. And it also doesn't change the US's reasons for keeping it. While chattel slavery may have been adopted late by the British, it was likely that you were better off as a slave in either the Spanish or Portuguese empire. It was observed even in colonial times that British chattel slavery was unusually cruel compared to slave institutions in Latin America. Both were terrible, of course, but British colonies did not legally protect the family institutions of slaves, nor were there ways for slaves to set themselves free. To a certain extent, slaves in Spanish and Portuguese colonies were able to preserve aspects of their previous African culture, whereas in Protestant colonies, any slave that didn't assimilate would be punished or killed. Because of the Spanish policy of mestizaje, there were varying degrees of servitude that a black person could be afforded, all the way up to "free black person." This was not the norm in British colonies, where slaves were brutally repressed and expected to be totally subservient to all white people regardless of class. So while slavery as an institution lasted longer in Spanish and Portuguese colonies, it was largely due to reforms in the slave code that allowed slaves marginally more freedom. (And, let's place emphasis on the word "marginally," because slavery in Latin America was still abhorrent.)

[@STho205]

@@TheForeignersNetwork Africans created modern chattle slavery and did the actual kudnapping. It happened. If inexcusable then they must be damned first... Or you could grow up and see this objectively in the context of history, instead of throwing a tantrum like anyone in your direct memory of generations practiced it...ie grandparents, gg, ggg, gggg. IOW don't fight wars already won.

[@TheForeignersNetwork]

@@STho205 No one was holding a gun to Europeans' heads telling them to buy slaves. Slavery is bad wholesale, whether it was Africans doing the slaving or white people. Also, there's historical evidence to suggest that European powers regularly pit African nations against one another in order to grease the wheels of the slave trade--They were active participants in the deterioration of the continent as a whole, and they would later use that to their advantage when searching for raw industrial materials. In any case, the fact that you think I was having a "tantrum" is very telling and a little bit silly. If you can't have a nuanced discussion about slavery then I think you should probably go elsewhere, because I'm not going to entertain banal or racist arguments used by apologists.

[@TheNphillips]

@@STho205it’s interesting how Brits are taught about slavery. It always starts with their interdicting and stopping the Slave trade in the Atlantic. Britains to the rescue right, but what they are not taught is for 125 years prior the Brits slave trade was bigger than all the other European powers combined. Also not told is Britain imposed forced labor in the colonies after closing the transatlantic trade. How much space is there between slavery and forced labor, And when did Britains end forced labor? At the end of WW2. If there is such a thing as karma I wouldn’t even change planes in England.

[@rodrigodepierola]

Awesome and nuanced. It's hard these days but you really pulled it off

[@CharityCatherine]

Months have gone by since you posted here. I miss you. I will keep checking in for about a year. Be well!

[@emigdiogabrielmatosferrera7824]

3:04 Be careful referencing David Hume as it can be interpreted that in that exact extract he implies his opinios upon the equality of white people. He is know for having racist thoughts as written by himself on his essay "Of the national characters" in 1753 where Hume writes: "I have a tendency to suspect that the blacks and in general all the other species of men (because there are four or five different classes) are naturally inferior to the whites".

[@Matt-kt9nm]

There will always be the possibility of alternate interpretations to a given text, or statement. Especially when it's on a divisive topic.

[@Appleblade]

I think a large part of the problem was not knowing what would happen if blacks were freed. There were many of them, they were uneducated, and they were penniless. Perhaps they would form armies and seek retribution. I have to believe this was a serious if generally unspoken worry.

[@drmodestoesq]

They had the template of the British freeing slaves in their colonies. It was a peaceful evolution from slavery. Which probably would have happened if the British/American colonists had not had a revolution.

[@subcitizen2012]

It's still the generally unspoken worry today...

[@matsanw]

Due to the laws of some states, in many cases the damage that could be done to freed slaves turned freeing them much more difficult than people imagine. People think freeing them would just reset their status and turn them into a normal citizen but it wasn't that simple. Not only that, but as you said, many had barely any skills that would help, and of course, zero money and property or a safety net of relashionships. Outright just letting them go would send many of them to legal problems or their deaths.

[@normanclatcher]

​@@subcitizen2012 Psh. The next civil war won't be fought over race. It'll be against the ultra-rich.

[@warlordofbritannia]

Yet that never happened. Almost as if those fears were just a weak defense for racism and the peculiar institution….

[@andylangeland496]

Did I miss the part where Thomas Jefferson was massively in debt and slaves were part of the mortgage of the land? Also he did free at least 7 slaves... 2 by deeds and 5 in his will.

[@user-md3wm7vu1f]

werent those his kids/mistresses that he freed?

[@RebeccaOre]

He allowed at least one daughter to escape with some financial help. She married into the white community.

[@andylangeland496]

@@user-md3wm7vu1f He freed Robert Hemings and James Hemings by deeds in the mid 1790s... both adult males... so not his kids... Here is the exceprt from his will related to manumitting five slaves - Madison and Eston (named in the will) both born to Sally Hemings, and one or both claimed Jefferson as their father - "I give to my good affectionate and faithful servant Burwell his freedom and the sum of three hundred Dollars to buy necessaries to commence his trade of painter and glaser, or to use otherwise as he pleases. I give also to my good servants John Hemings and Joe Fosset their freedom at the end of one year after my death and to each of them respectively all the tools of their respective shops or callings and it is my will that a comfortable log house be built for each of the three servants so emancipated on some part of my lands convenient to them with respect to the residence of their wives and to Charlottesville and the university where they be mostly employed and reasonably convenient also to the interest of the proprietor of the land: of which houses I give the use of one with a heritage of an acre to each during his life or personal occupation thereof-I give also to John Hemings the service of his two apprentices Madison and Eston Hemings until their respective ages of twenty one years at which period respectively I give them their freedom and I Humbly and earnestly request of the legislature of Virginia a confirmation of the bequest of freedom to these servants with permission to remain in this state where their families and connections are as an additional instance of favor of which I have received so many other manifestations in the course of my life and for which I now give them my last solemn thanks.

[@jomckellan]

@@user-md3wm7vu1f Mainly. His kids with his dead wife's half-sister, Sally.

[@derek3708]

Thanks for talking about "forbidden" things without bias brother

[@MonkehMike]

Always look forward to your videos!

[@notcesr7136]

The idea that slavery persisted because southerners didn’t want to work under the hot Sun seems implausible and over simplistic. Poor farmers must have done it themselves and wealthy people never do the manual labor themselves, they always find a way to get others to do it (usually wages)

[@notcesr7136]

From what I remember of US history classes, the cotton gin was very important for maintaining slavery.

[@notcesr7136]

Oh lol you did bring up the cotton gin

[@BS-vx8dg]

"The idea that slavery persisted because southerners didn’t want to work under the hot Sun seems implausible and over simplistic." This was the single line in this video that didn't sit well with me. But perhaps the notion has validity and could have been phrased better. I think it *is* true that the upper reaches of Southern society were disdainful of work in general, but yeah, the hot sun thing just sounded a bit off.

[@BS-vx8dg]

@@Sadistic_Rage Agreed. I wasn't questioning the factual basis, I was merely concerned that that "fact" did not deliver enough bang for the potential cost.

[@matsanw]

Seems implausible and oversimplistic because it is. I think he was trying his best to not change topics on the video, but the situation at the time wasn't that straightfoward.

[@nbenefiel]

The Haitian slave revolt happened in 1792. It was brutal. Many Americans were terrified that this could happen here.

[@bobdollaz3391]

It's happening now!

[@gregmumbai333]

@@bobdollaz3391 Golly gee partner. Load up that shotgun and get outside! What are you doing typing in the comments?

[@nbenefiel]

@@bobdollaz3391 nonsense

[@tedphillips2501]

Thomas Jefferson and the others of his time feared "freeing" the slaves, who had virtually no education in this primitive industrial time, would result in a slave rebellion, destroying the Republic. This is why, because of Georgia and South Carolina refusing to sign the Declaration of Independence unless the proposed sections referencing slavery were deleted, slavery continued. In addition, had the slaves been taught to read, write, and do arithmatic, our history would be quite different. It still is not being done.

[@charleshinesjr.2360]

The idea that Southerners, unlike Northerners, we're lazy and didn't want to work in the hot sun and therefore embraced slavery is nonsense. Slavery died out in the north because the crops grown there, primarily wheat, barley, oats, etc., required heavy labor at only two points during the growing season, planting and harvesting. It was simply more economical to hire paid labor for those two relatively short periods. Rice and indigo which were grown in the south required heavy labor throughout the entire growing season making the cost of purchasing, housing, feeding, care, and oversight of slaves economically preferential to free paid labor.

[@prestonasher2291]

Very well done. You kept it neutral and fair as possible. Thank you! Most would compare his actions today's standards, and we must not look at history that way.

[@sydguitar99]

Also people have to understand that when looking at historical figures we have to look at them from the time they existed not through our modern lens because in the future people are going to look at us as barbarians

[@stratospheric37]

The slaves he owned and raped and the indians he took land from after advocating for and committing genocide against them probably didn't really liked the guy at the time he existed did they?

[@JohnEricksonYYZ]

True, but the irony of the American Revolution is that it was Loyalists such as John Graves Simcoe, the first governor of Upper Canada, who passed the first laws to end the slave trade in 1791 in what later became Canada.

[@drandrewm]

​@@JohnEricksonYYZ Great point!

[@jhonklan3794]

Honestly, he still seems pretty bad in context. He was provided with ample evidence to repudiate his beliefs and actively participated in the practice. Him personally ordering whippings cannot be understated, nor can him thinking whipping is appropriate for those with a "runaway slave mentality'. On some level, I think he knew what he was doing was wrong. That, if anything, makes it worse. The founders understood they were not perfect people. This is one such glaring barberous imperfection.

[@Regimeshifts]

you missed the part where the enlightenment was pushing for rights BEFORE slavery became worse. the time they existed didnt all agree with them, so your point is a bit moot to some degree

[@hitchensghost]

The public of the 1790s was composed of people who could read and afford a newspaper. In the south, this was comprised of landowners, who also presumably had slaves. When this came to a head in 1860, an election was virtually fought over this. When the south lost, they never really conceded this issue, and 150 years later, it is still a divisive topic. Considering that 90% of the electorate never had slaves even in that time, it seems that the only reason the dirt poor whites of the south wanted slavery to continue was that it kept themselves off the bottom rung of society. I think a similar mentality exists towards the emancipation of women even today.

[@RebeccaOre]

Alliances of poor whites and blacks got suppressed rather vigorously. The slave owning elite played both against each other quite deftly most of the time.

[@thevoxdeus]

Think of the number of Americans who know they're too fat, know that it's causing them problems, but still maintain the lifestyle that made them unhealthy. You can know a thing is wrong, know that it's causing profound damage, and still rationalize having other more immediate priorities. For people who were actually enslaved, slavery was a daily tragedy. For people who owned slaves, it was a type of human behavior that had been around for thousands of years before they were even born. If they were relatively kind masters (relative to psychopathic masters) they could probably view themselves as being enlightened progressives even though compared to the liberty they demanded for themselves, what they were doing was abominable. Guilt needed time to corrode apathy. A critical mass of Americans had to be convinced that slavery was not just a thing to be abolished, but a thing that they were willing to kill and die to abolish.

[@RoseA.Dewine]

Well stated. Still uneasy with it, but I got the analogy. Thank you

[@hrishikeshricky3130]

Just subscribed - fantastic content Sir Chapman

[@oliverdurkin-cinematograph2693]

KZbin Gold. Keep doing what you're doing. In grattitude. Great chanel!