The Thomas Jefferson conundrum

[Sarah G]

he never freed any of his slaves

What a stupid fuck

His will freed his five children

Jefferson was no saint, he was a man of his time, and there is a lot of present-ism bullshit being presented as accurate commentary here

You reminded me, the John Adams series is on HBO today. It is so good. The first one is just starting.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I like the part where they are meeting one another for the first time in Philadelphia.

Jefferson is complaining of the noisesomeness of the city, wishing "I were in my own country."

 

[peach174]

He isn't my liberal hero. I think he was a phony.

he never freed any of his slaves, and in fact had no compunctions about breaking up slave families by selling them off to raise money when he was short of cash, unlike many other slave owners of that era, so the myth that he 'hated slavery' and that he was morally tortured by it doesn't really bear up to scrutiny. A book called Master of the Mountain came out recently that shed a lot of light on Jefferson's estate management practices, including his approving the purchase of spiked collars several times by his overseers, and hiring overseers notorious for their beatings and whippings of slaves.

That book is full of lies.
Especially when it says- when he engineered the Louisiana Purchase in 1803, Jefferson pushed for slavery in that territory.
This is just the opposite. Proof of this being true is in the records of our Library of Congress.
People who write this stuff rely on people who are not very well informed about our history.
It's Despicable.

 

[JakeStarkey]

He isn't my liberal hero. I think he was a phony.

he never freed any of his slaves, and in fact had no compunctions about breaking up slave families by selling them off to raise money when he was short of cash, unlike many other slave owners of that era, so the myth that he 'hated slavery' and that he was morally tortured by it doesn't really bear up to scrutiny. A book called Master of the Mountain came out recently that shed a lot of light on Jefferson's estate management practices, including his approving the purchase of spiked collars several times by his overseers, and hiring overseers notorious for their beatings and whippings of slaves.

That book is full of lies.
Especially when it says- when he engineered the Louisiana Purchase in 1803, Jefferson pushed for slavery in that territory.
This is just the opposite. Proof of this being true is in the records of our Library of Congress.
People who write this stuff rely on people who are not very well informed about our history.
It's Despicable.

Oh, yeah, there are many, many despicable such characters: David Barton is just another one.

David Barton | Right Wing Watch

 

[regent]

I was reminded today that in the original draft of the DOI, the following words (penned by Jefferson), were included:

.

Africans in America/Part 2/Rough draft of the Declaration

Was Jefferson just talking out of his ass as a way to stick a needle in King George's eye? Because Jefferson himself owned slaves, refused to free slaves, and did in fact use them as collateral for loans.

Is old Tommy the world's biggest hypocrite?

The Declaration of Independence was a form of propaganda and to some extent it worked. One of the lessons of the Declaration would be to connect Jefferson's use of George III to politics today.
I think some slave holders of that era believed their slaves were safer and better cared for than perhaps even if they were granted freedom.

The Declaration of Independence was not propaganda.
It was a legal document that Declared War against England and was sent to the King of England.
Every single one of those men who signed it put their lives and their possessions on the line if they had lost the war.
When the war was won that legal document was used to form the bases of our Constitution.
Who taught you this incorrect information?

The Congress had voted independence on July 2, on that day the deed was done. On July 4th the Congress voted for Jefferson's document to be accepted giving the reasons and so forth for the July 2nd vote. The Congress made 86 changes and dropped 480 words. This was important stuff. The English Parliament the real culprit was not mentioned, but George III was given top billing. Why?
In any case a great deal of time and effort went into justifying the break with England and why the break. What was the founder's purpose with the Declaration to declare independence they had already voted for earlier? The founders were trying to state the purpose for the split, and further their own cause, and that's called propaganda.
An interesting assignment is cull the Declaration and find the end products in the Constitution. There are some. Wonder how many signers of the Declaration were framers?

 

[peach174]

he never freed any of his slaves, and in fact had no compunctions about breaking up slave families by selling them off to raise money when he was short of cash, unlike many other slave owners of that era, so the myth that he 'hated slavery' and that he was morally tortured by it doesn't really bear up to scrutiny. A book called Master of the Mountain came out recently that shed a lot of light on Jefferson's estate management practices, including his approving the purchase of spiked collars several times by his overseers, and hiring overseers notorious for their beatings and whippings of slaves.

That book is full of lies.
Especially when it says- when he engineered the Louisiana Purchase in 1803, Jefferson pushed for slavery in that territory.
This is just the opposite. Proof of this being true is in the records of our Library of Congress.
People who write this stuff rely on people who are not very well informed about our history.
It's Despicable.

Oh, yeah, there are many, many despicable such characters: David Barton is just another one.

David Barton | Right Wing Watch

At least Barton gets his from actual historic books and documents and not made up bull crap. He also shows his proof with those books, letters and documents.
Show where this guy has proof of actual documents from Jefferson that says he was all for slavery in the northwest territory.

 

[peach174]

The Declaration of Independence was a form of propaganda and to some extent it worked. One of the lessons of the Declaration would be to connect Jefferson's use of George III to politics today.
I think some slave holders of that era believed their slaves were safer and better cared for than perhaps even if they were granted freedom.

The Declaration of Independence was not propaganda.
It was a legal document that Declared War against England and was sent to the King of England.
Every single one of those men who signed it put their lives and their possessions on the line if they had lost the war.
When the war was won that legal document was used to form the bases of our Constitution.
Who taught you this incorrect information?

The Congress had voted independence on July 2, on that day the deed was done. On July 4th the Congress voted for Jefferson's document to be accepted giving the reasons and so forth for the July 2nd vote. The Congress made 86 changes and dropped 480 words. This was important stuff. The English Parliament the real culprit was not mentioned, but George III was given top billing. Why?
In any case a great deal of time and effort went into justifying the break with England and why the break. What was the founder's purpose with the Declaration to declare independence they had already voted for earlier? The founders were trying to state the purpose for the split, and further their own cause, and that's called propaganda.
An interesting assignment is cull the Declaration and find the end products in the Constitution. There are some. Wonder how many signers of the Declaration were framers?

Congress voted on the Lee Resolution for independence on July 2nd and was adopted by 12 of the 13 colonies, New York not voting.
Immediately afterward, the Congress began to consider the Declaration. Adams and Franklin had made only a few changes before the committee submitted the document. The discussion in Congress resulted in some alterations and deletions, but the basic document remained Jefferson's. The process of revision continued through all of July 3 and into the late morning of July 4. Then, at last, church bells rang out over Philadelphia; the Declaration had been officially adopted.

Further their own cause?

85% of the nation agreed to split with England.
There was no further reason to convince the 15% that were still loyal to the crown.
After the war was won most of them left and went to Canada or back to England.

 

[norwegen]

The Declaration of Independence was a form of propaganda and to some extent it worked. One of the lessons of the Declaration would be to connect Jefferson's use of George III to politics today.
I think some slave holders of that era believed their slaves were safer and better cared for than perhaps even if they were granted freedom.

The Declaration of Independence was not propaganda.
It was a legal document that Declared War against England and was sent to the King of England.
Every single one of those men who signed it put their lives and their possessions on the line if they had lost the war.
When the war was won that legal document was used to form the bases of our Constitution.
Who taught you this incorrect information?

The Congress had voted independence on July 2, on that day the deed was done. On July 4th the Congress voted for Jefferson's document to be accepted giving the reasons and so forth for the July 2nd vote. The Congress made 86 changes and dropped 480 words. This was important stuff. The English Parliament the real culprit was not mentioned, but George III was given top billing. Why?
In any case a great deal of time and effort went into justifying the break with England and why the break. What was the founder's purpose with the Declaration to declare independence they had already voted for earlier? The founders were trying to state the purpose for the split, and further their own cause, and that's called propaganda.
An interesting assignment is cull the Declaration and find the end products in the Constitution. There are some. Wonder how many signers of the Declaration were framers?

George III given top billing? He was the only one the DoI was meant for. The Americans had already dismissed the Parliament, having already been seating their own legislatures. They were already even seating a national legislature. Splitting from the king was merely the final break from England; the DoI meant that the Americans were no longer residents of commonwealths but of sovereign states.

The founders did not further their own cause with the DoI; they did not act on their own. The sentiment among Americans as a society was a Whiggish sentiment. Adoption of a document declaring independence was a natural development in a society excited about its own brand of republican polity, in a society anticipating self-government and a government rooted in natural law principles.

 

[norwegen]

The Declaration of Independence was not propaganda.
It was a legal document that Declared War against England and was sent to the King of England.
Every single one of those men who signed it put their lives and their possessions on the line if they had lost the war.
When the war was won that legal document was used to form the bases of our Constitution.
Who taught you this incorrect information?

The Congress had voted independence on July 2, on that day the deed was done. On July 4th the Congress voted for Jefferson's document to be accepted giving the reasons and so forth for the July 2nd vote. The Congress made 86 changes and dropped 480 words. This was important stuff. The English Parliament the real culprit was not mentioned, but George III was given top billing. Why?
In any case a great deal of time and effort went into justifying the break with England and why the break. What was the founder's purpose with the Declaration to declare independence they had already voted for earlier? The founders were trying to state the purpose for the split, and further their own cause, and that's called propaganda.
An interesting assignment is cull the Declaration and find the end products in the Constitution. There are some. Wonder how many signers of the Declaration were framers?

Congress voted on the Lee Resolution for independence on July 2nd and was adopted by 12 of the 13 colonies, New York not voting.
Immediately afterward, the Congress began to consider the Declaration. Adams and Franklin had made only a few changes before the committee submitted the document. The discussion in Congress resulted in some alterations and deletions, but the basic document remained Jefferson's. The process of revision continued through all of July 3 and into the late morning of July 4. Then, at last, church bells rang out over Philadelphia; the Declaration had been officially adopted.

Further their own cause?

85% of the nation agreed to split with England.
There was no further reason to convince the 15% that were still loyal to the crown.
After the war was won most of them left and went to Canada or back to England.

Yes, the Tories fled; the Americans wanted to retain their liberties and their limited governments. No wonder that Whig politics and the abolition movement would give birth to the modern Republican Party. Natural law principles of equality and liberty would find more permanence in our land because of it.

I just wish today's Republican Party would remember that.

 

[regent]

The Declaration of Independence was not propaganda.
It was a legal document that Declared War against England and was sent to the King of England.
Every single one of those men who signed it put their lives and their possessions on the line if they had lost the war.
When the war was won that legal document was used to form the bases of our Constitution.
Who taught you this incorrect information?

The Congress had voted independence on July 2, on that day the deed was done. On July 4th the Congress voted for Jefferson's document to be accepted giving the reasons and so forth for the July 2nd vote. The Congress made 86 changes and dropped 480 words. This was important stuff. The English Parliament the real culprit was not mentioned, but George III was given top billing. Why?
In any case a great deal of time and effort went into justifying the break with England and why the break. What was the founder's purpose with the Declaration to declare independence they had already voted for earlier? The founders were trying to state the purpose for the split, and further their own cause, and that's called propaganda.
An interesting assignment is cull the Declaration and find the end products in the Constitution. There are some. Wonder how many signers of the Declaration were framers?

George III given top billing? He was the only one the DoI was meant for. The Americans had already dismissed the Parliament, having already been seating their own legislatures. They were already even seating a national legislature. Splitting from the king was merely the final break from England; the DoI meant that the Americans were no longer residents of commonwealths but of sovereign states.

The founders did not further their own cause with the DoI; they did not act on their own. The sentiment among Americans as a society was a Whiggish sentiment. Adoption of a document declaring independence was a natural development in a society excited about its own brand of republican polity, in a society anticipating self-government and a government rooted in natural law principles.

The Declaration of I was written with one eye on France, and to that extent the D of I worked. Would we have won the Revolutionary war without France? Propaganda is not evil we are subjected to it every day.
Did Jefferson take on George III rather than Parliament because it is easier to blame one person than a group. Who get the most criticism in our government the president or the Congress?

 

[norwegen]

The Congress had voted independence on July 2, on that day the deed was done. On July 4th the Congress voted for Jefferson's document to be accepted giving the reasons and so forth for the July 2nd vote. The Congress made 86 changes and dropped 480 words. This was important stuff. The English Parliament the real culprit was not mentioned, but George III was given top billing. Why?
In any case a great deal of time and effort went into justifying the break with England and why the break. What was the founder's purpose with the Declaration to declare independence they had already voted for earlier? The founders were trying to state the purpose for the split, and further their own cause, and that's called propaganda.
An interesting assignment is cull the Declaration and find the end products in the Constitution. There are some. Wonder how many signers of the Declaration were framers?

George III given top billing? He was the only one the DoI was meant for. The Americans had already dismissed the Parliament, having already been seating their own legislatures. They were already even seating a national legislature. Splitting from the king was merely the final break from England; the DoI meant that the Americans were no longer residents of commonwealths but of sovereign states.

The founders did not further their own cause with the DoI; they did not act on their own. The sentiment among Americans as a society was a Whiggish sentiment. Adoption of a document declaring independence was a natural development in a society excited about its own brand of republican polity, in a society anticipating self-government and a government rooted in natural law principles.

The Declaration of I was written with one eye on France, and to that extent the D of I worked. Would we have won the Revolutionary war without France? Propaganda is not evil we are subjected to it every day.
Did Jefferson take on George III rather than Parliament because it is easier to blame one person than a group. Who get the most criticism in our government the president or the Congress?

The Congress had no need to take on the Parliament. No need to.

 

[peach174]

George III given top billing? He was the only one the DoI was meant for. The Americans had already dismissed the Parliament, having already been seating their own legislatures. They were already even seating a national legislature. Splitting from the king was merely the final break from England; the DoI meant that the Americans were no longer residents of commonwealths but of sovereign states.

The founders did not further their own cause with the DoI; they did not act on their own. The sentiment among Americans as a society was a Whiggish sentiment. Adoption of a document declaring independence was a natural development in a society excited about its own brand of republican polity, in a society anticipating self-government and a government rooted in natural law principles.

The Declaration of I was written with one eye on France, and to that extent the D of I worked. Would we have won the Revolutionary war without France? Propaganda is not evil we are subjected to it every day.
Did Jefferson take on George III rather than Parliament because it is easier to blame one person than a group. Who get the most criticism in our government the president or the Congress?

The Congress had no need to take on the Parliament. No need to.

No it wasn't the Parliament that decided to start ruling the colonists. It was King George III who decided to rule them in the 1770's after they had their own established government for 150 years.
This was the beginning of the rebellion.

 

[Dad2three]

That book is full of lies.
Especially when it says- when he engineered the Louisiana Purchase in 1803, Jefferson pushed for slavery in that territory.
This is just the opposite. Proof of this being true is in the records of our Library of Congress.
People who write this stuff rely on people who are not very well informed about our history.
It's Despicable.

Oh, yeah, there are many, many despicable such characters: David Barton is just another one.

David Barton | Right Wing Watch

At least Barton gets his from actual historic books and documents and not made up bull crap. He also shows his proof with those books, letters and documents.
Show where this guy has proof of actual documents from Jefferson that says he was all for slavery in the northwest territory.

"At least Barton gets his from actual historic books and documents and not made up bull crap. He also shows his proof with those books, letters and documents."

lol


Rise of a right-wing quack: Faux-historian David Barton’s shocking new influence

David Barton -- Glenn Beck's favorite "historian" -- is a discredited fraud. Which makes his new ascent terrifying



[M]any professional historians dismiss Mr. Barton, whose academic degree is in Christian education from Oral Roberts University, as a biased amateur who cherry-picks quotes from history and the Bible.

“The problem with David Barton is that there’s a lot of truth in what he says,” said Derek H. Davis, director of church-state studies at Baylor University, a Baptist institution in Waco, Tex. “But the end product is a lot of distortions, half-truths and twisted history.”

That’s a very generous way of putting it.



Rise of a right-wing quack: Faux-historian David Barton?s shocking new influence - Salon.com

 

[Dad2three]

That book is full of lies.
Especially when it says- when he engineered the Louisiana Purchase in 1803, Jefferson pushed for slavery in that territory.
This is just the opposite. Proof of this being true is in the records of our Library of Congress.
People who write this stuff rely on people who are not very well informed about our history.
It's Despicable.

Oh, yeah, there are many, many despicable such characters: David Barton is just another one.

David Barton | Right Wing Watch

At least Barton gets his from actual historic books and documents and not made up bull crap. He also shows his proof with those books, letters and documents.
Show where this guy has proof of actual documents from Jefferson that says he was all for slavery in the northwest territory.

In seeking to establish, what he called "an empire for liberty," Jefferson influenced the country's policies toward Native Americans and the extension of slavery into the West. Despite a life-long interest in Native American culture, President Jefferson advocated policies that would dislocate Native Americans and their way of life. In 1784, Jefferson opposed the extension of slavery into the northwest territory, but he later supported its westward extension because he feared that any restriction of slavery could lead to a civil war and an end to the nation. At the end of his presidency, Jefferson looked forward to a United States that spread across the entire continent of North America.

The West - Thomas Jefferson | Exhibitions - Library of Congress

 

[Dad2three]

The Declaration of Independence was not propaganda.
It was a legal document that Declared War against England and was sent to the King of England.
Every single one of those men who signed it put their lives and their possessions on the line if they had lost the war.
When the war was won that legal document was used to form the bases of our Constitution.
Who taught you this incorrect information?

The Congress had voted independence on July 2, on that day the deed was done. On July 4th the Congress voted for Jefferson's document to be accepted giving the reasons and so forth for the July 2nd vote. The Congress made 86 changes and dropped 480 words. This was important stuff. The English Parliament the real culprit was not mentioned, but George III was given top billing. Why?
In any case a great deal of time and effort went into justifying the break with England and why the break. What was the founder's purpose with the Declaration to declare independence they had already voted for earlier? The founders were trying to state the purpose for the split, and further their own cause, and that's called propaganda.
An interesting assignment is cull the Declaration and find the end products in the Constitution. There are some. Wonder how many signers of the Declaration were framers?

Congress voted on the Lee Resolution for independence on July 2nd and was adopted by 12 of the 13 colonies, New York not voting.
Immediately afterward, the Congress began to consider the Declaration. Adams and Franklin had made only a few changes before the committee submitted the document. The discussion in Congress resulted in some alterations and deletions, but the basic document remained Jefferson's. The process of revision continued through all of July 3 and into the late morning of July 4. Then, at last, church bells rang out over Philadelphia; the Declaration had been officially adopted.

Further their own cause?

85% of the nation agreed to split with England.
There was no further reason to convince the 15% that were still loyal to the crown.
After the war was won most of them left and went to Canada or back to England.

I have a minor in history, and your 15% number I've only recently heard about, coming upon the heels of right wing 'historians' like Barton, misrepresenting REAL facts

HISTORIAN Robert Calhoon said the consensus of historians is that in the Thirteen Colonies between 40 and 45 percent of the white population supported the Patriots' cause, between 15 and 20% supported the Loyalists, and the remainder were neutral or kept a low profile.



With a white population of about 2.5 million, that makes about 380,000 to 500,000 Loyalists. The great majority of them remained in America, since only about 80,000 Loyalists left the United States 1775-1783. They went to Canada, Britain, Florida or the West Indies, but some eventually returned


Patriot (American Revolution) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[peach174]

The Congress had voted independence on July 2, on that day the deed was done. On July 4th the Congress voted for Jefferson's document to be accepted giving the reasons and so forth for the July 2nd vote. The Congress made 86 changes and dropped 480 words. This was important stuff. The English Parliament the real culprit was not mentioned, but George III was given top billing. Why?
In any case a great deal of time and effort went into justifying the break with England and why the break. What was the founder's purpose with the Declaration to declare independence they had already voted for earlier? The founders were trying to state the purpose for the split, and further their own cause, and that's called propaganda.
An interesting assignment is cull the Declaration and find the end products in the Constitution. There are some. Wonder how many signers of the Declaration were framers?

Congress voted on the Lee Resolution for independence on July 2nd and was adopted by 12 of the 13 colonies, New York not voting.
Immediately afterward, the Congress began to consider the Declaration. Adams and Franklin had made only a few changes before the committee submitted the document. The discussion in Congress resulted in some alterations and deletions, but the basic document remained Jefferson's. The process of revision continued through all of July 3 and into the late morning of July 4. Then, at last, church bells rang out over Philadelphia; the Declaration had been officially adopted.

Further their own cause?

85% of the nation agreed to split with England.
There was no further reason to convince the 15% that were still loyal to the crown.
After the war was won most of them left and went to Canada or back to England.

I have a minor in history, and your 15% number I've only recently heard about, coming upon the heels of right wing 'historians' like Barton, misrepresenting REAL facts

HISTORIAN Robert Calhoon said the consensus of historians is that in the Thirteen Colonies between 40 and 45 percent of the white population supported the Patriots' cause, between 15 and 20% supported the Loyalists, and the remainder were neutral or kept a low profile.



With a white population of about 2.5 million, that makes about 380,000 to 500,000 Loyalists. The great majority of them remained in America, since only about 80,000 Loyalists left the United States 1775-1783. They went to Canada, Britain, Florida or the West Indies, but some eventually returned


Patriot (American Revolution) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I have been reading about our history way before Barton was ever on the TV
I have read many history books that have said there was around 15 to 20% for loyalists.

http://www.ushistory.org/us/11b.asp
In the long run, however, the patriots were much more successful attracting support. American patriots won the war of propaganda. Committees of Correspondence persuaded many fence-sitters to join the patriot cause.

 

[regent]

George III given top billing? He was the only one the DoI was meant for. The Americans had already dismissed the Parliament, having already been seating their own legislatures. They were already even seating a national legislature. Splitting from the king was merely the final break from England; the DoI meant that the Americans were no longer residents of commonwealths but of sovereign states.

The founders did not further their own cause with the DoI; they did not act on their own. The sentiment among Americans as a society was a Whiggish sentiment. Adoption of a document declaring independence was a natural development in a society excited about its own brand of republican polity, in a society anticipating self-government and a government rooted in natural law principles.

The Declaration of I was written with one eye on France, and to that extent the D of I worked. Would we have won the Revolutionary war without France? Propaganda is not evil we are subjected to it every day.
Did Jefferson take on George III rather than Parliament because it is easier to blame one person than a group. Who get the most criticism in our government the president or the Congress?

The Congress had no need to take on the Parliament. No need to.

Of the 27 Jefferson grievances, how many were caused by Parliament and how many by George?

 

[Dad2three]

Congress voted on the Lee Resolution for independence on July 2nd and was adopted by 12 of the 13 colonies, New York not voting.
Immediately afterward, the Congress began to consider the Declaration. Adams and Franklin had made only a few changes before the committee submitted the document. The discussion in Congress resulted in some alterations and deletions, but the basic document remained Jefferson's. The process of revision continued through all of July 3 and into the late morning of July 4. Then, at last, church bells rang out over Philadelphia; the Declaration had been officially adopted.

Further their own cause?

85% of the nation agreed to split with England.
There was no further reason to convince the 15% that were still loyal to the crown.
After the war was won most of them left and went to Canada or back to England.

I have a minor in history, and your 15% number I've only recently heard about, coming upon the heels of right wing 'historians' like Barton, misrepresenting REAL facts

HISTORIAN Robert Calhoon said the consensus of historians is that in the Thirteen Colonies between 40 and 45 percent of the white population supported the Patriots' cause, between 15 and 20% supported the Loyalists, and the remainder were neutral or kept a low profile.



With a white population of about 2.5 million, that makes about 380,000 to 500,000 Loyalists. The great majority of them remained in America, since only about 80,000 Loyalists left the United States 1775-1783. They went to Canada, Britain, Florida or the West Indies, but some eventually returned


Patriot (American Revolution) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I have been reading about our history way before Barton was ever on the TV
I have read many history books that have said there was around 15 to 20% for loyalists.

Loyalists, Fence-sitters, and Patriots [ushistory.org]
In the long run, however, the patriots were much more successful attracting support. American patriots won the war of propaganda. Committees of Correspondence persuaded many fence-sitters to join the patriot cause.

Your link

"Often overlooked are the fence-sitters who made up the largest group."

NO serious historian thinks 85% of the Colonist's supported the Revolution. NONE

 

[regent]

I have a minor in history, and your 15% number I've only recently heard about, coming upon the heels of right wing 'historians' like Barton, misrepresenting REAL facts

HISTORIAN Robert Calhoon said the consensus of historians is that in the Thirteen Colonies between 40 and 45 percent of the white population supported the Patriots' cause, between 15 and 20% supported the Loyalists, and the remainder were neutral or kept a low profile.



With a white population of about 2.5 million, that makes about 380,000 to 500,000 Loyalists. The great majority of them remained in America, since only about 80,000 Loyalists left the United States 1775-1783. They went to Canada, Britain, Florida or the West Indies, but some eventually returned


Patriot (American Revolution) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I have been reading about our history way before Barton was ever on the TV
I have read many history books that have said there was around 15 to 20% for loyalists.

Loyalists, Fence-sitters, and Patriots [ushistory.org]
In the long run, however, the patriots were much more successful attracting support. American patriots won the war of propaganda. Committees of Correspondence persuaded many fence-sitters to join the patriot cause.

Your link

"Often overlooked are the fence-sitters who made up the largest group."

NO serious historian thinks 85% of the Colonist's supported the Revolution. NONE

It was always one third supported Britain, one third supported revolution, and one third could care less. All historian's estimates, of course.

 

[Picaro]

They had to compromise with the Southern States and a few Northern States
Jefferson worked to oppose slavery in other ways.
Mainly the Northwest Territory that forbids slavery in any new States, but he also worked to get more States slavery free, by 1789, 5 of the Northern states had abolished slavery. By 1804 all the other Northern states had abolished slavery.

It was largely the New England Federalists who abolished slavery in the northern states, and they did so because of political pressure from Calvinist fundamentalists and other evangelicals of the First and Second 'Great Awakenings', i.e. abolitionists. 'Anti-slavery' is not to be conflated with abolitionism, then or ever. Most anti-slavery advocates were not abolitionists, and were agitating to keep blacks out of the new territories altogether, which is why they also passed the Black Codes, which in many states made it pretty much impossible for blacks to make a legal living in many of them. Anti-slavery advocates, outside of the abolitionists, were advocating what would be a modern white nationalist's wet dream; no blacks at all being allowed in the new territories.


It's also an easy thing to vote and support ordinances that have no effect on you personally or your personal wealth. Jefferson's 'opposition to slavery' diminished in direct proportion to his increasing power to actually do something about it.

Over several days of debate, more than a quarter of the text was deleted, most notably a scathing denunciation of the slave trade. It was no secret that Jefferson resented those changes. He noted at the time: passages were “struck out in complaisance to S. Carolina and Georgia, who had never attempted to restrain the importation of slaves & who on the contrary still wished to continue it. Our northern brethren also, I believe, felt a little under those censures; for tho' their people have very few slaves themselves, yet they have been pretty considerable carriers of them to others.”

The Jefferson of 1774 was not the Jefferson of later years; in that era he was caught up in the independence movement and all the abstract philosophical principles that went into the propaganda against King George and feverishly writing grandiose manifestos.


What politicians say is not to be conflated with what they actually believe or do in their personal lives, any more than the 'idealism' of modern trust fund kids and frat brats hanging out in college means squat later on; they get over it and go on to enjoy the benefits of family wealth and business and social connections, and never let idealism interfere with taking advantage of those privileges and stations in life, particularly where their money and political influence is concerned. Jefferson was no liberationist egalitarian after the Revolution nor for the rest of his life. He goes silent on slavery abolition by the 1790's.

Jefferson, no doubt more than other Americans because he has historically carried the mantle of the American character on his shoulders, is vulnerable to modern censure for his apparent contrasting views. He had an obsession with equality and natural rights, and hated slavery, and believed that the conviction of the American psyche by America's revolutionary principles would soon doom the institution. He himself tried unsuccessfully to facilitate the manumission of slaves in Virginia and also, as you say, in the new western territories.

He didn't try very hard re manumission, it's no risk to support something that was never going to happen and hence be able to claim to abolitionist political supporters he was 'on their side'. This is common even today; politicians like LBJ were extremely adept at this sort of manipulation, as a modern example. Manumission is not the same as freeing them; it's a commercial transaction, and something that is bought from the owners; some slaves were allowed to make money, favored ones, but try and come up with how much money a field hand would ever see.


If he 'hated slavery' there is no indication at all of it in his personal business affairs; he was very diligent at turning as large a profit as possible out his own slaves. His 'apparently contrasting views' become perfectly clear when one accepts that he was a duplicitous politician and merely attempting to cover all bases on two sides of the Atlantic, particularly in France after the war, where America’s friends, particularly Lafayette, were his only access to the French Crown who could help both him and the U.S. with paying off British creditors.

The Declaration of Independence was a form of propaganda and to some extent it worked. One of the lessons of the Declaration would be to connect Jefferson's use of George III to politics today.
I think some slave holders of that era believed their slaves were safer and better cared for than perhaps even if they were granted freedom.

Yes. Nonetheless, the complaints were overblown, and George III, or more accurately his ministers, handled it all pretty badly, mainly from arrogance. They lost a lot of revenue when the East India Company went bankrupt in the 1760's, and after a long period of benign neglect and looking the other way on the colonial traders dealing with 'enemies' in the Caribbean decided the colonies should be able to pay their own way re military expenditures, they went overboard and imposed too many revenue schemes at once. The colonies had some sympathizers in Parliament, England itself going through the same sort of thing themselves.

One of the rules of history is that one should not import values, beliefs and practices of the present into the past. Someday citizens may question why we allowed red and green lights to control our use of automobiles. At the time of Jefferson slavery was being questioned and yet sixty years later Americans have to fight a war to end the practice.

It isn't necessary to import values of the present, since those values already existed in Jefferson's day, via the Calvinists and some of the evangelicals and many New England Federalists.


His 'freeing of his children' is merely a common practice of the day, cutting a deal with a favored female slave trading the freedom of her children for sexual favors. Technically they might have had the legal status of slaves, but practically they were to be freed before they were even born, and not the same as freeing real slaves. It's ridiculous to claim otherwise as some sort of hand-wave in defense of his slave owning. He wasn't conflicted at all about slavery; he loved the money they brought in.


Re Master of the Mountain:

That book is full of lies.
Especially when it says- when he engineered the Louisiana Purchase in 1803, Jefferson pushed for slavery in that territory.
This is just the opposite. Proof of this being true is in the records of our Library of Congress.
People who write this stuff rely on people who are not very well informed about our history.
It's Despicable.

Cite the 'lies', from the book itself, not some web page you read somewhere. People who write these sorts of claims about books they've never read are obviously not informed at all, much less well informed. Your's and Jake's juvenile emotional needs to disparage people they disagree with says more about you than than it does about those you're weakly attempting to dismiss. Go play in the Fever Swamps with the other kids; you'll be happier there.

The Congress had voted independence on July 2, on that day the deed was done. On July 4th the Congress voted for Jefferson's document to be accepted giving the reasons and so forth for the July 2nd vote. The Congress made 86 changes and dropped 480 words. This was important stuff. The English Parliament the real culprit was not mentioned, but George III was given top billing. Why?

Because Parliament wasn't entirely behind George III, and some were sympathizers; no point in making unnecessary enemies, especially if the rebellion failed and one might want friends in England in that event. England was itself suffering from new taxes as well, so who knew if the war would even reach a major shooting stage at the time, or last as long as it did? Also taking into consideration the fact that many colonists still supported the Crown, there was no point in alienating them all at once either. Even Ben Franklin's son opposed the break with England, for one example.

In any case a great deal of time and effort went into justifying the break with England and why the break. What was the founder's purpose with the Declaration to declare independence they had already voted for earlier? The founders were trying to state the purpose for the split, and further their own cause, and that's called propaganda.

Yes.

An interesting assignment is cull the Declaration and find the end products in the Constitution. There are some. Wonder how many signers of the Declaration were framers?

According to Forrest McDonald's The Presidency of Thomas Jefferson, a lot of Jefferson's and others views were lifted directly from Henry St. John, Lord Bolingbroke, and his Craftsman pamphlets of the early 1720's and thereabouts. St. John was a proponent of 'Tory Oppositionism'. I'll dig out some cites when I remember where I laid it.

At least Barton gets his from actual historic books and documents and not made up bull crap. He also shows his proof with those books, letters and documents.
Show where this guy has proof of actual documents from Jefferson that says he was all for slavery in the northwest territory.

Show where you actually read the book, then you can make ignorant specious claims about it and what the author said in it concerning Jefferson and the Northwest Ordinance, the Louisiana Purchase, or anything else. It also helps to know what Jefferson was doing in those years, circa 1783 and after, in attempting to influence France, and dealing with his influential friends of America there, like Lafayette and others, who were all abolitionists and pressuring Jefferson on why the Americans were not freeing slaves as per the Revolutionary spirit espoused in the Declaration.