How could Jefferson own slaves while writing about equality?

Question

Opinion Question

Answer 1

It was a sign of the times...thank goodness we went away from that...

Answer 2

We actually just discussed this Tuesday in my Revolutionary Ideology class. Previously we had talked about More and Rousseau and their views of equality and freedom, then we touched on Jefferson and what he meant when writing the declaration. When he said "All men are born free & equal" that is exactly what he meant. They are *born* free and equal, in the sense that at the very start, everyone has a chance to do something with their lives, move up to a higher social status w/e. To make his point my teacher talked about how it's like a foot race, and everyone knows there will be a winner and a loser but they all start with the same advantages. So that's how he could write about equality while still owning slaves. They just happened to lose the race and that's where they ended up in life. :/

Answer 3

Not that slavery is being condoned in this answer, but it is important to realize that slavery was a WORLDWIDE practice for hundreds of years up to the time of Jefferson. The Zulus enslaved and traded other Africans that were not Zulus, the Egyptians enslaved the Hebrews, indentured servants were in essence slaves...this practice had been common place for centuries.

Thankfully as humans became more civilized (I use that term loosely) they began to see the error of their predecessors ways. Unfortunately there is still slavery today - but it is not socially acceptable in most cultures.

So in short, it seems ironic and hypocritical of Jefferson - but that is the way things were "back in the day".

Answer 4

While writing the Declaration of Independence Jefferson released all of his slaves. He wanted to ban slavery in the Declaration, but some of the Southern states said they would not sign it if slavery was not allowed.

Answer 5

Slaves were an economic necessity in Jefferson's eyes... without their help he would not have been in the position he was in. He did treat his slaves much better than many of the other founding fathers.

Answer 6

It was a way of having income in the south. I don't agree with slavery but if you've fed your children by the means you wouldn't want to give it up unless you had to. Keep in mind that he did give up his slaves as well in time and was not as abusive as many were on a daily basis. He had some amazing inventions that his house maids got to use. Looking at both sides of the agruement helps to understand.

Answer 7

For the same reason that Senator Robert Byrd says he's all about equality and protecting the constitution, but in fact was a member of the KKK.

Hypocrites.

Answer 8

Actually he had a reputation for treating his slaves in a rather progressive manner considering the time he lived in.

Answer 9

~Since you fail to cite any works of Jefferson to which you refer, I will assume you alude to the Declaration of Independence. Had you read much of Jefferson's other works, you wouldn't need to ask the question. Jefferson was a great proponent of personal liberty for those entitled to it by the law and custom of his day.

Perhaps, like all great thinkers, Jefferson was a product of his times and was writing from such a frame of reference. At the time of the Declaration of Independence, salvery existed in every colony and slaves made up approximately 20% of the colonial population. The Declaration was not about personal freedoms and liberties, it was about the right of organized society to cast off an unjust government, by force of arms if necessary. Slavery was never an issue, and slavery was deemed not only legal, but necessary, by the English Crown and Parliament (the rightful lawmakers of the colonies in 1776) and by the colonists themselves, just as it had been by every civilization in history since the socialization of mankind.

John Locke and all the great proponents of freedom and liberty were addressing themselves to the landowning, tax paying free white males. Jefferson, at least in the Declaration, was not attempting to address personal, individual rights, liberties or freedom. I suppose even the most enlightened of thinkers don't try to push the envelope too far on matters extraneous and irrelevant to the task at hand. Why should you expect more of Jefferson, and why single him out? He did, at least, free his slaves (including his daughter) posthumously through his Will, just like George Washington and countless others.

Jefferson did not write the Declaration. The Committee of Five did. Jefferson submitted the working draft and the others contributed substantially to the final version. All 5 had to make significant concessions and compromises of their personal goals and ideals in order to produce a mutually acceptable document. The ideas expressed in the Declaration were hardly novel or unique at the time, nor were they intended to be, as was acknowledged by the authors when they presented it. The Committe drew heavily from, among other sources:

The works of Locke
The Oath of Abjuration, Dutch Republic declaration of independence of 1581
The Declaration of Arbroath, 1320, the first formal document declaring independence in western civilization
Virginia's Declaration of Rights of June 1776.
The English Bill of Rights of 1689 (although this was relied on much more in the drafting of the Constitution).
The works of Thomas Paine

That the colonial rebels had no thought of granting universal freedom and liberty to all within the realm is abundantly obvious. That is why, under the constitution (which was not authored by Jefferson):

- the number of Representatives to serve in Congress was based on the population of each state, counting "free Persons" (including indentured servants: that is, a slave for a term of years) as a whole person, slaves as 3/5 of a person, and Indians not at all unless they paid taxes. Article I, section 2

- the president had to be free, {white}, native born and 35 years old. Article II, section 1

- slavery was recognized as legal until December, 1865. Amendment XIV (And no, The Great Emancipator did not free any slaves. Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation had no practical effect whatsover.)

- Black men did not acquire the legal right to vote until July, 1868. Amendment XV

- Women didn't win the right to vote until August, 1920. Amendment XIX

- Although Amendment XIV conferred citizenship on anyone born in the United States and subject to its jurisdiction, Native Americans were not granted citizenship until 1924 with the passage of the Indian Citizenship Act, and they were not even recognized as legal persons under the law until the Standing Bear trial in 1879

-Residents of Washington DC finally got the right to vote for president and for elected representation in Congress in 1961, thanks in no small part to the Soviet Union. Amendment XXIII

The constitution didn't have much to say about individual rights and liberties either. The Bill of Rights, the first 10 amendments, weren't passed and ratified until 1791, largely due to the pressures exerted by George Mason. They were drafted by James Madison, but Madison borrowed liberally from the Virginia Declaration of Rights, which had been written by Mason.

By the way, independence was declared on July 2, 1776, when the Continental Congress approved the Lee Resolution, authored by Richard Henry Lee.

Your attempt at irony and sarcasm falls flat on its face when viewed in the context of historical fact, wouldn't you say?

Answer 10

His slaves were equal to each other.

Answer 11

africans were not considered equally human and therefore not entitled to full rights of man