Lincoln and Colonization

Joined
Sep 17, 2011
Location
mo
Actually it would be for this op, haven't seen any other likely courses. Well perhaps a more measured approach not attaching civil rights to reconstruction, that perhaps would have been likely if Lincoln had lived as well, he likely wouldn't have overreached in idealism.

Nor do I subscribe to some view they would be somehow inherently inferior and incapable of succeeding in colonization compared to penal colonies ....
 

RobertP

Lt. Colonel
Joined
Nov 11, 2009
Location
Dallas
Actually it would be for this op, haven't seen any other likely courses. Well perhaps a more measured approach not attaching civil rights to reconstruction, that perhaps would have been likely if Lincoln had lived as well, he likely wouldn't have overreached in idealism.

Nor do I subscribe to some view they would be somehow inherently inferior and incapable of succeeding in colonization compared to penal colonies ....
We see from the Liberia experience that the freedmen felt superior to the indigenous Africans, practicing apartheid and slavery on them until well into the 20th century.
 

DanSBHawk

Captain
Joined
May 8, 2015
Location
Wisconsin
It amazes me that the people who most wanted to deport black freedmen after the war... were the ones who had no problem exploiting their labor before the war. When it was legal.

The country would have been much better off deporting disloyal and racist whites. North and South.
 

Zack

Sergeant
Joined
Aug 20, 2017
Location
Los Angeles, California
Actually it would be for this op, haven't seen any other likely courses. Well perhaps a more measured approach not attaching civil rights to reconstruction, that perhaps would have been likely if Lincoln had lived as well, he likely wouldn't have overreached in idealism.

Nor do I subscribe to some view they would be somehow inherently inferior and incapable of succeeding in colonization compared to penal colonies ....

The fundamental difference between European colonization of the Americas and the American Colonization Society was that the former were individuals choosing to leave (for various reasons including to escape persecution) and the latter was - with few exceptions - white people deciding on the behalf of black people that they would be better off in Africa. This is why I cited the first national black convention, David Walker's Appeal, and that the organization was founded and staffed by white men including slaveholders.

Now, some 13,000 black Americans did volunteer to go to Liberia. The ACS did not force anyone to go. As with any group, there was a broad spectrum of opinion in the black community on the issue. Some believed that justice could never be achieved in America (a sobering thought indeed) and so left for Liberia.

But the original question was whether the proposal had merit in light of white oppression, and to that the answer is still no. And it should be a point of shame for the land of the free that anyone would feel they would be freer if they left. How could it possibly be easier to deport millions and millions of people than to tell slaveholders and racists that they could not own human beings or deny them access to basic rights? Moreover, how could it possibly be morally right? As several organizations at the time asserted, they were not African-Americans but simply Americans. The wealth of the country had been built on their backs and with their lives and now it was time for them to share in that national growth and success. Not go live somewhere else and start from scratch.

To conclude:

You falsely asserted in the OP that the choice was between colonization and oppression (there were in fact dozens of other options available), falsely asserted that the lack of a strong colonization movement suggests oppression wasn't bad, and then falsely asserted that my statements regarding the stupid and immoral decision to move a massive group of people largely against their will to unknown lands must mean I am racist and do not believe that a black colony could have been successful.

Also I wouldn't call the work of a penal colony a "success" for the prisoners in the colony. And, though many convicts were sent to Australia for example, plenty of free colonists also went by choice.
https://www.sl.nsw.gov.au/stories/convict-experience

✌️
 

RobertP

Lt. Colonel
Joined
Nov 11, 2009
Location
Dallas
It amazes me that the people who most wanted to deport black freedmen after the war... were the ones who had no problem exploiting their labor before the war. When it was legal.

The country would have been much better off deporting disloyal and racist whites. North and South.
So what you are saying is that you would have preferred an entire region of African Americans that could have been controlled better?
 
Joined
Sep 17, 2011
Location
mo
You falsely asserted in the OP that the You falsely asserted in the OP that the choice was between colonization and oppression (there were in fact dozens of other options available), falsely asserted that the lack of a strong colonization movement suggests oppression wasn't bad, and then falsely asserted that my statements regarding the stupid and immoral decision to move a massive group of people largely against their will to unknown lands must mean I am racist and do not believe that a black colony could have been successful. asserted that the lack of a strong colonization movement suggests oppression wasn't bad, and then falsely asserted that my statements regarding the stupid and immoral decision to move a massive group of people largely against their will to unknown lands must mean I am racist and do not believe that a black colony could have been successful.
No those are all your own false assertions. As the OP was colonization something that Lincoln considered, have merit, had nothing to do with if their was other choices or not. Did not say anything about not being other options, would seem the one most likely to circumvent oppression though.

Colonization is rather unrelated to oppression, and one imply's nothing about the other.

And yes I do not think African Americans would somehow been more likely to fail then Europeans who did forced immigration through penal colonies. If they had pursued colonization as far as to forced, the reality is it wouldn't have been anything drastically new, in that we forced Native Americans also considered non citizens in the period, to move rather periodically.......and forced colonization compared to voluntary or incentivized colonization would go to your dozens of possible óptions available.
 
Last edited:
Top