Give up money, give up fame, give up science, give the earth itself and all it contains, rather than do an immoral act. And never suppose, that in any possible situation, or under any circumstances, it is best for you to do a dishonorable thing, however slightly so it may appear to you. Whenever you are to do a thing, though it can never be known but to yourself, ask yourself how you would act were all the world looking at you, and act accordingly.
Talk to me when you set free the 600 humans that you own. Until then you can fuck off to your castle on the hill and invent silly gadgets, and study plants while your farm loses money every year until your death.
To me, the surprising fact isn't that the man who wrote "all men are created equal" owned slaves; the surprising thing is that a slave-owner wrote "all men are created equal." Talk about having ideals that transcend one's upbringing...
It's possible to do nuanced analysis of that era, Jefferson's beliefs, his treatment of his slaves relative to other slaveowners, the fact that he freed them on his death, and the things he wrote about in his letters to contemporaries - if you read his letters, he constantly questioned slavery and had misgivings about it, but it was the norm for the era.
You could make intelligent points about it. But you haven't done so. This "until then you can fuck off" is petty, it doesn't open anyone's mind - if you wanted to, you could put some thought into it and try to make a more nuanced, intelligent argument. Broadly condemning with profanity, no nuance, it doesn't change anyone's mind or enlighten anyone.
I take your point and agree my post doesn't add much to the discussion and understand why it's voted down. But I disagree that any of the points you mention in your first paragraph help the case that Jefferson was not an utter hypocrite when it comes to notions of Liberty or Self-Reliance. And that was the point I was trying to convey.
I agree with you that the parent comment detracts from the discussion and deserves its downvotes. Nevertheless, Thomas Jefferson's hypocrisy, as exemplified by the Declaration of Independence, was obvious even to some of his contemporaries. For instance, in his Strictures upon the Declaration of Independence [1], former Massachusetts Bay Colony Governor Thomas Hutchinson wrote the following:
--
I should therefore be impertinent, if I attempted to shew... in what sense all men are created equal; or how far life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness may be said to be unalienable; only I could wish to ask the Delegates of Maryland, Virginia, and the Carolinas, how their Constituents justify the depriving more than an hundred thousand Africans of their rights to liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and in some degree to their lives, if these rights are so absolutely unalienable...
--
Evidently, Jefferson doesn't deserve the benefit of the doubt simply because lots of people back then had slaves. His positive reputation today rests on a much simpler and sturdier foundation than his intellectual accomplishments or (dubious) moral fiber, namely, military victory. We mustn't forget the lesson contained in the aphorism "The winners write the history books", which is that the winners write the history books. Jefferson (and the Patriots) won; Hutchinson (and the Loyalists) didn't.
You think slavery doesn't exist in the world now? What are you doing about ending it, then?
Slavery even exists in the USA - it's called the Internal Revenue Code; the only question is what percentage of the time while you are working, that you are a slave.
(Please note, I am not getting into what are usually called "tax protester" arguments.)
Talk to me when you set free the 600 humans that you own. Until then you can fuck off to your castle on the hill and invent silly gadgets, and study plants while your farm loses money every year until your death.