Tuesday, July 21, 2020

The dualism of Thomas Jefferson





"If our youth were taught true American history in school today, they might not be destroying statues of him. They might understand that he was this - not a perfect man, but a very good man indeed."    


Thomas Jefferson. Our third President, and without a doubt, one of our most influential founding fathers. He did so many great things for this country, his position on Mount Rushmore has been earned many times over. But he was a very complicated man. One one hand, he abhorred slavery. Called it a "hideous blot". One the other hand, through inheritance and purchases, over the course of his life Thomas Jefferson "owned" 600 human beings. In other words, they were his slaves.

How conflicted was he on slavery? Big time. While serving as our Minister to France in the late 1700's, Jefferson constructed the genesis for the Northwest Ordinance. This document addressed the Northwest Territory (what was to become Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin, Ohio, and part of Minnesota) and how it would be treated, should any part of this territory become states. The purpose was to ensure any future states which would come out of the Northwest Territory (or any other territory), would have the same rights as the original 13 states. But here comes the clinker. He also wanted included in this document, that slavery would not be legal in our territories. Wow! From a slave owner!

But this story gets better. Jefferson also believed that even though he owned many slaves, slavery should be made illegal in all of the United States. He wanted that language included also. But he knew it would take time. So he wanted to give the Union until the year 1800 to rid itself of slavery. AND - this came very, very close to passing. It only failed by one vote.

When I was reading up on this slavery issue, a thought came to mind. I knew someone years ago who was hopelessly addicted to smoking. One day he said to me, "I wish the government would make cigarettes illegal. Then I would have have no choice but to quit." Maybe that is the way it was with Jefferson. He had slaves, but hated slavery. If it were made illegal, he could stop owning slaves. But he was a deeply complicated man. In fact, as the principal author of our Declaration of Independence, many credit him with penning the phrase "all men are created equal".

Here is one more point to ponder. If that one vote never happened, and in the late 1700's a resolution was passed to end slavery in the Union by 1800, would we still have fought a Civil War? I guess we will never know. But we do know this - before he became our third President, and during his term as President, Thomas Jefferson did a LOT of good things for this country. An immeasurable amount of good things. But - he also owned slaves.

Does Thomas Jefferson deserve his place of honor on Mount Rushmore? Does he deserve to have numerous statues built in his likeness? Was he a saint or a sinner? Maybe a bit of both. Maybe Jefferson was a flawed man. A good man, but with some flaws. We could say that about many of our nation's heroes and leaders. 

We owe a lot to Thomas Jefferson. That is my feeling, and the feeling of many others. If our youth were taught true American history in school today, they might not be destroying statues of him. They might understand that he was this - not a perfect man, but a very good man indeed. And a very important architect of our early Union.   

1 comment:

  1. Jefferson did contemplate freeing the slaves on his plantation but the law at the time would have required they be captured and returned or sold. By the time Jefferson's parents died and left him the plantation slavery was already past economical, white laborers could be bought for less per day than the cost of keeping a slave. They were however, a status symbol, a symbol of wealth. You could still afford slaves and the lifestyle. Just having 12 people for dinner at that time required at least 12 servants to prepare serve and clean up. Today you can do that by yourself. Consider the times when judging people in history.

    ReplyDelete