Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > World History Forum > American History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

American History American History Forum - United States, Canada, Mexico, Central and South America


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old December 7th, 2012, 02:36 AM   #1

Yankee's Avatar
Scholar
 
Joined: Mar 2012
From: Baltimore, Maryland
Posts: 567
Repatriation


Lincoln was for repatriation. Why did he change his mind? Was it because he liked being seen as "The Great Emancipator" and repatriation would ruin that? Were Blacks no repatriated because southerners needed the cheap labor(since they couldn't have free labor)?
Yankee is offline  
Remove Ads
Old December 7th, 2012, 02:57 AM   #2

Rongo's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Dec 2011
From: Ohio
Posts: 5,685

He never really "changed" his mind. He was always for repatriation as long as the freed slaves wanted to be repatriated. But it turned out that very few of them did, so he accepted the reality and moved on.
Rongo is offline  
Old December 7th, 2012, 03:05 AM   #3

Yankee's Avatar
Scholar
 
Joined: Mar 2012
From: Baltimore, Maryland
Posts: 567

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rongo View Post
He never really "changed" his mind. He was always for repatriation as long as the freed slaves wanted to be repatriated. But it turned out that very few of them did, so he accepted the reality and moved on.
OK thank you. I have heard people say that he changed his mind because he was more worried about his legacy. Good to know.

What about the south. I heard that, while they didn't like Blacks, they also didn't want them to leave. Any truth?
Yankee is offline  
Old December 7th, 2012, 03:06 AM   #4

Baltis's Avatar
Goat Whisperer
 
Joined: Dec 2011
From: Texas
Posts: 2,687
Blog Entries: 30

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yankee View Post
Was it because he liked being seen as "The Great Emancipator" and repatriation would ruin that?
Yes, Lincoln freed the slaves and took on the south to feed his ego. Its why the majority of Americans consider him among our very least favorite Presidents.
Baltis is offline  
Old December 7th, 2012, 03:24 AM   #5

Rongo's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Dec 2011
From: Ohio
Posts: 5,685

Quote:
Originally Posted by Baltis View Post
Yes, Lincoln freed the slaves and took on the south to feed his ego. Its why the majority of Americans consider him among our very least favorite Presidents.
Oh, I'm sure it's coming. Stay tuned...
Rongo is offline  
Old December 7th, 2012, 03:29 AM   #6

Yankee's Avatar
Scholar
 
Joined: Mar 2012
From: Baltimore, Maryland
Posts: 567

Quote:
Originally Posted by Baltis View Post
Yes, Lincoln freed the slaves and took on the south to feed his ego. Its why the majority of Americans consider him among our very least favorite Presidents.
You're preaching to the choir. But I'm telling you, people do make these arguments.
Yankee is offline  
Old December 7th, 2012, 04:15 AM   #7

Baltis's Avatar
Goat Whisperer
 
Joined: Dec 2011
From: Texas
Posts: 2,687
Blog Entries: 30

Just having a bit of fun. Did not mean to offend you in any way. The actual answer is, of course, no. However, I'm sure you are right that some die hard lost causers might try that argument. Shouldn't let it surprise me.
Baltis is offline  
Old December 7th, 2012, 05:07 AM   #8

Rongo's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Dec 2011
From: Ohio
Posts: 5,685

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yankee View Post
What about the south. I heard that, while they didn't like Blacks, they also didn't want them to leave. Any truth?
The problem with that question is that "the South" was not a monolith. There were millions of people in the South, with millions of different ideas. And seeing as most of them had little say in the matter, it would be very hard to know what their ideas were.

I'm sure some Southerners would have liked to see them leave. I know Robert E. Lee felt that way. But it would also make sense that some large plantation owners would want to see them stay, because they did need the labor force.
Rongo is offline  
Old December 7th, 2012, 05:18 AM   #9

Yankee's Avatar
Scholar
 
Joined: Mar 2012
From: Baltimore, Maryland
Posts: 567

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rongo View Post
The problem with that question is that "the South" was not a monolith. There were millions of people in the South, with millions of different ideas. And seeing as most of them had little say in the matter, it would be very hard to know what their ideas were.

I'm sure some Southerners would have liked to see them leave. I know Robert E. Lee felt that way. But it would also make sense that some large plantation owners would want to see them stay, because they did need the labor force.
My fault, I should have specified. I guess I was meaning the plantation owners and men of means who needed the labor. Did they fight or proclaim their opposition to repatriation?
Yankee is offline  
Old December 7th, 2012, 05:25 AM   #10

Rongo's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Dec 2011
From: Ohio
Posts: 5,685

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yankee View Post
My fault, I should have specified. I guess I was meaning the plantation owners and men of means who needed the labor. Did they fight or proclaim their opposition to repatriation?
The repatriation movement, when it existed, was supported by an unusual coalition of abolitionists and slaveholders. But the peak of the movement was in the 1820s through 1840s. By the end of the Civil War, when it might have mattered to most slaveholders, it was dead.

Here's an interesting article about it:
American Colonization Society
Rongo is offline  
Reply

  Historum > World History Forum > American History

Tags
repatriation


Thread Tools
Display Modes


Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.