Re: [Marxism] Fwd: 5 Things About Slavery You Probably Didn't Learn In Social Studies: A Short Guide To 'The Half Has Never Been Told'

[Mark Lause via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

My personal appreciation to both Manuel and Jeff.

To clarify, I said nothing about the U.S. Constitution, which William Lloyd
Garrison rather aptly described as a covenant with death and an agreement
with hell.  Rather, I was discussing the Mexican constitution of 1824 which
eliminated slavery.

In 1834, Santa Anna led a coup that overturned the government based on this
document. This is the fellow who told one U.S. official, "a hundred years
to come my people will not be fit for liberty."  His coup was unpopular
over much of the country, and sparked the resistance in Texas (and
elsewhere).

Did the Anglos jump in and take advantage?  Yes.

Did they redirect these legitimate concerns in ways that would suit them?
Of course.

Were the people there better off for this having happened?  Certainly not.

Solidarity!
Mark L.
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Fwd: 5 Things About Slavery You Probably Didn't Learn In Social Studies: A Short Guide To 'The Half Has Never Been Told'

[Louis Proyect via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

(Forwarded from Manuel Barrera.)

Jeff: " We could have a more productive discussion if people don't make 
such charges, and especially if differing takes on historical questions 
are not automatically taken to reflect different world views or 
political positions on current issues. I know we all are tempted to do 
that during a heated argument. But to make such a valid charge, you 
would need to show how that person's conclusion flowed from the evil 
ideology or from flawed historical records, for instance. Let's try to 
keep the discussion more civil."


Two points:
First, I think we should avoid calling for "civility" in our discussions 
given what that connotation has recently meant within the democratic 
struggle around academic freedom surrounding U of Ill. firing of Steven 
Salaita. If someone is demonstrating some ignorance based on seen or 
unseen notions of "White supremacy", such individuals should be called 
on it. Example abound, and just because it is revolutionaries of color 
who may be the most attuned to such constructions--of history or 
discourse--does not require "us" to be "civil". Indeed, everyone should 
just pay attention. After all, are revolutionaries and Marxists the one 
group of people who must be able to learn from our mistakes and mistaken 
notions?


Having said that, Second, I disagree completely with the idea that one's 
assessment that the Texas war for "independence" (otherwise known as the 
war promulgated by reactionary bourgeois interests in the early U.S., 
especially those interests based on bringing one additional slavery 
supporting state into the nascent Union) was not about slavery but about 
other things is somehow "defending white supremacy".


In the case of the white colonists of Texas--these were known as 
"TexiANs"--and the fruits of Spanish colonialism--known as "TexiCANs" or 
"Tejanos"--both forces had very different reasons why they wished to 
fight and overthrow Mexican rule. That a tacit "coalition" 
existed--along with the historical might of the bourgeois-democratic 
revolution--and resulted in the defeat of Mexican rule over Texas does 
not confer some utter "progressivism". History, and the Truth, are 
concrete. The results are what we have. The "Mexicanos/Tejanos" did not 
benefit from the war for "independence" except perhaps in the minds of 
some Marxists that somehow bourgeois revolution is "historically" 
progressive. History and how society progresses is NEVER a foregone 
conclusion--yesterday or today--it simply is "what it is" and people 
live with or overcome the consequences.


Who could reasonably argue that Mexicanos/Tejanos/Now Chicanos actually 
benefitted from the Texas war for "independence"; actually or 
"historically"? I am reminded of the slaughter by the Texas Rangers--the 
historical continuators of those "Texians"--on the Rio Grande border in 
response to the struggle to regain stolen land by Mexicano/Chicano 
peasants/ranchers influenced by the Mexican Revolution of 1910 dubbed as 
the first "war against terrorism" (cf. Johnson, 2005, 
http://yalepress.yale.edu/book.asp?isbn=9780300109702).



In any case, Mark's commentary seemed a little unclear as to whether the 
"constitution" he was referring related to Mexico's constitution and, 
therefore, the Mexicans fighting to keep Texas within its purview was 
more progressive because of the clear intents of White "rebels" to grab 
Texas for the Union or if he meant that the U.S. Constitution was 
inherently more progressive and thereby the racist White "rebels" were 
working "historically" in progressive interests. This latter view--if 
indeed it is Mark's view--seems wholly ridiculous since we know exactly 
what the White "rebels" actually accompished. The former interpretation 
(again, I am still unsure which he meant), while plausibly progressive 
"historically" speaking simply did not really apply to the 
Mexicano/Tejano population were viciously oppressed by Mexico. Hence, 
the key sector of the population--"latifundistas", campesinos 
Tejanos/Mexicanos (most at the time considered themselves 
Mexicans)--were NEVER going to come out alright by this inter 
"pre-imperialist" "bourgeois-demoocratic revolutionary" war for 
"Independence".


In my view, Clay is not only wrong about his estimation of Mark's 
"defense of white supremacy", but further reflects a wholly 
ill-considered understanding of this pretend "war for independence" 
seemingly gleaned from a visit to the Alamo! I am not sure of Mark's 
points completely, but I would categorically disagree that a Marxist 
historian known for his work in his hometown in supporting and working 
for civil rights, Bl

Re: [Marxism] Fwd: 5 Things About Slavery You Probably Didn't Learn In Social Studies: A Short Guide To 'The Half Has Never Been Told'

[Mark Lause via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

Yes, Clay, you are falsely accusing me on two grounds.  First, you are
linking my position with that of the defenders of the Alamo.  There's no
justification for this other than gas.
'
Second, you are conflating views on "slavery" with "white supremacy," as
though there were not people opposing slavery who were not white
supremacists.

But I learned a long time when to stop writing for someone who's not
reading it anyway.

ML
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Fwd: 5 Things About Slavery You Probably Didn't Learn In Social Studies: A Short Guide To 'The Half Has Never Been Told'

[Clay Claiborne via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

Mark,

In a thread of this mailing list that was about slavery, I made a comment
which said that the fight at the Alamo was about preserving slavery. You
felt a need to respond and sought to contradict this, saying it was not
about slavery. You said:

[Slavery] was simply not part of the overt agenda of the Texas War for
> Independence.
> ...
> ,they were actually fighting for the arrangements that had eliminated
> slavery.
>

Since I believe that position is wrong, [I believe I have proven that
position is wrong], do you understand why I consider your post to be a
defense of white supremacy?

To make it even more clear. I said that those fighting at the Alamo were
fighting for white supremacy. You said they weren't. If I am right, you are
defending white supremacy. If you are right, I have falsely accused you and
the defenders of the Alamo of supporting white supremacy.

I stand by my position.

Clay Claiborne, Director
Vietnam: American Holocaust 
Linux Beach Productions
Venice, CA 90291
(310) 581-1536

Read my blogs at the Linux Beach 

_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Fwd: 5 Things About Slavery You Probably Didn't Learn In Social Studies: A Short Guide To 'The Half Has Never Been Told'

[Louis Proyect via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_slavery_in_Texas

Republic
As the Texas Revolution began in 1835, some slaves sided with Mexico, 
which provided for freedom. In the fall of 1835, a group of almost 100 
slaves staged an uprising along the Brazos River after they heard rumors 
of approaching Mexican troops. Whites in the area defeated and severely 
punished them. Several slaves ran away to serve with Mexican forces. 
Texan forces executed one runaway slave taken prisoner and resold 
another into slavery.[27] Other slaves joined the Texan forces, with 
some killed while fighting Mexican soldiers. Three slaves were known to 
be at the Battle of the Alamo; a boy named John was killed, while 
William B. Travis's slave Joe and James Bowie's slave Sam survived to be 
freed by the Mexican Army.[28]


After the Republic of Texas was created in 1836, Anglo-American views on 
slavery and race began to predominate. They passed laws reducing the 
rights of free blacks as citizens.[29] The 1836 Constitution of the 
Republic of Texas required free blacks to petition the Texas Congress 
for permission to continue living in the country. The following year all 
those who had been living in Texas at the time of independence were 
allowed to remain. On the other hand, the legislature created political 
segregation; it classified free residents with at least 1/8 African 
heritage (the equivalent to one great-grandparent) as a separate 
category, and abrogated their citizens' rights, prohibiting them from 
voting, owning property, testifying against whites in court, or 
intermarrying with whites.[30] As planters increased cotton production, 
they rapidly increased the purchase and transport of slaves. By 1840 
there were 11,323 slaves in Texas.[24]


Statehood
Slave population in Texas
YearPopulation
1825443
18365,000
184011,323
185058,161
1860182,566
1865250,000

In 1845 the United States annexed Texas as a state. The state 
legislature passed legislation further restricting the rights of free 
blacks. For example, it subjected them to punishments, such as working 
on road gangs if convicted of crimes, similar to those of slaves rather 
than free men.[31]


By 1850, the slave population in Texas had increased to 58,161; in 1860 
there were 182,566 slaves, 30 percent of the total population. In 1860 
almost 25 percent of all white families in Texas owned at least one 
slave. Texas ranked 10th in total slave population and 9th in percentage 
of slave population (30 percent of all residents).[24]


Forty percent of Texas slaves lived on plantations along the Gulf Coast 
and in the East Texas river valleys, where they cultivated cotton, corn, 
and some sugar.[24] Fifty percent of the slaves worked either alone or 
in groups of fewer than 20 on small farms ranging from the Nueces River 
to the Red River, and from the Louisiana border to the edge of the 
western settlements of San Antonio, Austin, Waco, and Fort Worth.[32] 
Some slaves lived among the cattlemen along the southern Gulf Coast and 
helped herd sheep and cattle. Rarely, a slave also broke horses, but 
generally only white men were used for that dangerous task. If they 
died, the boss did not suffer a monetary loss.[33] Slaves were not held 
between the Nueces River and the Rio Grande. A large supply of cheap 
Mexican labor in the area made the purchase and care of a slave too 
expensive.[33]


_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Fwd: 5 Things About Slavery You Probably Didn't Learn In Social Studies: A Short Guide To 'The Half Has Never Been Told'

[Clay Claiborne via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

On slavery in Mexico, Wikipedia says this:

> Slaves were nearly non-existent in the late colonial census of 1792.[9]
>  While
> banned shortly after the beginning of the Mexican War of Independence, the
> practice did not definitively end until 1829.[8]
> 

To restate what I quoted earlier:

> The "Republic of Texas" was a natural outgrowth of the Austin colony which
> brought slavery onto Mexican soil in 1821. In 1825, twenty five per cent of
> the people in Austin’s colony were slaves and by 1836 there were 5,000
> slaves.

Your claim that the defenders of the Alamo:

> they were actually fighting for the arrangements that
> had eliminated slavery.
>
Is just so much white supremacist propaganda - and on a Marxist list -
which is why I feel compelled to take time out of my busy schedule [working
9 hrs/day in an industrial plant with 4k other workers] to combat it.

The constitution they fought for, the constitution of the "Texas Republic"
legalized slavery in a way neither the US or Mexican constitutions never
did. Again read what I quoted from it above. Your most recent claim that
the re-introduction of slavery onto Mexican soil was just the outcome but
not the cause is again some more white supremacists BS, as is your claim
that the Hispanic population was the driving force behind the Texas revolt.

Clay Claiborne, Director
Vietnam: American Holocaust 
Linux Beach Productions
Venice, CA 90291
(310) 581-1536

Read my blogs at the Linux Beach 


On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 11:25 AM, Mark Lause via Marxism <
marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu> wrote:

>   POSTING RULES & NOTES  
> #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
> #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
> #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
> *
>
> Tejanos refers to the Hispanic population.
> _
> Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
> Set your options at:
> http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/clayclai%40gmail.com
>
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Fwd: 5 Things About Slavery You Probably Didn't Learn In Social Studies: A Short Guide To 'The Half Has Never Been Told'

[Mark Lause via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

Tejanos refers to the Hispanic population.
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Fwd: 5 Things About Slavery You Probably Didn't Learn In Social Studies: A Short Guide To 'The Half Has Never Been Told'

[Shane Mage via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*


On Oct 30, 2014, at 11:44 AM, Mark Lause via Marxism wrote:


I certainly don't want to badger you, but only to caution against  
reading

the outcome into cause . . . and to suggest that your assessment
understates the legitimate interests of the Tejanos who had a very
understandable interest in seeking independence from Mexico,  
particularly

under that regime.


But what "legitimacy" was there to begin with in the "Tejanos" (Yankee  
Conquistadores) presence in Texas?


And ain't separating "outcome" from (pretextural) "cause" merely  
denying agency to the White Slavers and their struggle?



Shane Mage

"Thunderbolt steers all things." Herakleitos of Ephesos, fr. 64





_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Fwd: 5 Things About Slavery You Probably Didn't Learn In Social Studies: A Short Guide To 'The Half Has Never Been Told'

[Mark Lause via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

I certainly don't want to badger you, but only to caution against reading
the outcome into cause . . . and to suggest that your assessment
understates the legitimate interests of the Tejanos who had a very
understandable interest in seeking independence from Mexico, particularly
under that regime.

ML.
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Fwd: 5 Things About Slavery You Probably Didn't Learn In Social Studies: A Short Guide To 'The Half Has Never Been Told'

[Clay Claiborne via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

Just got home from work and too tired to care.

Clay Claiborne, Director
Vietnam: American Holocaust 
Linux Beach Productions
Venice, CA 90291
(310) 581-1536

Read my blogs at the Linux Beach 


On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 4:21 PM, Mark Lause  wrote:

> Well, I'm sure you're so much busier than I am, but if you don't have time
> to discuss it--and insist on attributing whatever positions to me--I just
> won't bother trying either.
>
> ML
>
>
>
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Fwd: 5 Things About Slavery You Probably Didn't Learn In Social Studies: A Short Guide To 'The Half Has Never Been Told'

[Mark Lause via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

Well, I'm sure you're so much busier than I am, but if you don't have time
to discuss it--and insist on attributing whatever positions to me--I just
won't bother trying either.

ML
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Fwd: 5 Things About Slavery You Probably Didn't Learn In Social Studies: A Short Guide To 'The Half Has Never Been Told'

[Clay Claiborne via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

http://www.aaregistry.org/historic_events/view/alamo-why-did-it-happen

> Most of the men and women who moved to the Texas territory were colonizers
> who came in search of wealth and adventure, eager to grab up the land
> Mexico was handing out by the acre. In doing so, they agreed to convert to
> Catholicism and become Mexican citizens. Few did either. Once in Texas,
> they also realized there was much money to be made in Mexico's cotton
> industry. Their problem of labor involved was quickly solved through
> slavery which Mexico had banned.
>
> Shocked by the rapidly rising rate of white immigration and disgusted by
> their use of slavery, the Mexican government started slapping on
> restrictions, which were ignored. The battle of the Alamo was fought over
> issues like Federalism, slavery, immigration rights, the cotton industry
> and above all, money. General Santa Ana arrived at San Antonio; his Mexican
> army with some justice regarded the Texans as murderous barbarians. Many of
> the American settlers ("Texians" they were called) were Southerners who
> believed in and practiced slavery.
>
http://www.counterpunch.org/2004/04/08/forget-the-alamo/

The perpetuation of this myth of the Alamo is a dishonest exploitation of
> our history. The fact is that the defenders of the Alamo fought for white
> supremacy and slavery. This latest Hollywood edition of the Alamo story is
> not much different than the last half dozen or so Alamo movies, such as the
> 1937 Heroes of the Alamo. The most recent Alamo film saga was John Wayne’s
> lumbering effort in 1960, complete with a ponderous musical score and a
> cast of thousands. All of these films inevitably fall into a category known
> as White Man Movie Fiction.


D.W. Griffith also made one of the first-if not the first-fictional movies
> of the Alamo story, The Martyrs of the Alamo. The through line for Griffith
> here is the White Man As Hero; Non-White Man As Bad Guy. If White Man Dies,
> He Dies For a Good Cause; If Non-White Man Dies, Good Riddance. Native
> Americans and Mexicans routinely fell into the Good Riddance
> classifications.




> The facts are that Bowie was much more than a back alley knife fighter.
> Shortly after the War of 1812, he and his brother Rezin went into business
> as slave traders with the pirate Jean Lafitte. In the 1820’s they used
> their profits from the slave trade to become land speculators and
> eventually established a sugar plantation with slave labor in Louisiana.
> Ten years later they sold that business, and the 82 slaves who worked on
> it, for $90,000.
>
> Bowie took his share of the profits and went to "Texas" to join Stephen F.
> Austin’s group of Anglo colonists. He then became involved in a scheme to
> fraudulently acquire land grants from the Mexican government and ultimately
> garnered thousands of acres of land. As the crisis loomed between the Anglo
> colony and the Mexican government, Bowie found himself on the side of
> William Travis’ "War Party," a group that brooked no conciliation with the
> Mexican government and was dedicated to the creation of a "Republic of
> Texas."
>
> The "Republic of Texas" was a natural outgrowth of the Austin colony which
> brought slavery onto Mexican soil in 1821. In 1825, twenty five per cent of
> the people in Austin’s colony were slaves and by 1836 there were 5,000
> slaves. James S. Mayfield, a later Secretary of State for the Republic of
> Texas, stated that "the true policy and prosperity of this country (Texas)
> depend on the maintenance" of slavery. Like all Southern plantation owners,
> these Anglo-Texans had a plan for their own prosperity based on the free
> labor of slaves.
>
> However, the problem for the slave-owning crowd was that the fledgling
> national government in Mexico City threatened to restrict or abolish
> slavery on Mexican land.
>
> So the Texas colonists organized a convention in March, 1836 to establish
> the issues for which they would do battle with the Mexican government. In a
> two-week period they adopted a declaration of independence from Mexico,
> declared a republic, and produced a constitution for that republic. All of
> this activity occurred during the siege of the Alamo.
>
> The Alamo defenders fought and died for the constitution of the Republic
> of Texas which declared in Sections 6, 9 and 10:
>
> "All free white persons who emigrate to the republic…shall be entitled to
> all the privileges of citizenship.’
>
> "All persons of color who were slaves for life previous to their
> emigration to Texas, and who are now held in bondage, shall remain in the
> like state of servitude… Congress (of Texas) shall pass no laws 

Re: [Marxism] Fwd: 5 Things About Slavery You Probably Didn't Learn In Social Studies: A Short Guide To 'The Half Has Never Been Told'

[Clay Claiborne via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

True, overtly they fought for liberty, as a practical matter they fought to
maintain and expand slavery. They certainly could have fought for
independence and an end to slavery but they didn't. Such "paradoxes"
between the stated cause and the real one can be found in history every
once and a while.

Clay Claiborne, Director
Vietnam: American Holocaust 
Linux Beach Productions
Venice, CA 90291
(310) 581-1536

Read my blogs at the Linux Beach 


On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 6:45 PM, Mark Lause via Marxism <
marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu> wrote:

>   POSTING RULES & NOTES  
> #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
> #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
> #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
> *
>
> I'm sure that some of them had that in mind, but that was simply not part
> of the overt agenda of the Texas War for Independence.
>
> Remember that a series of coups had overthrown the governments in power
> based on the 1824 constitution.  When General Antonio López de Santa Anna
> moved against Texas, the local rebels raised the flag of the constitution.
> So, in that sense, they were actually fighting for the arrangements that
> had eliminated slavery.
>
> Paradoxical, no?
>
> ML
> _
> Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
> Set your options at:
> http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/clayclai%40gmail.com
>
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Fwd: 5 Things About Slavery You Probably Didn't Learn In Social Studies: A Short Guide To 'The Half Has Never Been Told'

[Mark Lause via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

I'm sure that some of them had that in mind, but that was simply not part
of the overt agenda of the Texas War for Independence.

Remember that a series of coups had overthrown the governments in power
based on the 1824 constitution.  When General Antonio López de Santa Anna
moved against Texas, the local rebels raised the flag of the constitution.
So, in that sense, they were actually fighting for the arrangements that
had eliminated slavery.

Paradoxical, no?

ML
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Fwd: 5 Things About Slavery You Probably Didn't Learn In Social Studies: A Short Guide To 'The Half Has Never Been Told'

[Louis Proyect via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

On 10/24/14 5:02 PM, Clay Claiborne wrote:

Since I'm now in San Antonio, I will add one more piece to this story. I
resentful got around to visiting the Alamo, but I didn't see one
indication that the real freedom Davy Crockett etc al were fighting for
was the freedom to own slaves. Mexico had recently outlawed slavery.


From my article on the Comanches behind a JSTOR paywall.

Long before sociobiology existed, American politicians in 1846 used 
similar arguments when they went to war against Mexico. They wanted to 
put a Hobbesian end to the “cycles of bloody vendettas” that the epicene 
Spaniards were incapable of ending. A strong state had to subdue warring 
tribes, no matter the cost in blood and treasure. Brian DeLay writes 
about the racist ideology that was used to justify intervention against 
the Mexicans and ultimately the ethnic cleansing of the Comanche:


	Much of the intellectual nourishment this transformation depended upon 
came from Europe, and it matured during America's long experiences with 
African American slaves and with Indians. In both cases, controversies 
during the 1820s and 1830s ignited feverish attempts to shore up the 
intellectual foundations of racial science. Pseudoscientific monographs 
on the phenomenon and consequences of race mixing, the emerging fields 
of ethnological classification and phrenology (the study of character 
and mental capacity through close examination of skulls), and historical 
attempts to locate the genesis and developmental trajectory of the 
Anglo-Saxon race all lent legitimacy to hardening and self-serving 
racial values. Proponents of slavery defended their institution against 
abolitionist rhetoric with increasingly complicated racialist logic. 
Likewise, the architects of Indian removal relied upon a growing body of 
literature heralding the inevitable extinction of inferior races before 
the God-ordained march of the Anglo-American millions. (DeLay, 2008, 245)



_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Fwd: 5 Things About Slavery You Probably Didn't Learn In Social Studies: A Short Guide To 'The Half Has Never Been Told'

[Clay Claiborne via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

Since I'm now in San Antonio, I will add one more piece to this story. I
resentful got around to visiting the Alamo, but I didn't see one indication
that the real freedom Davy Crockett etc al were fighting for was the
freedom to own slaves. Mexico had recently outlawed slavery.
On Oct 24, 2014 7:49 AM, "Louis Proyect via Marxism" <
marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu> wrote:

>   POSTING RULES & NOTES  
> #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
> #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
> #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
> *
>
>
>
> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/23/the-half-has-never-
> been-told_n_6036840.html
> _
> Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
> Set your options at: http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/clayclai%
> 40gmail.com
>
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] Fwd: 5 Things About Slavery You Probably Didn't Learn In Social Studies: A Short Guide To 'The Half Has Never Been Told'

[Louis Proyect via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/23/the-half-has-never-been-told_n_6036840.html
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com