An Important Sequel To ” A More Balanced Presentation of the Foundation of the U.S. Starting July 4th, 2014 ” [# 290 ]1
July 1, 2014 by Alfred
This is a sequel to my previous article titled ” A More Balanced Presentation of the Foundation of the U.S. Starting July 4th, 2014 “. This article was published on June 29, 2014.
The purpose of this sequel is to provide additional documented context to the original article which describes the interview of historian / author Gerald Horne by Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzales of the independent progressive television program, Democracy Now.
Essentially this added sequel is comprised of the description of two legal cases, namely the Somerset Case and the Zong Case, which were taken up by London and which were presided by Lord Mansfield . These are considered cases which laid the seminal foundation for the abolition of slavery in England, something which the rising merchant class of England pressed for since they envisioned freed slaves to have the potential to become a major consumer market.
It is also noteworthy that the film “Belle” now playing in U.S. theaters on the occasion of Independence day, July 4th 2014, is based on a true story which features the dynamics embodied by during the time of the Somerset and Zong case trials.
So, bottom line is – as revealed in Slave Nation: How Slavery United The Colonies And Sparked The American Revolution, by Alfred and Ruth Blumrosen – that the primary reason why the colonists in America wanted to break away from Great Britain was that they were afraid that the British would abolish slavery.
This is why the historian/author Gerald Horne states that the perspective on July 4th must be balanced, since the colonist ruling class, particularly in the South, was not primarily interested in preserving its freedom to deny freedom to the African natives who were violently rounded up and sold to labor as slaves.
So, reproduced infra, to facilitate access to the previous article on this subject is the article published by this writer which was referred to at the onset of this sequel to that article.
” A More Balanced Presentation of the Foundation of the U.S. Starting July 4th, 2014 ”
The headline of this article is in quotation marks since it is part of an interview statement made by the author of ” Counter-Revolution 1776 : Was the United States Independence War a Conservative Revolt in Favor of Slavery ? “.
The author of this book is Gerald Horne of the University of Houston.
Gerald Horne was recently interviewed by the prestigious Democracy Now program. His interviewers were Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzales.
Gerald Horne presents a unique narrative which underlies the developments which lead to the eventual declaration of independence by the US, an event which liberated the country from a monarchy and thereby its ramifications of the sectarian religious wars in Europe.
The independence of the United States provided its people with an inspiring constitution which reflected the need for our nation to have addressed its yearnings that the new republic be based on a democracy whose fundamental pillars are equality of rights and obligations and freedom – particularly freedom of religion as well as freedom from religion.
Of course, these rights did not apply to either the natives of America at the time the colonists took over the land, and nor did these rights apply to the Africans in America who were literally hunted down in Africa like animals, chained, and forced to come to this country to be sold as slaves in New York City wherefrom many were then exported to Cuba and Brazil.
Gerald Horne provides a fascinating insight into the genesis which lead to the movement for the declaration of independence, particularly the emergence in London of the Somerset case in 1772 which indicated that London was rapidly moving to proclaim the abolition of slavery. Gerald Horne refers to the 1688 “Glorious Revolt” in London which set the monarchy back a step and which pushed the merchant’s class ahead, and he particularly focuses on the slavery trafficking merchants who demanded the deregulation of this highly profitable trade which had a margin of profit of 1,600 % to 1,700 %.
To sum up, the author states that the regarding of the 1776 revolution as an all upside event is far-fetched and that a more balanced presentation of the foundation of the United States is necessary.
The interview of Gerald Horne provides an insightful perspective which is substantively documented with events which must be factored into the narrative about this independence phenomenon.