Skipped and skimmed...did I get here in time to celebrate Olivia's natal day?

My wireless keyboard has been dying a slow and lingering death, and finally just completely went belly-up, so I haven't been able to email or talk to you guys or anything! It was awful!

From way back:

Raq - apparently Swisher and Blanton toured European naval bases last year, including Greece, Spain and Italy. Cool beans.

Bastards. Sure, we get invitations to go tour naval ships, but do they tell us when A's players are at Souda Bay?

I think that they are limiting their definition of slavery to slavery as it happened in the United States.

I really dislike this. Not that it's not a valid choice of framing for a discussion, but just because I think it happens enough that people think of it as the slavery, instead of one instance of slavery.

I'm not too up on US slavery dates, but in Jamaica, the slave trade was made illegal before slavery was--so there was a period of time where no one at all was being displaced, but slavery was still in effect. Did that happen in America?

I really dislike this.

So do I. I think it realy shows narrow-mindedness that shouldn't be there in a class. But I'm very Pollyanna like that.

Did that happen in America?

I don't know. It's something I'd have to look and see. IIRC, slavery wasn't covered much in my high school history classes other than to say, "The North didn't want slavery. The South did. There was a war. Lincoln made the Emancipation Proclamation and slavery was ended cause it was bad."

Did that happen in America?

Yes.

Edited for more detail: I'm not sure if there was US Law outlawing international slave trade or if it was a practical matter that transport from Africa was handled by the British, but importation of slaves definitely stopped before slavery did. I have seen the argument made that slave owners became more invested in keeping slavery legal in that period because the domestic slave trade was so lucrative and less prone to losses from death during the middle passage.

ita - I found this snippet:

Rhode Island forbade the importation of slaves completely in 1774. All of the states except Georgia had banned or limited it by 1786; Georgia did so in 1798 - although some of these laws were later repealed.

Here: [link]

History of Slavery in the US.

I've only really paid attention to what one relative was taught about US slavery, and the answer was also "not that much." Her history book did dwell on slavery practiced in South America, but pretty much glossed over its existence up here.

However, it appears that even the US slave trade was not synonymous with dislocation, just majorly overlapping. So they should shut up.

Yeah, I kinda get going during slavery discussions. Blame my parents. They installed the wiring.

Yeah, I kinda get going during slavery discussions.

The more I've learned about it over the years since I left high school, the more het up I get about it, too. And not just in the feeling disgusted it ever happened way, but when the facts gets fucked up. So many people still believe that a bunchof Southerners from the US sailed their way over to Africa, kidnapped people, and brought them here. It didn't happen that way. The way it did happen is just as horrific and for the most part, even more so, but learn the facts about the slave trade. In order to understand the Civil War at all, you have to understand the underpinnings of the slave trade AND slavery in order to understand why the South seceeded.

One classmate went so far as to say that neither example was slavery because they weren't removed from their countries.

Not to mention that, by that standard, neither the Greeks nor the Romans (nor any number of other civilizations in which you could end up owned by another person for reasons ranging from the Aimée's-classmate-approved "Lost the war, was forcibly taken from homeland" to "Owe the rich family at the other end of town more than I could pay back in a year" to "My dad has too many daughters and the local temple needs whorespriestesses") practiced slavery at all.

eta: Plus, as ita and others note, the huge gap during which slave-owning nations had enough homegrown slaves to no longer need to import them, which by classmate's definition makes it not slavery. Not enough @@ in the world.

Narrowing the definition like that really spiffs up 98% of human history, doesn't it? Or, not.

ION, fuck. Not getting paid until 2/7 at the earliest. Stabbity stab stab.

Also, my daughter is off being unbearably cute someplace halfway across town and I'm not there.

However, it's Olivia's natal day, which is news of great and delicious awesomeness! Wishing her bunches of parental raspberries on her belly and a ton of cake gleefully smushed all over.

I'm going on memory as to the exact date, ita, but the slave trade was made illegal in the U.S. in 1808. Chattel slavery was made illegal nationwide by the 13th Amendment in 1865, though the Northern states had prohibited the practice before.

And from your link, Aimée, I'm reminded of Native American slavery, which doesn't have inherent dislocation either.

Tsk, tsk.