"... in which he upbraided the decline of morality in the black community.... I published a reported essay in 2008, in this magazine, on these call-outs. In that essay, there is a brief and limp mention of the accusations against Cosby..... And should I have decided to state what I believed about Cosby, I would have had to write a much different piece.... At the time I wrote the piece... I believed that Bill Cosby was a rapist.... The Bill Cosby piece was my first shot writing for a big national magazine. I had been writing for 12 financially insecure years.... A voice in my head was, indeed, pushing me to do something more expansive and broader in its implication, something that did not just question Cosby's moralizing, but weighed it against the acts which I believed he committed. But Cosby was such a big target that I thought it was only a matter of time before someone published a hard-hitting, investigative piece. And besides, I had in my hand the longest, best, and most personally challenging piece I'd ever written.... I have often thought about how those women would have felt had they read my piece.... I regret not saying what I thought of the accusations, and then pursuing those thoughts. I regret it because the lack of pursuit puts me in league with people who either looked away, or did not look hard enough...."
Writes Ta-Nehisi Coates in "The Cosby Show/Declining to seriously reckon with the rape allegations against him is reckless. And I was once reckless."
So... he did what was in his interest then, and he's doing what's in his interest now. Noted.
November 19, 2014
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
94 comments:
Did the media give no attention or credence to these allegations for all these years because Cosby was one of theirs -- a black man, presumably a liberal? Just as they did with the Kennedys and Clinton? And are the allegations getting attention now because Cosby has had the temerity to criticize the black community, and thus cross the liberals who run the show?
Even I'm not quite cynical enough to believe that. And yet...
"And are the allegations getting attention now because Cosby has had the temerity to criticize the black community" Cosby has been criticizing the black community for quite a while now.
"Reckless"? Guy is straining hard not to say "cowardly."
So... he did what was in his interest then, and he's doing what's in his interest now. Noted.
Exactly!
I think Cosby was talking about how blacks can get educated and lift themselves from poverty, not a lecture on sexual morality from what I know.
This twerp would never dream of denying the party line.
Do both links go to the original essay?
He does at least have the courage to say that he thought back then that Cosby was a rapist. There are prob. hundreds of people in his boat who won't come clean.
"Do both links go to the original essay?"
Thanks. I'm sorry. It's fixed now.
"Courage" is now defined to mean saying things about alleged criminal behavior many years after the fact.
Noted.
Well, you could write an Anonymous novel about how you really knew Bill was a rapist...No, that would never work.
I have always liked and admired Cosby, but he is his own worst spokesman. Even his representatives are not outright denying the truth of these many accusations.
Unfortunately, it's hard to believe that this current wave of claims is some elaborate conspiracy or even a McMartin Preschool hysteria of made-up scenarios of chicken bones up the butt. If any of this is true, I'm afraid he's reaping the whirlwind.
Betamax made an astute observation yesterday that talented comedians often have a hook in their brains that is the downside to their immense gifts, and we shouldn't be shocked when something awful follows in the wake of this mess. A 77 yr old prideful man doesn't have enough time left to alter this terrible legacy that will surely eclipse his wonderful achievements.
- Krumhorn
So... he did what was in his interest then, and he's doing what's in his interest now. Noted.
Yep, perfect response.
And, if Cosby was a big name Democrat, would this other guy have written the current article?
Comments for Ta-Nehisi Coates' article on The Atlantic website are closed with 0 comments showing.
Also noted...
"I was still a low-profile reporter and worried about financial security" is, perhaps, a valid excuse for 2008. But what's his excuse for 2009-2014?
He had time to demand that white people give him money for his ancestors' suffering, but somehow never got around to writing about Cosby again? Tsk.
>>So... he did what was in his interest then, and he's doing what's in his interest now. Noted.
We are still talking about Gruber, right?
I think I speak for Crack and all his friends when I ask, quite emphatically, precisely how many words did Ta-Nehisi Coates use in creating this article?
I'm not sure what else about his comments might or might not be important or relevant.
Way to jump in only after everyone else has, sport. Nice burn, althouse!
I haven't read the essay yet, but is his opinion that Cosby is a rapist based in anything in particular beyond what is already out there?
"And besides, I had in my hand the longest, best, and most personally challenging piece I'd ever written"
Except for the stuff I chose not to face in face of the paycheck.
Because then it would've been:
And besides, I had in my hand the longest, best, and most FINANCIALLY challenging piece I'd ever written"
So: "most personally challenging" means I still was a coward, but it was the best coward I had ever been...
and
"the longest... piece I'd ever written" because WORD COUNT MATTERS.
Right on Althouse.
And -- maybe I missed something -- but in all of the allegations I haven't seen a reference to anal sex: what kind of milquetoast pervert was Cosby, anyway?
"And besides, I had in my hand the longest, best, and most personally challenging piece I'd ever written"
Somewhere in the Eighties someone said this very comment about a piece they wrote for "People" magazine about Lorenzo Lamas.
Then there was the searing piece in the Nineties I wrote about Shannen Doherty that was too blistering for "Seventeen" magazine to handle...
Ta Nehisi-Coates wrote...And besides, I had in my hand the longest, best, and most personally challenging piece I'd ever written...
I hope he wasn't referring to his reparations piece because that really was a piece...
Laslo Spatula: "Somewhere in the Eighties someone said this very comment about a piece they wrote for "People" magazine about Lorenzo Lamas."
Comment filed under "I wish I had said that!"
I believed that Bill Cosby was a rapist....
Note that in the quoted article he never once says why he believes Cosby is a rapist.
Coates is disgusting if he really did believe it back then and did nothing.
Ta-Ta, Ta.
Sorry for the deletion, Laslo, but I don't want the quoted material about a private citizen who is not present here and participating.
So does this mean we can conclude that if he knew Rev. Jackson or Bill Clinton were rapists he'd keep it silent, too?
Man, this post took some weird turns.
All of this about BC ----sad.
And no comments, of course. TNC is a gutless coward.
So do we owe Bill Cosby reparations or not?
I'm confused.
This is why I can't admire anyone anymore. They're all creeps! Now it's creepy Cosby and his milky eye all the time.
TV Land canceled Cosby reruns. Theo Huxtable hardest hit (those damn residuals won't mail themselves).
Coates says he is reckless? He describes himself as anything but reckless; rather, he was a calculating whore.
Did he or didn't he? Needs to have an investigative journalist look into it as this guy suggests. He has some interesting points as a former defense investigator.
He's poked a hole or two in Janice Dickinson's 'memories' just from looking around on the internet, checking dates, noticing her history of lies.
https://crayfisher.wordpress.com/2014/11/19/defending-bill-cosby/
Janice Dickinson sure looks like a young Steven Tyler in that photo. I think it's the fish lips.
It's not too late to make amends. Coates could interview the mothers of those two men Ray Lewis didn't kill. The mothers could tell of the bright promise of their sons lives and how hard it is to find closure when their killers run free. Coates could probe into all the open questions around the case. If Cosby got away with rape, how much worse for someone to get away with murder.
He makes it sound like he wants Cosby to be a rapist because Cosby was moralizing.
Sick.
He does at least have the courage to say that he thought back then that Cosby was a rapist.
Well, sure. Now that it isn't risky he has the courage to say something. Wait... that's not courage, is it?
Coates is so crooked he has to screw his pants on every morning. He's so corrupt he would sell his mother into slavery for a notch higher page ranking. He remakes all memory and history to suit his present ambitions. I simply don't believe him that he thought Cosby was a rapist years ago. I think he's making it up because he wants some of the attention now. If he could credibly accuse Cosby of raping him, he would.
Don't care what he thought then or now. He's a fool.
Perhaps this provides Cosby an opportunity to clean up his mess, against his will, before he dies.
I feel for the other cast members taking a residuals hit because of Cosby - he was not the best part of that show anyway, the kids were.
So... he did what was in his interest then, and he's doing what's in his interest now. Noted.
That string of preferring money over integrity runs right through his recent piece begging for reparations.
And, of course, if a rapist says the sun is shining it is not.
Whoopi Goldberg is now defending Cosby. That's not a good sign for him...
So... he did what was in his interest then, and he's doing what's in his interest now. Noted.
Cool.
gerry said...
So... he did what was in his interest then, and he's doing what's in his interest now. Noted.
Cool.
Yes. See this here. I would never have had that reaction without reading AA. But, now it's obvious.
AA has a way of observing, reading and commenting on things that is consistently interesting. That, simply put, is why this Blog is so popular. Even among those, like me, who frequently (and figuratively violently), disagree with her.
Even among those, like me, who frequently (and figuratively violently), disagree with her.
Ditto for me. I've sworn twice to stop coming here, and yet I keep showing up.
"I felt at the time that I was taking on Cosby's moralizing and wanted to stand on those things that I could definitively prove."
You just happen to leave that out, did you?
Jesus Christ, Ann, character assassination much?
If Cosby’s call-outs simply ended at that—a personal and communal creed—there’d be little to oppose. But Cosby often pits the rhetoric of personal responsibility against the legitimate claims of American citizens for their rights. He chides activists for pushing to reform the criminal-justice system, despite solid evidence that the criminal-justice system needs reform. His historical amnesia—his assertion that many of the problems that pervade black America are of a recent vintage—is simply wrong, as is his contention that today’s young African Americans are somehow weaker, that they’ve dropped the ball. And for all its positive energy, his language of uplift has its limitations. After the Million Man March, black men embraced a sense of hope and promise. We were supposed to return to our communities and families inspired by a new feeling of responsibility. Yet here we are again, almost 15 years later, with seemingly little tangible change. I’d take my son to see Bill Cosby, to hear his message, to revel in its promise and optimism. But afterward, he and I would have a very long talk.
-Ta-Nehisi Coates
Crack, what made you leave out:
"Part of what drives Cosby’s activism, and reinforces his message, is the rage that lives in all African Americans, a collective feeling of disgrace that borders on self-hatred."
-Ta-Nehisi Coates
Character assassination much, Crack?
Here's what should be "noted":
1. The DA didn't pursue these charges, because there wasn't enough evidence, but Coates - now 39 years old, I think - was, in Ann's hindsight, expected to bring down the great Bill Cosby, by his lonesome, in his first big break. Now that's what we mean by expecting black men to be "twice as good" as everybody else.
2. The image of a white mother, dissing a black man for explaining his challenges as a father and husband - and, in the face of a huge ethical challenge (he actually KNOWS Cosby and knows what he means to blacks) authentically saying "It was not enough" - shows exactly why blacks, men and women, don't engage with their evil, lying, gnawing-at-your-heels-for-nothing feminist movement. Yeah, he wanted to feed his kid and bring home a paycheck. Go ahead - knock him for it, why don't cha.
3. Historical amnesia extends to white women forgetting their role in the destruction of black men, for the satisfaction of a conservative white male audience, through history. Black men who, I should add, had done nothing to them. The number of deaths they've caused through lies, including of omission. I won't elaborate further because, it's been so common, Americans know.
4. I think Tank's admission that he "would never have had that reaction without reading AA" should be warning to Ann about becoming more self-aware of what she does with her privilege,...
Whoopi Goldberg is now defending Cosby.
...because it wasn't rape-rape.
Meade,
"Part of what drives Cosby’s activism, and reinforces his message, is the rage that lives in all African Americans, a collective feeling of disgrace that borders on self-hatred."
Character assassination much, Crack?
You've completely lost me with that one - care to elaborate?
Which is like saying, "He breathed in and out then, he's breathing in and out now".
Crack wrote 3. Historical amnesia extends to white women forgetting their role in the destruction of black men, for the satisfaction of a conservative white male audience, through history. Black men who, I should add, had done nothing to them. The number of deaths they've caused through lies, including of omission. I won't elaborate further because, it's been so common, Americans know.
No, I think you should elaborate that one because I think it's key to your personality disorder. Either that or go away again.
After the Million Man March...
Add 'innumeracy' to the latter-day "Civil Rights Movement"'s list of character flaws...just after 'Al Sharpton'.
You accused AA of "character assassination" for leaving out of the section she excerpted additional lines you deemed important.
It seems that you easily perceive faults in others while holding yourself to a lower standard of criticism.
Do you have a psychological need to personalize issues rather than discuss those issues simply on their merits?
Crack,
At the start of LBJ's war on poverty about 25% of black kids were born out of wedlock. Today it is closer to 75%.
So the horrible consequences of LBJ's policies are in fact fairly recent.
Meade,
"You accused AA of "character assassination" for leaving out of the section she excerpted additional lines you deemed important."
It was the only line that was relevant - he didn't have the evidence - and he said it 6 whole paragraphs before getting to his personal problems.
"It seems that you easily perceive faults in others while holding yourself to a lower standard of criticism."
No - a different standard - one with some history grounding it in reality.
"Do you have a psychological need to personalize issues rather than discuss those issues simply on their merits?"
No - Ann Althouse is posting this smear of a black man showing integrity in the crosshairs.
Ann Althouse should be called on it - with the Althouse-excised lack of evidence quote showing why it's a smear.
If Ann Althouse can smear Ta-Nehisi Coates as greedy - for wanting to be a decent father and husband - then Ann Althouse should re-think what she's up to:
Her son was giving us the he-who-smelt-it-dealt-it-racism bit a while back, which already doesn't speak well for his upbringing on these issues,...
"If Ann Althouse can smear Ta-Nehisi Coates as greedy"
Where did she call Ta-Nehisi Coates "greedy".
The smearing seems to be you smearing AA.
Crack, what do you think Ta-Nehisi Coates meant when he said, "And I was once reckless."?
Is it unfair to now ask how we can be certain that he is no longer being "reckless"?
Again I have to ask: how many words did TNC use to create this article?
This is critical to our understanding of TNC key points.
"We were supposed to return to our communities and families inspired by a new feeling of responsibility. Yet here we are again, almost 15 years later, with seemingly little tangible change."
To me, the MMM and its message was the great opportunity, a turning point after which the lazy game of blaming ancestral wrongs would at least be attenuated, and the idea of starting over with an immigrant mentality approach to success in life and family would become the new paradigm. The last sentence of the quote above shows how little of the message so many people - even the elite intelligentsia like Coates and Crack - seemingly understood. Message: no one cares; take responsibility for yourself. When, if ever, will that cruel, harsh and unpleasant reality sink in?
Meade,
Crack, what do you think Ta-Nehisi Coates meant when he said, "And I was once reckless."?
He took a chance. Why, do you see something paranoid, and nefarious (which is how your question reads) in that word?
Is it unfair to now ask how we can be certain that he is no longer being "reckless"?
No, it's fair. I think his integrity - something you and everybody-has-to-lie Ann, and whites in general seem to have a problem with as we blacks are openly dealing with our moral and ethical issues as adults.
Whites should try it sometimes.
Blacks would probably like the result a lot more than the artful-dodger-covered-in-blood routine,...
veni vidi vici,
"Message: no one cares; take responsibility for yourself. When, if ever, will that cruel, harsh and unpleasant reality sink in?"
If you actually read Coates, and didn't rely on white smears misquoting his intentions - you'd see he addresses such statements. That said, you assume that blacks, left to their own devices, can succeed. The problem is blacks aren't being left to their own devices. We now live with mass incarceration, etc. That one issue strips our community of men, votes, home life, a sense of opportunity or,..even community itself. And we can go back to the beginning of black's arrival here and see an unbroken series of such "outside interferences" in our development - ranging from selling children to lynchings to bombing neighborhoods, and redlining entire neighborhoods - all designed so we'll never be able to do as you say.
That you don't already know that is also one of the biggest parts of the problem,...
veni vidi vici,
"Message: no one cares"
Do you seriously think, being around this crew, that message has been missed?
How many times can I say you're South African style white supremacist KKK Nazis, with a murderous culture, before the meaning of the words "no one cares" can come into focus for you?
Feeding Jews into ovens, enslaving blacks and thinking it's all good - and proud of yourselves for what you claim to have accomplished on other's backs - no difference.
I know you don't care.
It's you who miss why,...
What will happen now is that the left will attempt to a) remove all of Cosby's work from pubic access and b) promote the concept that his sexual sins discredit his political and social philosophies.
This does not apply to people like President Clinton, mind you. If Pres. Bush had gotten fellated by a woman less than 1/2 his age who was completely dependent on his good will to keep her prestigious job they'd have called him a rapist and tried to hound him out of office. But he was left-wing, so a different standard applies.
It was the only line that was relevant - he didn't have the evidence
Does he suddenly have evidence now? I'm guessing no.
Crack:
"Today, 30% of white kids are born out of wedlock and not only does no one look at them "
Oh, I look at them. I look at one every time I go to a particular relative's house. Same pattern - girl with no job and low education has sex with young man with no education and no future, has baby, doesn't wise up, has ANOTHER baby by the same guy. No marriage. Lives with parents and off of government dole. No realistic prospects of father getting gainful employment sufficient to financially/materially support mother and children.
WTF? Really, WTF. This is replicated in white families all over the country. It's higher in black families, but it's indicative of a general moral breakdown in American society wherein dependency on government instead of self-sufficiency used to be shameful and is now demanded and embraced by an ever-increasing percentage of people and an entitlement. An agenda promoted by the Democratic party.
Shanna,
"Does he suddenly have evidence now? I'm guessing no."
The women are making themselves the evidence. This isn't "he said, she said" but "she said and she said and she said and,..."
I'm just glad blacks are being shown to have our ethical house in order while Ann's just claimed, yesterday, everybody has to lie. A law professor. It blows the mind.
White Americans have been living by some really ugly social concepts, for a long time, while claiming to stand for others.
Learn to tell the truth, y'all,...
RonF,
"It's indicative of a general moral breakdown in American society wherein dependency on government instead of self-sufficiency used to be shameful and is now demanded and embraced by an ever-increasing percentage of people and an entitlement. An agenda promoted by the Democratic party."
Really? When did this "general moral breakdown in American society" begin? With the advent of blacks voting with Democrats?
Or was it slavery? Jim Crow? Separate but equal? And so on?
Was it a ""general moral breakdown in American society" when whites burned a cross on Nat King Cole's lawn, or not?
And was slavery an example of this country's previous "self-sufficiency" or have you conveniently air-brushed it's implications out of your mind?
And now that the Republicans have positioned themselves as our new antagonists, who do you think gets hurt by all the cuts y'all want? Do you care? (No - we've been over that) so what makes you different from the Democrats? Blacks are still the ones getting hurt, by whites of both parties, no matter which way we turn.
Republicans yelled the loudest against The Case For Reparations, so where's your badge of honor supposed to be pinned?
You guys suffer from massive historical and cultural amnesia,...
Self-sufficiency:
Slavery. The most impressive wealth-generator this land has ever known.
Post-slavery lynchings and terrorism - including, and especially of, successful blacks.
The plunder of black wealth, by law, by the government and the citizenry.
Discrimination and segregation, so whites didn't have to compete with others on a level playing field, sports being a favorite comparison.
Government redlining so whites got the best homes and neighborhoods.
Laws advocating white supremacy.
Taking black's taxes for facilities and services - including justice in the courts - that blacks had no access to but served to support the exclusive "self-sufficient" exploits of whites.
Man, you guys will lie to yourselves.
I know it helps to have no one blacks around so you can get away with it in peace,...
The women are making themselves the evidence.
So it is just the numbers? I'm guessing that if he thought Cosby was a rapist then, he was basing it on the women who had come forward at the time. Who are mostly the same as the ones coming forward now as I understand it. Coates himself has no evidence, merely a feeling which hasn't changed over the the years.
Slavery. The most impressive wealth-generator this land has ever known.
citation needed
Anne Althouse wrote...
"So... he did what was in his interest then, and he's doing what's in his interest now. Noted"
I am trying to think of a word to describe this interpretation of what Coates wrote, and all I can come up with is "stupid."
I used to think the Professor was obtuse deliberately to engage her audience. I don't really think so any more.
Nobody can truly know what goes on behind doors closed to him. However, just for the record (such as it is):
I worked with Cosby in the studio for about 4 years in the late 80s, saw and spoke with him frequently. We were not friends, but cordial work acquaintances. Last time I saw him was at a social occasion around 1990.
FWIW, I certainly never heard a word said against him regarding his treatment of women. In fact, just the opposite: he was a mentor to some young men and women I knew fairly well. I would have thought that if there had been any sort of impropriety I would have caught at least the tiniest whiff of rumor, but there was absolutely nothing.
What there was instead was a steady stream of all sorts of good deeds arranged by Cosby, in particular for young people in trouble who he hoped could benefit from a leg up, someone putting in a good word, and often financial aid--more on the order of arranging tuition than handing out cash. In my position, he needed me to know something about these good works, but outside of a very small circle, none of these acts of kindness were ever made public by Cosby or anyone working for him. For that and for other things I would have ascribed to his good character, I have great admiration for the man.
Nobody can truly know what goes on behind doors closed to him. However, just for the record (such as it is):
I worked with Cosby in the studio for about 4 years in the late 80s, saw and spoke with him frequently. We were not friends, but cordial work acquaintances. Last time I saw him was at a social occasion around 1990.
FWIW, I certainly never heard a word said against him regarding his treatment of women. In fact, just the opposite: he was a mentor to some young men and women I knew fairly well. I would have thought that if there had been any sort of impropriety I would have caught at least the tiniest whiff of rumor, but there was absolutely nothing.
What there was instead was a steady stream of all sorts of good deeds arranged by Cosby, in particular for young people in trouble who he hoped could benefit from a leg up, someone putting in a good word, and often financial aid--more on the order of arranging tuition than handing out cash. In my position, he needed me to know something about these good works, but outside of a very small circle, none of these acts of kindness were ever made public by Cosby or anyone working for him. For that and for other things I would have ascribed to his good character, I have great admiration for the man.
God, what a whinger.
Shanna said...
The women are making themselves the evidence.
"So it is just the numbers? I'm guessing that if he thought Cosby was a rapist then, he was basing it on the women who had come forward at the time."
Sure, he thought, but what could he do with a thought?
HoodlumDoodlum said...
Slavery. The most impressive wealth-generator this land has ever known.
citation needed
Make of it what you will:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/23/the-half-has-never-been-told_n_6036840.html
bbkingfish,
"I used to think the Professor was obtuse deliberately to engage her audience. I don't really think so any more."
Thank YOU,...
"Really? When did this "general moral breakdown in American society" begin? With the advent of blacks voting with Democrats?"
I'd say that it started up during the early '60's.
"And was slavery an example of this country's previous "self-sufficiency" or have you conveniently air-brushed it's implications out of your mind?"
Oh, no, it's been part of the American ethos before slavery came to our shores. Captain John Smith addressed the issue when Jamestown was established in 1607 (12 years before any slaves were sold there). Some of the immigrants styled themselves as aristocracy and thought that they could live off of the rest of the people there. Capt. Smith disabused them of that concept and set the ideal:
"Countrymen, the long experience of our late miseries, I hope is sufficient to persuade every one to a present correction of himself, and think not that either my pains, nor the [investors'] purses, will ever maintain you in idleness and sloth. I speak not this to you all, for diverse of you I know deserve both honor and reward, better than is yet here to be had: but the greater part must be more industrious, or starve, how ever you have been heretofore tolerated by the authorities of the Council, from that I have often commanded you. You see now that power rests wholly in myself: you must obey this now for a Law, that he that will not work shall not eat (except by sickness he be disabled) for the labors of thirty or forty honest and industrious men shall not be consumed to maintain an hundred and fifty idle loiterers."
Did the introduction of slavery contradict that? Surely. IF a failure in the part of *some* of those proclaiming ideals to live up to ideals invalidates those ideals, then we should not have any ideals at all.
Slavery has been a stain on American history and should never be forgotten.
But that does not change the fact that self-sufficiency independent of the government is a hallmark of American society, and it's degradation has led to a lot of unintended consequences.
"Really? When did this "general moral breakdown in American society" begin? With the advent of blacks voting with Democrats?"
RonF says..
"I'd say that it started up during the early '60's."
The 1860s?
I would have to say America's moral breakdown began much earlier than that. Not as early as John Smith though, who, of course, was a English colonist with English values who worked for English masters, and not an American at all.
Meade asks...
Crack, what do you think Ta-Nehisi Coates meant when he said, "And I was once reckless."?
Is it unfair to now ask how we can be certain that he is no longer being "reckless"?
Meade, your first question strongly suggests you didn't read Coates' article. Did you? If you did read it and have to ask the question, I really don't know what to say.
As to your second question, no I don't think it's necessarily unfair to ask such a question, but it is startling in that, again, it seems (to one who admittedly did read Coates' post) possible to ask only if the questioner is oblivious to the context of the rest of the article. If I had to ask your question, I wouldn't be in a big hurry to brag about it.
A genuine thank you for the cite. I started to write a long-ish rebuttal but after reading the last of the 5 points I realized the quoted author did it himself. To wit:
Baptist argues that the main driving reason was an economic one: slavery had to keep expanding to remain profitable,and Southern politicians wanted to ensure that new western states would be slave-owning ones.
And he's right about that. But that's not evidence that the slave economy was hugely profitable or sustainable--it's the exact opposite. By the 1860s it was inefficient (in both absolute and competitive terms) and could only be sustained as an institution (large-scale) by constant geographic expansion. The fact that the only net profit you could only profit (in accounting terms) long term from large scale slavery by continuing to expand into better-than-average land shows that as an institution it was no longer sustainable and was not economically profitable.
From the 5 points it sounds like Baptist is counting the value of the slaves themselves, which in an accounting sense is valid but when you're actually trying to compare the non-slave wealth of the South to the non-slave wealth of the North it's not a useful addition.
2) In its heyday, slavery was more efficient than free labor, contrary to the arguments made by some northerners at the time.
That's an argument that's been made and rebutted quite a bit. Most of the modern econ history literature (as far as I recall) says slavery was less efficient when comparing similar land and by discouraging investment (industrialization, etc) was much less efficient than using wage labor over the long term. When the article you quote says "The increase was even higher if one looks at the growth in the newer southwestern areas in 1860, where the efficiency of picking grew by 2.6 percent per year from 1811 to 1860, for a total productivity increase of 361 percent." that's actually making the case--the newer areas (into which the South wanted to expand slavery) had better/less intensively used land, and it was only there that the less-efficient system using slaves could compete.
3) Slavery didn't just enrich the South, but also drove the industrial boom in the North.
So again it's true that funds from slavery went to the North and was used as capital to help the industrialization. But your argument is that slavery itself is the most impressive wealth-generator, and that's not true by the very same argument Baptist uses. The capital indirectly rasied thanks to slavery (cotton used in Northern industrial mills, etc) paid for industrialization of the North. That industrialiation generated much (much!) better returns than did slavery, meaning the North got much more wealthy. That certainly happened more quickly due to the capital (from slavery), but as the example from other nations (w/o slavery) shows, industrialization would eventually have occurred.
Saying slavery is a wealth-generator, of course, also means you're not counting the slaves themselves in your economic model. What I mean is that slavery might make the slave owner money, but the slave himself remains poor-certainly poorer than he would were he free and doing the same labor. You can only say slavery is wealth-generating by ignoring the slaves. Even doing so shows that slavery is not as good a wealth generator as industrialization/mechanization, though, so even accepting your cited article's arguments (and I have disputed a few) your assertion is not supported by the evidence you presented.
Thanks again for the link.
When I see Ta-Nehisi's name I think, Tennessee, it's easier to imagine than the other ponderous given (taken?) name.
When I see crack's name I stop reading. That's quite a marketing plan you've got there Althouse.
So what are you hiding from us now, Coates? What are you lying about now that you are going to share with us in 8 or 10 years?
Do Ta-Nehisi Coates and the league of others "who either looked away, or did not look hard enough" owe the women Cosby raped some sort of reparations? Or is his regret enough?
Post a Comment