@ArtemisFowl_003@YahooNun6@sleepy_devo Much of his story is corroborated. The fact that Lee separated slaves from their families by leasing them out. The fact that slaves fled and were caught. The constable Norris mentioned is corroborated in Lee's accounting book. Even with no direct evidence, it's not far-fetched.
@ArtemisFowl_003@YahooNun6@sleepy_devo The only thing we can often go on are other people's testimonies during this period. The stance of "necessary evil" is common during the period, so while this account may have only one other witness, this type of story is a dime a dozen during this period, especially when legal.
@ArtemisFowl_003@YahooNun6@sleepy_devo Evidence for abuse is difficult because slaves are illiterate, so they need others to write their story.
The Norris story corroborates one thing. If Lee believes slavery to be a necessary evil, it'd be in line to give such lashings to one who runs away, like a parent to a child.
@ArtemisFowl_003@sleepy_devo Hm, and we should've kept them enslaved even further? After all, according to you and Lee they just turn to murderers and thieves without slavery.
"How do you expect people taken from their homes [...] to speak, read, write, or any frame of reference"
@sleepy_devo If Artemis thinks ppl need to stay enslaved to be civilized, he is delusional. "The Deep South's repression towards blacks was granting enlightenment." Fuck off.
There are so many quotes to pick from, but you went with bullshit. Lee wasnt wrong. How do you expect people taken from their homes from an entirely different way of life to live in the US back then when they had zero ability to speak, read, write or any frame of reference to society?
@ArtemisFowl_003@YahooNun6@sleepy_devo If Lee was antislavery, he's a hell of a hypocrite to drive his slaves hard after inheritance.
If Lee didn't care for slavery, he actively fought to keep it alive.
If Lee considered slavery as civilizing, Lincoln willing to negotiate slavery to prevent war is not equivalent.
@ArtemisFowl_003@YahooNun6@sleepy_devo 3. His in-law's will stated "enslaved people were to be freed within five years of his death". That's not a restriction from selling/freeing slaves. Instead of selling to recoup, Lee used the estate of 200 slaves to the fullest up until the will stated he can use them no more.
@ArtemisFowl_003@YahooNun6@sleepy_devo 1. His personal servants during wartime did not serve to reduce the debt.
2. The debt he inherited was to service the estate he was bequeathed. He chose to *keep* the estate and drove his slaves hard to be rid of it.
@ArtemisFowl_003@YahooNun6@sleepy_devo Except Lee not only was considering buying more slaves in his letters up to 1860, but he also personally rented them out as personal servants during the Civil War. But I guess his dad forced those slaves upon him too somehow. What an bad take by me to judge Lee for buying slaves.
@ArtemisFowl_003@YahooNun6@sleepy_devo Let's also ignore how Lee was a hard slave driver pre-war who separated families. Whatever his words after the war to reconcile his image was, in actions before and during the war are clearly in favor of the institution of slavery.
@ArtemisFowl_003@YahooNun6@sleepy_devo You know that Lincoln quotes in that very same letter that his stance to prevent civil war doesn't mean he doesn't wish for all slaves to be free.
You're so disingenuous in regards to this issue, and you know it.