The arrogance of the "freemen" to compare their discrimination to that of the Black slave population is sickening, and more so is their simultaneous support of Black slavery. The whites' argument that their misfortunes could be equated to the black slaves ignores the fundamental characteristic that differentiated them: white males counted as citizens in the U.S, while Blacks were insignificant, unheard victims. While these white workers were fighting against pay-cuts, and for fewer hours, black slaves were being denied basic human rights, and forced to be ripped from their families.
In addition to the obvious disgust at the overwhelming white ignorance, I was also astounded by the similarities between the White laborer's fear of "job competition with emancipated slaves," and the modern prejudice against Hispanic immigrants taking jobs today. In the same way White laborers felt that they were being treated as people, or even animals, "beneath their race", some Americans today feel that they should not be losing jobs to, or receiving salaries, less than foreign immigrants.
When I first read the term “wage slavery”, I was skeptical about whether “wage slavery” could even be compared to what black slaves went through at the time. My skepticism was furthered as I read about how the oppressed wage slaves in the North regarded themselves as “slaves” their bosses as “slavemasters”. Roediger stresses even “if the worker could be called a slave, the wage-paying master could not…really be regarded as a slavemaster” (324) The key factor that distinguishes a “wage slave” from a black slave, is obiviously that the wage slave are working voluntarily for money, whereas the black slave is owned as property by his boss. Sure, the conditions in the North may have been harsh for white slaves, but they were not even comparable to what black slaves faced. Although white slaves faced long hours and low pay, black slaves suffered from the crack of a whip and no pay at all. To portray white slaves as the “real victims” of oppression serves an injustice to black slaves. White slaves did not have to worry about being forced to work, sold, or separated from their families. For black slaves, these three fears were a reality. The Northeners’ argument is that white slavery and black slavery are two of a kind, but in reality, they are as different as can be. White slavery was a case of voluntarily working for pay through tough circumstances, while black slavery was the act of being plucked from one’s life and family and forced to work for no wages at all.
I could not believe that the freemen of the north compared their suffering to the slaves of the south; such victimization of their comparably pleasant lives was disgusting. Equating “freemen” and “slaves” seems like an obvious contraction that the freemen were trying to ignore. Many white men seemed to take for granted the freedom and rights that they had as Roediger writes, “use of a term like white slavery was not an act of solidarity with the slave but rather a call to arms to end the inappropriate oppression of whites.” Oppression? They were not the ones being treated as pieces of property, as many black slaves were. White Slaves may have been subjected to low pay and long hours, but black slaves got no pay at all and often were whipped and treated cruelly, in ways no human being should treat another. Although white slaves suffered as well, it was mild compared to what the black slaves went through. They were taken from their families and forced to work for no pay, often becoming someone else’s property, while white slaves voluntarily chose to work for little pay and were still regarded as human beings.
Roediger's essay was relatively unbiased on his part, not really taking a perspective of one side, which I really liked. However, the main subject was a very controversial topic to write about, but it was an issue that needed to be addressed. Roediger talked about the phrase “wage slavery” often, describing its usage and origin, as well as its importance during the 1830s. He said that the white people began to protest over working hours, writing that they were toiling much more than other manufacturing country workers such as the British for the same wage. But what really caused outrage among citizens was the coffin handbill that placed whites on the same level as blacks.
People, mainly women and children, were working ridiculous hours, but referring to themselves as “white slaves” driven by slave masters was completely out of line. They had absolutely no right to use such a term to describe their predicament when their working hours were nothing compared to what slaves have had to do for generations. They had no idea the pain and suffering slaves had suffered, never fully being free, unable to vote and own property, and abuse by slave owners. Slaves experienced much cruelty, such as having their families deliberately broken and scattered, children sent to different masters from their parents, while white families were kept working together.
It’s interesting that working white people likened themselves to slaves, protesting for the end of improper white oppression, for “liberty, equality, and the rights of man”, but continue to favor black slavery. Whites implied that they don’t want to lift a finger to work, but that slaves should overly exert themselves because they are used to it, and because they worked fewer hours. White perspective was completely distorted, workers made themselves look like the victims of this mess, and while they are to some degree (although they did choose to work), they believed that their lives were fraught with unfairness because they were run like slaves. White factory workers said the slave life was bad when they talked about their own laboring, but when black servility was called into question, it didn’t matter how they felt, blacks could handle it because it was always that way.
Roediger's essay truly seemed to highlight the domino effect that the issue of "equality", an idea which Jackson incorporated into his presidency, on American people and society. President Jackson, an ordinary man himself, set out to ensure that voting rights were expanded, specifically for white American males, regardless of social class or property. This sparked a realization in other oppressed groups, such as women and slaves, that they too had a chance at increasing their legal rights. Roediger represents this through his evidence that people and workers in the middle to lower social statuses wanted to prevent themselves from being labeled as slaves, the lowest possible social stratum with little to absolutely no freedom. As people began to admit that they were "slaves in every sense of the word," eyes were opened to the fact that workers were losing the very freedom and liberty that had been promised to them during the founding of their country. (323) Through the focus on the lack of equality and freedom and the issue of slavery, Roediger also highlights the growing chasm between the privileged and the oppressed, which will later play a defining role in our country's history.
This essay is a very interesting looks at the class dynamics of white workers in the evolving capitalist economy. In particular, it gave an interesting look on how this tied into and affected attitudes on race and slavery. Instead of increasing abolitionist sentiments, the struggles of white workers merely reinforced racists beliefs among the white working class population. They believed that slavery was the natural domain of the black population, and believed that capitalist masters were planning on pushing them into the domain of black slaves. From this, I believe it can be said that poverty can increase racial tension, rather then causing solidarity. A bad situation causes workers to desire a scapegoat to pin the blame for their unhappiness on. This causes workers to direct their ire towards those under them, even as they protest against those above them.
One section of Roediger's essay in particular stuck out to me; that is, the rhetoric of "white slavery." The irony and hypocrisy of white workers desiring to have the pity of black slaves but simultaneously distance themselves from blacks is obvious; an aspect of this is evidently the very wording used to describe white slavery. The verb "slave" is used to "indicate the performance of work unbecoming to whites" (321). This quote in and of itself very well illustrates the white drive to degrade black people and separate themselves from them - slave labor, very hard labor, is something that white people should not have to do; they are better than that. Another vocabulary term that I found fascinating was the “white nigger,” a white person who emulates a black one in his practice of slave labor. This terminology came into American English in the 1830s, just when “white slavery” was becoming prominent. The irony is staggering – white laborers desiring to be pitied for being stuck in the level of black people, and at the same time desperately wanting to be separate from blacks.
Roediger's essay reveals to the reader 19th century American racism which is even prevalent in modern society. It is clear that no matter a white persons social status, they believe that black slaves are truly the lowest in the social food-chain. It almost seems silly for working-class white men to compare their suffering to slaves; they need to examine their rights, freedoms and privileges that the slaves don't have. But then again, white folk truly those liberties were limited to their race. Somehow, slaves were incapable of handling freedom. This racism, which is silly, continues in the modern era as well. There is still conflict in America between races expressed through hate-crimes and stereotypes.
During the Industrial Revolution, people were worried that the people employed to work the new machines would lose some of their humanity by being worked like a machine. These people worked in enclosed, deafening areas, working long hours for little pay. The irony in it, though, is that chattel slaves were already being worked like machines for thousands of years before the Industrial Revolution. That these white workers compared themselves to slaves shows their ignorance and racism. The idea that African Americans deserved to be slaves simply because they did not fight slavery earlier on is simply ridiculous. The idea that African Americans deserved to be slaves simply because they had not violently destroyed the institution of slavery, and thus the South, shows how deeply racist people were. Violence and not non-violence is referred to here because the Southerners failed to listen to any efforts to abolish slavery until the Civil War. The idea that “white slavery” was anything like chattel slavery was likewise absurd. While white workers were treated badly at work, they were still their own masters and could quit if need be. Likewise, the white workers were paid, while chattel slaves generally were not. Finally, “white slavery” could be solved merely by some reforms in the industry business, while chattel slavery required significant structural changes to be fixed. The mere fact of how much more change needed to be done to fix chattel slavery, compared to “white slavery” shows just how different these two social issues were. Chattel slavery was a much more rampant issue and much more ingrained in the social status of things than “white slavery”.
Although "wage-laborers" melodramatically compared themselves to black slaves, there were many factors that caused this rhetoric, as evident in Roediger's essay. One of the main reasons "wage-laborers" or "white slaves" (as they often referred to themselves) believed they were slaves is because they had a skewed perception of slavery. Most laborers were from the north and thus had virtually no contact with slaves, and therefore were unable to understand the life of a slave. Moreover wage laborers were afraid that their liberties would be taken away, so in order to reaffirm the threat of corruption they compared themselves to slaves who had no rights. Because slavery was such a major political issue at the time, factory workers were able to stir up controversy and get what they wanted- protection.
While, like most people have stated, the notion of comparing "white slavery" to slavery, I believe the workers did have legitimate fears. Many Americans were unsure of their future in the rapidly, modernizing industrial society that they were living in. The tailors were already working long, hard hours, but while many other workers were celebrating the merits of unionization, they were prohibited from organizing. Most northerners hadn't witnessed slavery, so their concept of slavery was different from the true slavery in the South. This tough period made workers even more afraid that in the future things could get even worse, so possibly one day they might be as low in society as slaves.
The arrogance of the "freemen" to compare their discrimination to that of the Black slave population is sickening, and more so is their simultaneous support of Black slavery. The whites' argument that their misfortunes could be equated to the black slaves ignores the fundamental characteristic that differentiated them: white males counted as citizens in the U.S, while Blacks were insignificant, unheard victims. While these white workers were fighting against pay-cuts, and for fewer hours, black slaves were being denied basic human rights, and forced to be ripped from their families.
ReplyDeleteIn addition to the obvious disgust at the overwhelming white ignorance, I was also astounded by the similarities between the White laborer's fear of "job competition with emancipated slaves," and the modern prejudice against Hispanic immigrants taking jobs today. In the same way White laborers felt that they were being treated as people, or even animals, "beneath their race", some Americans today feel that they should not be losing jobs to, or receiving salaries, less than foreign immigrants.
When I first read the term “wage slavery”, I was skeptical about whether “wage slavery” could even be compared to what black slaves went through at the time. My skepticism was furthered as I read about how the oppressed wage slaves in the North regarded themselves as “slaves” their bosses as “slavemasters”. Roediger stresses even “if the worker could be called a slave, the wage-paying master could not…really be regarded as a slavemaster” (324) The key factor that distinguishes a “wage slave” from a black slave, is obiviously that the wage slave are working voluntarily for money, whereas the black slave is owned as property by his boss. Sure, the conditions in the North may have been harsh for white slaves, but they were not even comparable to what black slaves faced. Although white slaves faced long hours and low pay, black slaves suffered from the crack of a whip and no pay at all. To portray white slaves as the “real victims” of oppression serves an injustice to black slaves. White slaves did not have to worry about being forced to work, sold, or separated from their families. For black slaves, these three fears were a reality. The Northeners’ argument is that white slavery and black slavery are two of a kind, but in reality, they are as different as can be. White slavery was a case of voluntarily working for pay through tough circumstances, while black slavery was the act of being plucked from one’s life and family and forced to work for no wages at all.
ReplyDeleteI could not believe that the freemen of the north compared their suffering to the slaves of the south; such victimization of their comparably pleasant lives was disgusting. Equating “freemen” and “slaves” seems like an obvious contraction that the freemen were trying to ignore. Many white men seemed to take for granted the freedom and rights that they had as Roediger writes, “use of a term like white slavery was not an act of solidarity with the slave but rather a call to arms to end the inappropriate oppression of whites.” Oppression? They were not the ones being treated as pieces of property, as many black slaves were. White Slaves may have been subjected to low pay and long hours, but black slaves got no pay at all and often were whipped and treated cruelly, in ways no human being should treat another. Although white slaves suffered as well, it was mild compared to what the black slaves went through. They were taken from their families and forced to work for no pay, often becoming someone else’s property, while white slaves voluntarily chose to work for little pay and were still regarded as human beings.
ReplyDeleteRoediger's essay was relatively unbiased on his part, not really taking a perspective of one side, which I really liked. However, the main subject was a very controversial topic to write about, but it was an issue that needed to be addressed. Roediger talked about the phrase “wage slavery” often, describing its usage and origin, as well as its importance during the 1830s. He said that the white people began to protest over working hours, writing that they were toiling much more than other manufacturing country workers such as the British for the same wage. But what really caused outrage among citizens was the coffin handbill that placed whites on the same level as blacks.
ReplyDeletePeople, mainly women and children, were working ridiculous hours, but referring to themselves as “white slaves” driven by slave masters was completely out of line. They had absolutely no right to use such a term to describe their predicament when their working hours were nothing compared to what slaves have had to do for generations. They had no idea the pain and suffering slaves had suffered, never fully being free, unable to vote and own property, and abuse by slave owners. Slaves experienced much cruelty, such as having their families deliberately broken and scattered, children sent to different masters from their parents, while white families were kept working together.
It’s interesting that working white people likened themselves to slaves, protesting for the end of improper white oppression, for “liberty, equality, and the rights of man”, but continue to favor black slavery. Whites implied that they don’t want to lift a finger to work, but that slaves should overly exert themselves because they are used to it, and because they worked fewer hours. White perspective was completely distorted, workers made themselves look like the victims of this mess, and while they are to some degree (although they did choose to work), they believed that their lives were fraught with unfairness because they were run like slaves. White factory workers said the slave life was bad when they talked about their own laboring, but when black servility was called into question, it didn’t matter how they felt, blacks could handle it because it was always that way.
Roediger's essay truly seemed to highlight the domino effect that the issue of "equality", an idea which Jackson incorporated into his presidency, on American people and society. President Jackson, an ordinary man himself, set out to ensure that voting rights were expanded, specifically for white American males, regardless of social class or property. This sparked a realization in other oppressed groups, such as women and slaves, that they too had a chance at increasing their legal rights. Roediger represents this through his evidence that people and workers in the middle to lower social statuses wanted to prevent themselves from being labeled as slaves, the lowest possible social stratum with little to absolutely no freedom. As people began to admit that they were "slaves in every sense of the word," eyes were opened to the fact that workers were losing the very freedom and liberty that had been promised to them during the founding of their country. (323) Through the focus on the lack of equality and freedom and the issue of slavery, Roediger also highlights the growing chasm between the privileged and the oppressed, which will later play a defining role in our country's history.
ReplyDeleteThis essay is a very interesting looks at the class dynamics of white workers in the evolving capitalist economy. In particular, it gave an interesting look on how this tied into and affected attitudes on race and slavery. Instead of increasing abolitionist sentiments, the struggles of white workers merely reinforced racists beliefs among the white working class population. They believed that slavery was the natural domain of the black population, and believed that capitalist masters were planning on pushing them into the domain of black slaves. From this, I believe it can be said that poverty can increase racial tension, rather then causing solidarity. A bad situation causes workers to desire a scapegoat to pin the blame for their unhappiness on. This causes workers to direct their ire towards those under them, even as they protest against those above them.
ReplyDeleteOne section of Roediger's essay in particular stuck out to me; that is, the rhetoric of "white slavery." The irony and hypocrisy of white workers desiring to have the pity of black slaves but simultaneously distance themselves from blacks is obvious; an aspect of this is evidently the very wording used to describe white slavery. The verb "slave" is used to "indicate the performance of work unbecoming to whites" (321). This quote in and of itself very well illustrates the white drive to degrade black people and separate themselves from them - slave labor, very hard labor, is something that white people should not have to do; they are better than that. Another vocabulary term that I found fascinating was the “white nigger,” a white person who emulates a black one in his practice of slave labor. This terminology came into American English in the 1830s, just when “white slavery” was becoming prominent. The irony is staggering – white laborers desiring to be pitied for being stuck in the level of black people, and at the same time desperately wanting to be separate from blacks.
ReplyDeleteRoediger's essay reveals to the reader 19th century American racism which is even prevalent in modern society. It is clear that no matter a white persons social status, they believe that black slaves are truly the lowest in the social food-chain. It almost seems silly for working-class white men to compare their suffering to slaves; they need to examine their rights, freedoms and privileges that the slaves don't have. But then again, white folk truly those liberties were limited to their race. Somehow, slaves were incapable of handling freedom. This racism, which is silly, continues in the modern era as well. There is still conflict in America between races expressed through hate-crimes and stereotypes.
ReplyDeleteDuring the Industrial Revolution, people were worried that the people employed to work the new machines would lose some of their humanity by being worked like a machine. These people worked in enclosed, deafening areas, working long hours for little pay. The irony in it, though, is that chattel slaves were already being worked like machines for thousands of years before the Industrial Revolution. That these white workers compared themselves to slaves shows their ignorance and racism. The idea that African Americans deserved to be slaves simply because they did not fight slavery earlier on is simply ridiculous. The idea that African Americans deserved to be slaves simply because they had not violently destroyed the institution of slavery, and thus the South, shows how deeply racist people were. Violence and not non-violence is referred to here because the Southerners failed to listen to any efforts to abolish slavery until the Civil War. The idea that “white slavery” was anything like chattel slavery was likewise absurd. While white workers were treated badly at work, they were still their own masters and could quit if need be. Likewise, the white workers were paid, while chattel slaves generally were not. Finally, “white slavery” could be solved merely by some reforms in the industry business, while chattel slavery required significant structural changes to be fixed. The mere fact of how much more change needed to be done to fix chattel slavery, compared to “white slavery” shows just how different these two social issues were. Chattel slavery was a much more rampant issue and much more ingrained in the social status of things than “white slavery”.
ReplyDeleteAlthough "wage-laborers" melodramatically compared themselves to black slaves, there were many factors that caused this rhetoric, as evident in Roediger's essay. One of the main reasons "wage-laborers" or "white slaves" (as they often referred to themselves) believed they were slaves is because they had a skewed perception of slavery. Most laborers were from the north and thus had virtually no contact with slaves, and therefore were unable to understand the life of a slave. Moreover wage laborers were afraid that their liberties would be taken away, so in order to reaffirm the threat of corruption they compared themselves to slaves who had no rights. Because slavery was such a major political issue at the time, factory workers were able to stir up controversy and get what they wanted- protection.
ReplyDeleteWhile, like most people have stated, the notion of comparing "white slavery" to slavery, I believe the workers did have legitimate fears. Many Americans were unsure of their future in the rapidly, modernizing industrial society that they were living in. The tailors were already working long, hard hours, but while many other workers were celebrating the merits of unionization, they were prohibited from organizing. Most northerners hadn't witnessed slavery, so their concept of slavery was different from the true slavery in the South. This tough period made workers even more afraid that in the future things could get even worse, so possibly one day they might be as low in society as slaves.
ReplyDelete