White Fragility: Why It's So Hard for White People to Talk About Racism is a 2018 book written by Robin DiAngelo about race relations in the United States. An academic with experience in diversity training, DiAngelo coined the term "white fragility" in 2011 to describe what she views as any defensive instincts or reactions that a white person experiences when questioned about race or made to consider their own race. In White Fragility,
DiAngelo views racism in the United States as systemic and often
perpetuated subconsciously by individuals. She recommends against
viewing racism as committed intentionally by "bad people".
Published on June 26, 2018, the book entered the New York Times Bestseller List that month, remaining on the list for well over a year and experiencing a resurgence in demand during the George Floyd protests
beginning in May 2020. As of the July 26, 2020 edition, the book was in
its 97th week on the list in the Paperback Nonfiction category, where
it is ranked number one. Critically, the book received generally
positive reviews at the time of its publication. It received more mixed
reviews in the aftermath of the George Floyd protests two years later.
Some reviewers lauded the book for being thoughtful and instructive, but
characterized it as diagnostic rather than solution-oriented. Other
reviewers criticized the book for making false claims about race and
racism in America, for putting whites in a situation where anything they
say is used against them, for infantilizing black people, and for doing
nothing to promote racial justice or combat systemic racism.
Background
Author Robin DiAngelo is a white American academic. She worked for 20 years in providing diversity training for businesses. Identifying as "progressive"
at the time, she found her view on race changing as she began working
with people of color and experienced hostility from white people when
talking about race during the training. After five years in the job, she began studying for a PhD in multicultural education at the University of Washington. DiAngelo became a tenured professor at Westfield State University, working in the areas of critical discourse analysis and whiteness studies. White Fragility draws heavily on her experiences in her diversity training job. The book is aimed at a white audience.
DiAngelo coined the term "white fragility" in 2011, to describe defensive behavior by a white person when their conception of racism is questioned. White Fragility is DiAngelo's third book, following What Does It Mean to Be White?: Developing White Racial Literacy (2012). White Fragility was published on June 26, 2018, by Beacon Press.
To accompany the book, Beacon Press's website offers: a Reading Guide
by DiAngelo and Özlem Sensoy; a Discussion Guide for Educators by
Valeria Brown; and a Discussion Guide for Unitarian Universalist Association meetings by Gail Forsyth-Vail. The book was published in early 2019 in the United Kingdom by Penguin Books.
Synopsis
The book opens with a foreword from the black American academic Michael Eric Dyson.
DiAngelo describes white fragility to be a defensive response by a white person
when their whiteness is highlighted or mentioned, or their racial
worldview is challenged, whether this response is conscious or
otherwise. She gives examples including a white man accusing someone of "playing the race card" or a white woman crying to avoid conflict.
DiAngelo proposes that white people are used to viewing themselves as
"raceless" or the "default" race, and as such are insulated from
feelings of racial discomfort. She describes racism as systematic rather than overt and conscious, arguing that racial segregation has shaped the United States.
She points to research that has shown that children as young as four
years old show a strong and consistent pro-white bias and an especially
strong prejudice against black males.
DiAngelo says that people associate racism with extremists such as neo-Nazis or self-identified white supremacists, who they label as "bad people", and conclude that because they are a "good person" that they cannot be racist. She criticizes white liberals, arguing that white people who identify as "progressive" view themselves as "woke"
to avoid questioning any issue of racism in themselves. She terms these
reactions "aversive racism" and writes that it prevents people from
addressing unconscious racist bias, which she believes everyone has.
Contrastingly, she uses the term "avowed racists" to refer to those who
she believes are intentionally perpetrating racism.
The author writes that "color blindness",
the idea that one should not notice or think about a person's race, is
unhelpful as it prevents people from understanding how race does matter
in the current world. She criticizes individualism, the American Dream and the philosophical concept of objectivity. Instead, she promotes utilitarianism. The book describes the lynching of Emmett Till in 1955, a 14-year-old child who was accused of harassing a white woman. It also uses as an example Jackie Robinson, the first African-American to play in Major League Baseball (MLB) in the modern era (1901- ).
DiAngelo says that a stereotype of black men as violent and dangerous
is untrue and used to justify continuing racist brutality.
Reception
Nosheen Iqbal wrote in The Guardian that "DiAngelo's book is a radical statement at a time when the debate is so polarised."
Praise
White Fragility became a New York Times bestseller for more than a year. In September 2019, Slate noted that "White Fragility
has yet to leave the New York Times bestseller list since its debut in
June 2018, making it the fastest-selling book in the history of Beacon Press." In June 2020, during the George Floyd protests, it reached no. 1 on the New York Times list.
The July 26, 2020 edition of the list marked the book's 97th week in
the Paperback Nonfiction category, where it was ranked number 1.
The Los Angeles Review of Books review by David Roediger
reviewed the book very positively and praised DiAngelo's "keen
perception, long experience, and deep commitment" and said the book is
"uncommonly honest about the duration and extent of entrenched injustice
and provocative on the especially destructive role of progressive
whites at critical junctures." He concluded that the book "reads better
as evidence of where we are mired than as a how-to guide on where we are
on the cusp of going."
The Publishers Weekly
review called it "a thoughtful, instructive, and comprehensive book on
challenging racism" and "impressive in its scope and complexity". The New Statesman
review described it as "a clear-sighted, methodical guide seeking to
help readers 'navigate the roiling racial waters of daily life', though
stops short of prescribing any concrete solutions."
It asserted that DiAngelo's "overarching aim is not for her readers to
feel guilty about their white identity. Rather it is to encourage them
to understand that there will be no change if they are just 'really
nice… smile at people of colour… go to lunch together on occasion'."
For The New Yorker in 2018, staff writer Katy Waldman wrote about White Fragility
that "[t]he book is more diagnostic than solutions-oriented, and the
guidelines it offers toward the end—listen, don't center yourself, get
educated, think about your responses and what role they play—won't shock
any nervous systems. The value in White Fragility lies in its methodical, irrefutable exposure of racism in thought and action, and its call for humility and vigilance."
Criticism
In an August 2019 article for The New Yorker, the columnist Kelefa Sanneh
characterized DiAngelo as "perhaps the country's most visible expert in
anti-bias training, a practice that is also an industry, and from all
appearances a prospering one". He suggested that DiAngelo "reduces all
of humanity to two categories: white and other" and that she presents
people of color as "sages, speaking truths that white people must
cherish, and not challenge." Sanneh was also critical of what he saw as
DiAngelo's tendency to be "endlessly deferential—for her, racism is
basically whatever any person of color thinks it is". He also observes
that there is an enormous "difference in scale between the historical
injustices [DiAngelo] invokes and the contemporary slights she
addresses".
In a 2020 op-ed for The New York Times, journalist and political correspondent Jamelle Bouie
argued that the recent emphasis on exploring white fragility siphoned
crucial energy from white people inwardly, towards their own behavior,
instead of funneling resources and time into exploring wealth inequality
and other harmful consequences of white supremacy.
Also writing in The Guardian, Kenan Malik
countered in 2020 that the book is "psychobabble" which
counter-productively shifts the focus from structural change to
individual bias, thus "leaving the real issues untouched."
Reviewing Sanneh's comments, professor Lauren Michele Jackson
"consider[s] DiAngelo's inclusion of seemingly incongruous grievances a
strength. Etiquette is never beside the point. As DiAngelo has said,
neither White Fragility nor her workshops intend to convert the
gleefully racist; she speaks to the well-intended whose banal blusters
make racial stress routine."
However, Jackson found the lack of cited scholars of color troubling:
"I couldn't help but notice the relative dearth of contemporary black
studies scholarship cited in White Fragility."
Carlos Lozada, The Washington Post's nonfiction book critic, raised a point about circular reasoning:
"any alternative perspective or counterargument is defeated by the
concept itself. Either white people admit their inherent and unending
racism and vow to work on their white fragility, in which case DiAngelo
was correct in her assessment, or they resist such categorizations or
question the interpretation of a particular incident, in which case they
are only proving her point."
In a January 2020 article for The New Republic, J.C. Pan situates DiAngelo's work among "other white anti-racist educators" such as Tim Wise and Peggy McIntosh who provide "therapeutic rather than policy-based" approaches. Pan writes that "the major shortcoming of White Fragility is that it offers almost nothing in the way of concrete political action." Justin Lee makes a similar argument in an essay in The Independent, which views the book as part of a discourse which does not in fact promote racial justice but rather protects class privilege.
After the George Floyd protests, the book received some negative reviews. Journalist and author Matt Taibbi
strongly criticized the book as having a corporate vision of racism,
labeling the book "pseudo-intellectual horseshit" that is likely to have
pernicious effects for race relations.
In his view, the book divisively fetishises race and places it at the
centre of people's identities, while denying the significance of
individual personalities and moral choices and the universal human
experience.
Linguist John McWhorter, writing in The Atlantic,
called the book "a racist tract", saying it infantilized and
condescended towards black people. He also stated the book was "replete
with claims that are either plain wrong or bizarrely disconnected from
reality". As examples, he cited DiAngelo's claim that white baseball
fans believe that no Black person before Jackie Robinson was in the
Major Leagues because none were qualified and her claim that in the
American higher-education system no one ever talks about racism. He
argued that the book contradicts itself about white racial identity and
leaves white people with no way to avoid being racist. He further
criticized the book for not explaining why or how its instructions will
help to accomplish social change.
Writing in the Boston Review, political science professor Peter Dreier
also criticizes DiAngelo's interpretation of the Jackie Robinson story.
"Contrary to DiAngelo’s retelling," Dreier writes, "Robinson's success
did not render 'whites, white privilege, and racist institutions
invisible.'" He further writes that "In White Fragility DiAngelo
examines racism as a web of deeply-ingrained attitudes rather than as a
system of power—what is often called institutional or systemic racism.
Perhaps this is because discussing the redistribution of power, wealth,
and income might not sit comfortably with DiAngelo's corporate clients."
Thomas Jefferson, the third president of the United States,
owned more than 600 slaves during his adult life. Jefferson freed two
slaves while he lived, and five others were freed after his death,
including two of his children from his relationship with his slave (and
sister-in-law) Sally Hemings.
His other two children with Hemings were allowed to escape without
pursuit. After his death, the rest of the slaves were sold to pay off
his estate's debts.
Privately, one of Jefferson's reasons for not freeing more slaves was his considerable debt, while his more public justification, expressed in his book Notes on the State of Virginia,
was his fear that freeing enslaved people into American society would
cause civil unrest between white people and former slaves.
Jefferson consistently spoke out against the international slave trade and outlawed it while he was president. He advocated for a gradual emancipation of all slaves within the United States and the colonization of Africa by freed African Americans. However, he opposed some other measures to restrict slavery within the U.S., and also criticized voluntary manumission.
Early years (1743–1774)
Thomas Jefferson was born into the planter class of a "slave society", as defined by the historian Ira Berlin, in which slavery was the main means of labor production. He was the son of Peter Jefferson, a prominent slaveholder and land speculator in Virginia, and Jane Randolph, granddaughter of English and Scots gentry. In 1757, when Jefferson was 14, his father died, and so he inherited 5,000 acres (20 km2) of land, 52 slaves, livestock, his father's notable library, and a gristmill. This property was initially under control of his guardian, John Harvie Sr. He assumed full control over these properties at age 21. In 1768, Thomas Jefferson began construction of a neoclassical mansion known as Monticello, which overlooked the hamlet of his former home in Shadwell.
As an attorney, Jefferson represented people of color as well as whites.
In 1770, he defended a young mixed-race male slave in a freedom suit, on the grounds that his mother was white and freeborn. By the colony's law of partus sequitur ventrem, that the child took the status of the mother, the man should never have been enslaved. He lost the suit. In 1772, Jefferson represented George Manly, the son of a free woman of color, who sued for freedom after having been held as an indentured servant
three years past the expiration of his term. (The Virginia colony at
the time bound illegitimate mixed-race children of free women as
indentured servants: until age 31 for males, with a shorter term for
females.) Once freed, Manly worked for Jefferson at Monticello for wages.
In 1773, the year after Jefferson married the young widow Martha Wayles Skelton,
her father died. She and Jefferson inherited his estate, including
11,000 acres, 135 slaves, and £4,000 of debt. With this inheritance,
Jefferson became deeply involved with interracial families and financial
burden. As a widower, his father-in-law John Wayles had taken his mixed-race slave Betty Hemings as a concubine and had six children with her during his last 12 years.
These additional forced laborers made Jefferson the
second-largest slaveholder in Albemarle County. In addition, he held
nearly 16,000 acres of land in Virginia. He sold some people to pay off
the debt of Wayles' estate. From this time on, Jefferson owned and supervised his large chattel
estate, primarily at Monticello, although he also developed other
plantations in the colony. Slavery supported the life of the planter
class in Virginia.
In collaboration with Monticello, now the major public history site on Jefferson, the Smithsonian opened on the National Mall an exhibit, Slavery at Jefferson's Monticello: The Paradox of Liberty, (January – October 2012) at the National Museum of American History
in Washington, D.C. It covered Jefferson as a slaveholder and the
roughly 600 enslaved people who lived at Monticello over the decades,
with a focus on six enslaved families and their descendants. It was the
first national exhibit on the Mall to address these issues. In February
2012, Monticello opened a related new outdoor exhibition, Landscape of Slavery: Mulberry Row at Monticello,
which "brings to life the stories of the scores of people—enslaved and
free—who lived and worked on Jefferson's 5,000 acre plantation."
Shortly after ending his law practice in 1774, Jefferson wrote A Summary View of the Rights of British America, which was submitted to the First Continental Congress.
In it, he argued Americans were entitled to all the rights of British
citizens, and denounced King George for wrongfully usurping local
authority in the colonies. In regard to slavery, Jefferson wrote "The
abolition of domestic slavery is the great object of desire in those
colonies, where it was unhappily introduced in their infant state. But
previous to the enfranchisement of the slaves we have, it is necessary
to exclude all further importations from Africa; yet our repeated
attempts to effect this by prohibitions, and by imposing duties which
might amount to a prohibition, have been hitherto defeated by his
majesty's negative: Thus preferring the immediate advantages of a few
African corsairs to the lasting interests of the American states, and to
the rights of human nature, deeply wounded by this infamous practice."
In 1775, Thomas Jefferson joined the Continental Congress as a
delegate from Virginia when he and others in Virginia began to rebel
against the Royal Governor of Virginia, Lord Dunmore. Trying to reassert British authority over the area, Dunmore issued a Proclamation in November 1775 that offered freedom to slaves who abandoned their Patriot masters and joined the British.
Dunmore's action led to a mass exodus of tens of thousands of forced
laborers from plantations across the South during the war years; some of
the people Jefferson held as slaves also took off as runaways.
The colonists opposed Dunmore's action as an attempt to incite a massive slave rebellion. In 1776, when Jefferson co-authored the Declaration of Independence,
he referred to the Lord Governor when he wrote, "He has excited
domestic insurrections among us," though the institution of slavery
itself was never mentioned by name at any point in the document. In the original draft of the Declaration, Jefferson inserted a clause condemning King George III
for forcing the slave trade onto the American colonies and inciting
enslaved African Americans to "rise in arms" against their masters:
He has waged cruel war against
human nature itself, violating its most sacred rights of life and
liberty in the persons of a distant people who never offended him,
captivating & carrying them into slavery in another hemisphere or to
incur miserable death in their transportation thither. This piratical
warfare, the opprobrium of infidel powers, is the warfare of the
Christian King of Great Britain. Determined to keep open a market where
Men should be bought & sold, he has prostituted his negative for
suppressing every legislative attempt to prohibit or restrain this
execrable commerce. And that this assemblage of horrors might want no
fact of distinguished die, he is now exciting those very people to rise
in arms among us, and to purchase that liberty of which he has deprived
them, by murdering the people on whom he has obtruded them: thus paying
off former crimes committed against the Liberties of one people, with
crimes which he urges them to commit against the lives of another.
— BlackPast, The Declaration of Independence and the Debate Over Slavery
The Continental Congress, however, due to Southern opposition, forced
Jefferson to delete the clause in the final draft of the Declaration. Jefferson did manage to make a general criticism against slavery by maintaining "all men are created equal."
Jefferson did not directly condemn domestic slavery as such in the
Declaration, as Jefferson himself was a slaveowner. According to
Finkelman, "The colonists, for the most part, had been willing and eager
purchasers of slaves."
Researcher William D. Richardson proposed that Thomas Jefferson's use
of "MEN" in capital letters would be a repudiation of those who may
believe that the Declaration was not including slaves with the word
"Mankind".
That same year, Jefferson submitted a draft for the new Virginia
Constitution containing the phrase "No person hereafter coming into this
country shall be held within the same in slavery under any pretext
whatever." His proposal was not adopted.
In 1778 with Jefferson's leadership and probably authorship, the
Virginia General Assembly banned importing people to be used as slaves
into Virginia. It was one of the first jurisdictions in the world to ban
the international slave trade, and all other states except South
Carolina eventually followed prior to the Congress banning the trade in
1807.
As governor of Virginia for two years during the Revolution,
Jefferson signed a bill to promote military enlistment by giving white
men land, "a healthy sound Negro ... or £60 in gold or silver." As was customary, he brought some of the household workers he held in slavery, including Mary Hemings,
to serve in the governor's mansion in Richmond. Facing a British
invasion in January 1781, Jefferson and the Assembly members fled the
capital and moved the government to Charlottesville, leaving the workers
enslaved by Jefferson behind. Hemings and other enslaved people were
taken by the British as prisoners of war; they were later released in
exchange for captured British soldiers. In 2009, the Daughters of the Revolution (DAR) honored Mary Hemings as a Patriot, making her female descendants eligible for membership in the heritage society.
In June 1781, the British arrived at Monticello. Jefferson had
escaped before their arrival and gone with his family to his plantation
of Poplar Forest to the southwest in Bedford County;
most of those he held as slaves stayed at Monticello to help protect
his valuables. The British did not loot or take prisoners there. By contrast, Lord Cornwallis and his troops occupied and looted another planation owned by Jefferson, Elkhill in Goochland County, Virginia,
northwest of Richmond. Of the 30 enslaved people they took as
prisoners, Jefferson later claimed that at least 27 had died of disease
in their camp.
While claiming since the 1770s to support gradual emancipation,
as a member of the Virginia General Assembly Jefferson declined to
support a law to ask that, saying the people were not ready. After the
United States gained independence, in 1782 the Virginia General Assembly
repealed the slave law of 1723 and made it easier for slaveholders to
manumit slaves. Unlike some of his planter contemporaries, such as Robert Carter III, who freed nearly 500 people held slaves in his lifetime, or George Washington,
who freed all the enslaved people he legally owned, in his will of
1799, Jefferson formally freed only two people during his life, in 1793
and 1794. Virginia did not require freed people to leave the state until 1806.
From 1782 to 1810, as numerous slaveholders freed enslaved people, the
proportion of free blacks in Virginia increased dramatically from less
than 1% to 7.2% of blacks.
Following the Revolution (1784–1800)
Some historians have claimed that, as a Representative to the Continental Congress, Thomas Jefferson wrote an amendment or bill that would abolish slavery.
But according to Finkelman, "he never did propose this plan" and
"Jefferson refused to propose either a gradual emancipation scheme or a
bill to allow individual masters to free their slaves."
He refused to add gradual emancipation as an amendment when others
asked him to; he said, "better that this should be kept back."
In 1785, Jefferson wrote to one of his colleagues that black people
were mentally inferior to white people, claiming the entire race was
incapable of producing a single poet.
On March 1, 1784, in defiance of southern slave society, Jefferson submitted to the Continental Congress the Report of a Plan of Government for the Western Territory.
"The provision would have prohibited slavery in *all* new states carved
out of the western territories ceded to the national government
established under the Articles of Confederation." Slavery would have been prohibited extensively in both the North and South territories, including what would become Alabama, Mississippi, and Tennessee. His Ordinance of 1784 would have prohibited slavery completely by 1800 in all territories, but was rejected by the Congress by one vote due to an absent representative from New Jersey.
On April 23, Congress accepted Jefferson's 1784 Ordinance, but removed
the clause prohibiting slavery in all the territories. Jefferson said
that southern representatives defeated his original proposal. Jefferson
was only able to obtain one southern delegate to vote for the
prohibition of slavery in all territories. The Library of Congress notes, "The Ordinance of 1784 marks the high point of Jefferson's opposition to slavery, which is more muted thereafter."
In 1786, Jefferson bitterly remarked "The voice of a single individual
of the state which was divided, or of one of those which were of the
negative, would have prevented this abominable crime from spreading
itself over the new country. Thus we see the fate of millions unborn
hanging on the tongue of one man, & heaven was silent in that awful
moment!" Jefferson's Ordinance of 1784 did influence the Ordinance of 1787, that prohibited slavery in the Northwest Territory.
It would also serve as inspiration and citation for future attempts to
restrict slavery's domestic expansion. In 1848, senator David Wilmot cited it while trying to build support for the Wilmot Proviso, which would have banned slavery in territory captured during the Mexican–American War. In 1860, Presidential candidate Abraham Lincoln cited it to make his case that banning slavery in the federal territories was constitutional.
But the effect of Jefferson's nearly accomplished plan to ban slavery
outright in any new state would have been a huge and likely fatal blow
to the institution.
In 1785, Jefferson published his first book, Notes on the State of Virginia.
In it, he argued that blacks were inferior to whites and this
inferiority could not be explained by their condition of slavery. He
also stated that these arguments were not certain (see section on this
book below). Jefferson stated emancipation and colonization away from
America would be the best policy on how to treat blacks and added a
warning about the potential for slave revolutions in the future: "I
tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just: that his justice
cannot sleep for ever: that considering numbers, nature and natural
means only, a revolution of the wheel of fortune, an exchange of
situation is among possible events: that it may become probable by
supernatural interference! The almighty has no attribute which can take
side with us in such a contest."
From the 1770s on, Jefferson wrote of supporting gradual
emancipation, based on slaves being educated, freed after 18 for women
and 21 for men (later he changed this to age 45, when their masters had a
return on investment), and transported for resettlement to Africa. All
of his life, he supported the concept of colonization of Africa by
American freedmen. The historian Peter S. Onuf suggested that, after
having children with his slave Sally Hemings, Jefferson may have
supported colonization because of concerns for his unacknowledged
"shadow family". In addition, Onuf asserts that Jefferson believed at this point that slavery was "equal to tyranny".
The historian David Brion Davis
stated that in the years after 1785 and Jefferson's return from Paris,
the most notable thing about his position on slavery was his "immense
silence".
Davis believed that, in addition to having internal conflicts about
slavery, Jefferson wanted to keep his personal situation private; for
this reason, he chose to back away from working to end or ameliorate
slavery.
As U.S. Secretary of State, Jefferson issued in 1795, with
President Washington's authorization, $40,000 in emergency relief and
1,000 weapons to French slave owners in Saint-Domingue (modern-day Haiti) in order to suppress a slave rebellion.
President Washington gave the slave owners in Saint Domingue (Haiti)
$400,000 as repayment for loans the French had granted to the Americans
during the American Revolutionary War.
On September 15, 1800, Virginia governor James Monroe sent a letter to Jefferson, informing him of a narrowly averted slave rebellion by Gabriel Prosser. Ten of the conspirators had already been executed, and Monroe asked Jefferson's advice on what to do with the remaining ones.
Jefferson sent a reply on September 20, urging Monroe to deport the
remaining rebels rather than execute them. Most notably, Jefferson's
letter implied that the rebels had some justification for their
rebellion in seeking freedom, stating "The other states & the world
at large will for ever condemn us if we indulge a principle of revenge,
or go one step beyond absolute necessity. They cannot lose sight of the
rights of the two parties, & the object of the unsuccessful one."
By the time Monroe received Jefferson's letter, twenty of the
conspirators had been executed. Seven more would be executed after
Monroe received the letter on September 22, including Prosser himself,
but an additional 50 defendants charged for the failed rebellion would
be acquitted, pardoned, or have their sentences commuted.
As President (1801–1809)
In 1800, Jefferson was elected as President of the United States over John Adams.
He won more electoral votes than Adams, aided by southern power. The
Constitution provided for the counting of slaves as three fifths of
their total population, to be added to a state's total population for
purposes of apportionment and the electoral college. States with large
slave populations, therefore, gained greater representation even though
the number of voting citizens was smaller than that of other states. It
was due only to this population advantage that Jefferson won the
election.
Moved slaves to White House
Jefferson brought slaves from Monticello to work at the White House. He brought Edith Hern Fossett
and Fanny Hern to Washington, D.C., in 1802 and they learned to cook
French cuisine at the President's House by Honoré Julien. Edith was 15
years old and Fanny was 18. Margaret Bayard Smith
remarked of the French fare, "The excellence and superior skill of his
[Jefferson's] French cook was acknowledged by all who frequented his
table, for never before had such dinners been given in the President's
House". Edith and Fanny were the only slaves from Monticello to regularly live in Washington. They did not receive a wage, but earned a two-dollar gratuity each month.
They worked in Washington for nearly seven years and Edith gave birth
to three children while at the President's House, James, Maria, and a
child who did not survive to adulthood. Fanny had one child there. Their
children were kept with them at the President's House.
After Toussaint Louverture had become governor general of Saint-Domingue following a slave revolt, in 1801 Jefferson supported French plans to take back the island. He agreed to loan France $300,000 "for relief of whites on the island." Jefferson wanted to alleviate the fears of southern slave owners, who feared a similar rebellion in their territory.
Prior to his election, Jefferson wrote of the revolution, "If something
is not done and soon, we shall be the murderers of our own children."
By 1802, when Jefferson learned that France was planning to
re-establish its empire in the western hemisphere, including taking the Louisiana territory and New Orleans from the Spanish, he declared the neutrality of the US in the Caribbean conflict.
While refusing credit or other assistance to the French, he allowed
contraband goods and arms to reach Haiti and, thus, indirectly supported
the Haitian Revolution. This was to further US interests in Louisiana.
That year and once the Haitians declared independence in 1804,
President Jefferson had to deal with strong hostility to the new nation
by his southern-dominated Congress. He shared planters' fears that the
success of Haiti would encourage similar slave rebellions and widespread
violence in the South. Historian Tim Matthewson noted that Jefferson
faced a Congress "hostile to Haiti", and that he "acquiesced in southern
policy, the embargo of trade and nonrecognition, the defense of slavery
internally and the denigration of Haiti abroad." Jefferson discouraged emigration by American free blacks to the new nation. European nations also refused to recognize Haiti when the new nation declared independence in 1804. In his short biography of Jefferson in 2005, Christopher Hitchens noted the president was "counterrevolutionary" in his treatment of Haiti and its revolution.
Jefferson expressed ambivalence about Haiti. During his
presidency, he thought sending free blacks and contentious slaves to
Haiti might be a solution to some of the United States' problems. He
hoped that "Haiti would eventually demonstrate the viability of black
self-government and the industriousness of African American work habits,
thereby justifying freeing and deporting the slaves" to that island. This was one of his solutions for separating the populations. In 1824, book peddler Samuel Whitcomb, Jr. visited Jefferson in Monticello, and they happened to talk about Haiti. This was on the eve of the greatest emigration of U.S. Blacks to the island-nation.
Jefferson told Whitcomb that he had never seen Blacks do well in
governing themselves, and thought they would not do it without the help
of Whites.
Virginia emancipation law modified
In 1806, with concern developing over the rise in the number of free black people, the Virginia General Assembly modified the 1782 slave law to discourage free black people from living in the state. It permitted re-enslavement of freedmen
who remained in the state for more than 12 months. This forced newly
freed black people to leave enslaved kin behind. As slaveholders had to
petition the legislature directly to gain permission for manumitted
freedmen to stay in the state, there was a decline in manumissions after this date.
Ended international slave trade
In 1808, Jefferson denounced the international slave trade and called
for a law to make it a crime. He told Congress in his 1806 annual
message, such a law was needed to "withdraw the citizens of the United
States from all further participation in those violations of human
rights ... which the morality, the reputation, and the best interests of
our country have long been eager to proscribe." Congress complied and
on March 2, 1807, Jefferson signed the Act Prohibiting Importation of Slaves into law; it took effect 1 January 1808 and made it a federal crime to import or export slaves from abroad.
By 1808, every state but South Carolina had followed Virginia's
lead from the 1780s in banning importation of slaves. By 1808, with the
growth of the domestic slave population enabling development of a large
internal slave trade, slaveholders did not mount much resistance to the
new law, presumably because the authority of Congress to enact such
legislation was expressly authorized by the Constitution,
and was fully anticipated during the Constitutional Convention in 1787.
The end of international trade also increased the monetary value of
existing slaves. Jefferson did not lead the campaign to prohibit the
importation of slaves. Historian John Chester Miller
rated Jefferson's two major presidential achievements as the Louisiana
Purchase and the abolition of the international slave trade.
Retirement (1810–1826)
In
1819, Jefferson strongly opposed a Missouri statehood application
amendment that banned domestic slave importation and freed slaves at the
age of 25 believing it would destroy or break up the union.
By 1820, Jefferson, objected to what he viewed as "Northern meddling"
with Southern slavery policy. On April 22, Jefferson criticized the Missouri Compromise
because it might lead to the breakup of the Union. Jefferson said
slavery was a complex issue and needed to be solved by the next
generation. Jefferson wrote that the Missouri Compromise was a "fire
bell in the night" and "the knell of the Union". Jefferson said that he
feared the Union would dissolve, stating that the "Missouri question
aroused and filled me with alarm." In regard to whether the Union would
remain for a long period of time Jefferson wrote, "I now doubt it much."
In 1823, in a letter to Supreme Court Justice William Johnson,
Jefferson wrote "this case is not dead, it only sleepeth. the Indian
chief said he did not go to war for every petty injury by itself; but
put it into his pouch, and when that was full, he then made war."
In 1798, Jefferson's friend from the Revolution, Tadeusz Kościuszko,
a Polish nobleman and revolutionary, visited the United States to
collect back pay from the government for his military service. He
entrusted his assets to Jefferson with a will directing him to spend the
American money and proceeds from his land in the U.S. to free and
educate slaves, including Jefferson's, and at no cost to Jefferson.
Kościuszko revised will states: "I hereby authorise my friend Thomas
Jefferson to employ the whole thereof in purchasing Negroes from among
his own or any others and giving them Liberty in my name." Kosciuszko
died in 1817, but Jefferson never carried out the terms of the will: At
age 77, he pleaded an inability to act as executor due to his advanced
age
and the numerous legal complexities of the bequest—the will was
contested by several family members and was tied up in the courts for
years, long after Jefferson's death. Jefferson recommended his friend John Hartwell Cocke, who also opposed slavery, as executor, but Cocke likewise declined to execute the bequest.
In 1852 the U.S. Supreme Court awarded the estate, by then worth
$50,000, to Kościuszko's heirs in Poland, having ruled that the will was
invalid.
Jefferson continued to struggle with debt after serving as
president. He used some of his hundreds of slaves as collateral to his
creditors. This debt was due to his lavish lifestyle, long construction
and changes to Monticello, imported goods, art, and lifelong issues with
debt, from inheriting the debt of father-in-law John Wayles to signing
two 10,000 notes late in life to assist dear friend Wilson Cary
Nicholas, which proved to be his coup de grace. Yet he was merely one of
numerous others who suffered crippling debt around 1820. He also
incurred debt in helping support his only surviving daughter, Martha Jefferson Randolph, and her large family. She had separated from her husband, who had become abusive from alcoholism and mental illness (according to different sources), and brought her family to live at Monticello.
In August 1814, the planter Edward Coles
and Jefferson corresponded about Coles' ideas on emancipation.
Jefferson urged Coles not to free his slaves, but the younger man took
all his slaves to the Illinois and freed them, providing them with land
for farms.
In April 1820, Jefferson wrote to John Holmes giving his thoughts on the Missouri compromise. Concerning slavery, he said:
there is not a man on earth who would sacrifice more than I would, to relieve us from this heavy reproach [slavery] ... we
have the wolf by the ear, and we can neither hold him, nor safely let
him go. Justice is in one scale, and self-preservation in the other.
Jefferson may have borrowed from Suetonius,
a Roman biographer, the phrase "wolf by the ears", as he held a book of
his works. Jefferson characterized slavery as a dangerous animal (the
wolf) that could not be contained or freed. He believed that attempts to
end slavery would lead to violence.
Jefferson concluded the letter lamenting "I regret that I am now to
die in the belief that the useless sacrifice of themselves, by the
generation of '76. to acquire self government and happiness to their
country, is to be thrown away by the unwise and unworthy passions of
their sons, and that my only consolation is to be that I live not to
weep over it." Following the Missouri Compromise, Jefferson largely
withdrew from politics and public life, writing "with one foot in the
grave, I have no right to meddle with these things."
In 1821, Jefferson wrote in his autobiography that he felt
slavery would inevitably come to an end, though he also felt there was
no hope for racial equality in America, stating "Nothing is more
certainly written in the book of fate than that these people [negros]
are to be free. Nor is it less certain that the two races, equally free,
cannot live in the same government. Nature, habit, opinion has drawn
indelible lines of distinction between them. It is still in our power
to direct the process of emancipation, and deportation, peaceably, and
in such slow degrees, as that the evil will wear off insensibly; and
their places be, pari passu, filled up by free white laborers. If, on
the contrary, it is left to force itself on, human nature must shudder
at the prospect held up."
The U.S. Congress finally implemented colonization of freed
African American slaves by passing the Slave Trade Act of 1819 signed
into law by President James Monroe.
The law authorized funding to colonize the coast of Africa with freed
African American slaves. In 1824, Jefferson proposed an overall
emancipation plan that would free slaves born after a certain date. Jefferson proposed that African-American children born in America be bought by the federal government for $12.50 and that these slaves be sent to Santo Domingo.
Jefferson admitted that his plan would be liberal and may even be
unconstitutional, but he suggested a constitutional amendment to allow
congress to buy slaves. He also realized that separating children from
slaves would have a humanitarian cost. Jefferson believed that his
overall plan was worth implementing and that setting over a million
slaves free was worth the financial and emotional costs.
Posthumous (1827–1830)
At his death, Jefferson was greatly in debt, in part due to his continued construction program.
The debts encumbered his estate, and his family sold 130 slaves,
virtually all the members of every slave family, from Monticello to pay
his creditors.
Slave families who had been well established and stable for decades
were sometimes split up. Most of the sold slaves either remained in
Virginia or were relocated to Ohio.
Jefferson freed five slaves in his will, all males of the Hemings
family. Those were his two natural sons, and Sally's younger
half-brother John Hemings, and her nephews Joseph (Joe) Fossett and Burwell Colbert. He gave Burwell Colbert, who had served as his butler and valet, $300 for purchasing supplies used in the trade of "painter and glazier".
He gave John Hemings and Joe Fossett each an acre on his land so they
could build homes for their families. His will included a petition to
the state legislature to allow the freedmen to remain in Virginia to be
with their families, who remained enslaved under Jefferson's heirs.
Jefferson freed Joseph Fossett in his will, but Fossett's wife (Edith Hern Fossett)
and their eight children were sold at auction. Fossett was able to get
enough money to buy the freedom of his wife and two youngest children.
The remainder of their ten children were sold to different slaveholders.
The Fossetts worked for 23 years to purchase the freedom of their
remaining children.
Born and reared as free, not
knowing that I was a slave, then suddenly, at the death of Jefferson,
put upon an auction block and sold to strangers.
In 1827, the auction of 130 slaves took place at Monticello. The sale
lasted for five days despite the cold weather. The slaves brought
prices over 70% of their appraised value. Within three years, all of the
"black" families at Monticello had been sold and dispersed.
For two centuries the claim that Thomas Jefferson fathered children by his slave, Sally Hemings, has been a matter of discussion and disagreement. In 1802, the journalist James T. Callender, after being denied a position as postmaster by Jefferson, published allegations that Jefferson had taken Hemings as a concubine and had fathered several children with her. John Wayles
held her as a slave, and was also her father, as well as the father of
Jefferson's wife Martha. Sally was three-quarters white and strikingly
similar in looks and voice to Jefferson's late wife.
In 1998, in order to establish the male DNA line, a panel of researchers conducted a Y-DNA study of living descendants of Jefferson's uncle, Field, and of a descendant of Sally's son, Eston Hemings. The results, published in the journal Nature, showed a Y-DNA match with the male Jefferson line. In 2000, the Thomas Jefferson Foundation
(TJF) assembled a team of historians whose report concluded that,
together with the DNA and historic evidence, there was a high
probability that Jefferson was the father of Eston and likely of all
Hemings' children. W. M. Wallenborn, who worked on the Monticello
report, disagreed, claiming the committee had already made up their
minds before evaluating the evidence, was a "rush to judgement", and
that the claims of Jefferson's paternity were unsubstantiated and
politically driven.
Since the DNA tests were made public, most biographers and
historians have concluded that the widower Jefferson had a long-term
relationship with Hemings, and fathered at least some and probably all of her children.
A minority of scholars, including a team of professors associated with
the Thomas Jefferson Heritage Society, maintain that the evidence is
insufficient to conclude Thomas Jefferson's paternity, and note the
possibility that other Jeffersons, including Thomas's brother Randolph Jefferson and his five sons, who were alleged to have raped enslaved women, could have fathered Hemings' children.
Jefferson allowed two of Sally's children to leave Monticello without
formal manumission when they came of age; five other slaves, including
the two remaining sons of Sally, were freed by his will upon his death.
Although not legally freed, Sally left Monticello with her sons. They
were counted as free whites in the 1830 census. Madison Hemings, in an article titled, "Life Among the Lowly", in small Ohio newspaper called Pike County Republican, claimed that Jefferson was his father.
Monticello slave life
Jefferson ran every facet of the four Monticello farms and left
specific instructions to his overseers when away or traveling. Slaves in
the mansion, mill, and nailery reported to one general overseer
appointed by Jefferson, and he hired many overseers, some of whom were
considered cruel at the time. Jefferson made meticulous periodical
records on his slaves, plants and animals, and weather.Jefferson, in his Farm Book
journal, visually described in detail both the quality and quantity of
purchased slave clothing and the names of all slaves who received the
clothing.
In a letter written in 1811, Jefferson described his stress and
apprehension in regard to difficulties in what he felt was his "duty" to
procure specific desirable blankets for "those poor creatures" – his
slaves.
Some historians have noted that Jefferson maintained many slave
families together on his plantations; historian Bruce Fehn says this was
consistent with other slave owners at the time. There were often more
than one generation of family at the plantation and families were
stable. Jefferson and other slaveholders shifted the "cost of
reproducing the workforce to the workers' themselves". He could increase
the value of his property without having to buy additional slaves.
He tried to reduce infant mortality, and wrote, "[A] woman who brings a
child every two years is more profitable than the best man on the
farm."
Jefferson encouraged the enslaved at Monticello to "marry". (The
enslaved could not marry legally in Virginia.) He would occasionally buy
and sell slaves to keep families together. In 1815, he said that his
slaves were "worth a great deal more" due to their marriages.
"Married" slaves, however, had no legal protection or recognition under
the law; masters could separate slave "husbands" and "wives" at will.
Thomas Jefferson recorded his strategy for employing children in
his Farm Book. Until the age of 10, children served as nurses. When the
plantation grew tobacco, children were at a good height to remove and
kill tobacco worms from the crops.
Once he began growing wheat, fewer people were needed to maintain the
crops, so Jefferson established manual trades. He stated that children
"go into the ground or learn trades." When girls were 16, they began
spinning and weaving textiles. Boys made nails from age 10 to 16. In
1794, Jefferson had a dozen boys working at the nailery.
The nail factory was on Mulberry Row. After it opened in 1794, for the
first three years, Jefferson recorded the productivity of each child. He
selected those who were most productive to be trained as artisans:
blacksmiths, carpenters, and coopers. Those who performed the worst were
assigned as field laborers. While working at the nailery, boys received more food and may have received new clothes if they did a good job.
James Hubbard was an enslaved worker in the nailery who ran away
on two occasions. The first time Jefferson did not have him whipped, but
on the second Jefferson reportedly ordered him severely flogged.
Hubbard was likely sold after spending time in jail. Stanton says
children suffered physical violence. When a 17-year-old James was sick,
one overseer reportedly whipped him "three times in one day". Violence
was commonplace on plantations, including Jefferson's. Henry Wiencek cited within a Smithsonian Magazine
article several reports of Jefferson ordering the whipping or selling
of slaves as punishments for extreme misbehavior or escape.
The Thomas Jefferson Foundation quotes Jefferson's instructions
to his overseers not to whip his slaves, but noted that they often
ignored his wishes during his frequent absences from home. According to Stanton, no reliable document portrays Jefferson as directly using physical correction. During Jefferson's time, some other slaveholders also disagreed with the practices of flogging and jailing slaves.
Slaves had a variety of tasks: Davy Bowles was the carriage driver, including trips to take Jefferson to and from Washington D.C. or the Virginia capital. Betty Hemings,
a mixed-race slave inherited from his father-in-law with her family,
was the matriarch and head of the house slaves at Monticello, who were
allowed limited freedom when Jefferson was away. Four of her daughters
served as house slaves: Betty Brown; Nance, Critta and Sally Hemings.
The latter two were half-sisters to Jefferson's wife, and Sally bore him
6 children. Another house slave was Ursula Granger,
whom he had purchased separately. The general maintenance of the
mansion was under the care of Hemings family members as well: the master
carpenter was Betty's son John Hemings. His nephews Joe Fossett, as blacksmith, and Burwell Colbert, as Jefferson's butler
and painter, also had important roles. Wormley Hughes, a grandson of
Betty Hemings and gardener, was given informal freedom after Jefferson's
death. Memoirs of life at Monticello include those of Isaac Jefferson (published, 1843), Madison Hemings, and Israel Jefferson (both published, 1873). Isaac was an enslaved blacksmith who worked on Jefferson's plantation.
The last surviving recorded interview of a former slave was with Fountain Hughes, then 101, in Baltimore, Maryland in 1949. It is available online at the Library of Congress and the World Digital Library.
Born in Charlottesville, Fountain was a descendant of Wormley Hughes
and Ursula Granger; his grandparents were among the house slaves owned
by Jefferson at Monticello.
In 1780, Jefferson began answering questions on the colonies asked by
French minister François de Marboias. He worked on what became a book
for five years, having it printed in France while he was there as U.S.
minister in 1785. The book covered subjects such as mountains, religion, climate, slavery, and race.
Views on race
In Query XIV of his Notes, Jefferson analyses the nature of
Blacks. He stated that Blacks lacked forethought, intelligence,
tenderness, grief, imagination, and beauty; that they had poor taste,
smelled bad, and were incapable of producing artistry or poetry; but
conceded that they were the moral equals of all others. Jefferson believed that the bonds of love for blacks were weaker than those for whites.
Jefferson never settled on whether differences were natural or
nurtural, but he stated unquestionably that his views ought to be taken cum grano salis;
The
opinion, that they are inferior in the faculties of reason and
imagination, must be hazarded with great diffidence. To justify a
general conclusion, requires many observations, even where the subject
may be submitted to the Anatomical knife, to Optical glasses, to
analysis by fire or by solvents. How much more then where it is a
faculty, not a substance, we are examining; where it eludes the research
of all the senses; where the conditions of its existence are various
and variously combined; where the effects of those which are present or
absent bid defiance to calculation; let me add too, as a circumstance of
great tenderness, where our conclusion would degrade a whole race of
men from the rank in the scale of beings which their Creator may perhaps
have given them. To our reproach it must be said, that though for a
century and a half we have had under our eyes the races of black and of
red men, they have never yet been viewed by us as subjects of natural
history. I advance it, therefore, as a suspicion only, that the blacks,
whether originally a distinct race, or made distinct by time and
circumstances, are inferior to the whites in the endowments both of body
and mind. It is not against experience to suppose that different
species of the same genus, or varieties of the same species, may possess
different qualifications.
In 1808, French abolitionist Henri Grégoire sent Jefferson a copy of his book, An Enquiry Concerning the Intellectual and Moral Faculties and Literature of Negroes. In the book, Grégoire responded to and challenged Jefferson's arguments of Black inferiority in Notes on the State of Virginia by citing the advanced civilizations Africans had developed as evidence of their intellectual competence.Jefferson replied to Grégoire that the rights of African Americans should not depend on intelligence and that Black people had "respectable intelligence". Jefferson wrote of Black people that,
but whatever be their degree of talent it is no
measure of their rights. Because Sir Isaac Newton was superior to others
in understanding, he was not therefore lord of the person or property
of others. On this subject they are gaining daily in the opinions of
nations, and hopeful advances are making towards their re-establishment
on an equal footing with the other colors of the human family.
Dumas Malone, Jefferson's biographer, explained Jefferson's contemporary views on race as expressed in Notes
were the "tentative judgements of a kindly and scientifically minded
man". Merrill Peterson, another Jefferson biographer, claimed
Jefferson's racial bias against African Americans was "a product of
frivolous and tortuous reasoning ... and bewildering confusion of
principles." Peterson called Jefferson's racial views on African
Americans "folk belief".
In a reply (in The Papers of Thomas Jefferson, vol. 10, 22
June-31 December 1786, ed. Julian P. Boyd p. 20-29) to Jean Nicolas
DeMeunier's inquiries concerning the Paris publication of his Notes On The State of Virginia
(1785) Jefferson described the Southern slave plantation economy as "a
species of property annexed to certain mercantile houses in London":
"Virginia certainly owed two millions sterling to Great Britain at the
conclusion of the [Revolutionary] war. ... This is to be ascribed to
peculiarities in the tobacco trade. The advantages [profits] made by
the British merchants on the tobaccoes consigned to them were so
enormous that they spared no means of increasing those consignments. A
powerful engine for this purpose was the giving good prices and credit
to the planter, till they got him more immersed in debt than he could
pay without selling his lands or slaves. They then reduced the prices
given for his tobacco so that let his shipments be ever so great, and
his demand of necessaries ever so economical, they never permitted him
to clear off his debt. These debts had become hereditary from father to
son for many generations, so that the planters were a species of
property annexed to certain mercantile houses in London." After the
Revolution this subjection of the Southern plantation economy to
absentee finance, commodities brokers, import-export merchants and
wholesalers continued, with the center of finance and trade shifting
from London to Manhattan where, up until the Civil War, banks continued
to write mortgages with slaves as collateral, and foreclose on
plantations in default and operate them in their investors' interests,
as discussed by Philip S. Foner.
Support for colonization plan
In his Notes
Jefferson wrote of a plan he supported in 1779 in the Virginia
legislature that would end slavery through the colonization of freed
slaves.
This plan was widely popular among the French people in 1785 who lauded
Jefferson as a philosopher. According to Jefferson, this plan required
enslaved adults to continue in slavery but their children would be taken
from them and trained to have a skill in the arts or sciences. These
skilled women at age 18 and men at 21 would be emancipated, given arms
and supplies, and sent to colonize a foreign land. Jefferson believed that colonization was the practical alternative, while freed blacks living in a white American society would lead to a race war:
It will probably be asked, Why not retain and incorporate the blacks
into the state, and thus save the expense of supplying, by importation
of white settlers, the vacancies they will leave? Deep rooted prejudices
entertained by the whites; ten thousand recollections, by the blacks,
of the injuries they have sustained; new provocations; the real
distinctions which nature has made; and many other circumstances, will
divide us into parties, and produce convulsions which will probably
never end but in the extermination of the one or the other race.
Criticism for effects of slavery
In Notes Jefferson criticized the effects slavery had on both white and African-American slave society. He writes:
There
must doubtless be an unhappy influence on the manners of our people
produced by the existence of slavery among us. The whole commerce
between master and slave is a perpetual exercise of the most boisterous
passions, the most unremitting despotism on the one part, and degrading
submissions on the other. Our children see this, and learn to imitate
it; for man is an imitative animal. This quality is the germ of all
education in him. From his cradle to his grave he is learning to do what
he sees others do. If a parent could find no motive either in his
philanthropy or his self-love, for restraining the intemperance of
passion towards his slave, it should always be a sufficient one that his
child is present. But generally it is not sufficient. The parent
storms, the child looks on, catches the lineaments of wrath, puts on the
same airs in the circle of smaller slaves, gives a loose to his worst
of passions, and thus nursed, educated, and daily exercised in tyranny,
cannot but be stamped by it with odious peculiarities. The man must be a
prodigy who can retain his manners and morals undepraved by such
circumstances. And with what execration should the statesman be loaded,
who permitting one half the citizens thus to trample on the rights of
the other, transforms those into despots, and these into enemies,
destroys the morals of the one part, and the amor patriae of the other.
Evaluations by historians
According to James W. Loewen,
Jefferson's character "wrestled with slavery, even though in the end he
lost." Loewen says that understanding Jefferson's relationship with
slavery is significant in understanding current American social
problems.
Important 20th-century Jefferson biographers including Merrill Peterson
support the view that Jefferson was strongly opposed to slavery;
Peterson said that Jefferson's ownership of slaves "all his adult life
has placed him at odds with his moral and political principles. Yet
there can be no question of his genuine hatred of slavery or, indeed, of the efforts he made to curb and eliminate it." Peter Onuf stated that Jefferson was well known for his "opposition to slavery, most famously expressed in his ... Notes on the State of Virginia."
Onuf, and his collaborator Ari Helo, inferred from Jefferson's words
and actions that he was against the cohabitation of free blacks and
whites.
This, they argued, is what made immediate emancipation so problematic
in Jefferson's mind. As Onuf and Helo explained, Jefferson opposed the
mixing of the races not because of his belief that blacks were inferior
(although he did provisionally believe this) but because he feared that
instantly freeing the slaves in white territory would trigger "genocidal
violence". He could not imagine the blacks living in harmony with their
former oppressors. Jefferson was sure that the two races would be in
constant conflict. Onuf and Helo asserted that Jefferson was,
consequently, a proponent of freeing the Africans through "expulsion",
which he thought would have ensured the safety of both the whites and
blacks. Biographer John Ferling said that Thomas Jefferson was "zealously committed to slavery's abolition".
Starting in the early 1960s, some academics began to challenge
Jefferson's position as an anti-slavery advocate having reevaluated both
his actions and his words. Paul Finkelman wrote in 1994 that earlier scholars, particularly Peterson, Dumas Malone, and Willard Randall,
engaged in "exaggeration or misrepresentation" to advance their
argument of Jefferson's anti-slavery position, saying "they ignore
contrary evidence" and "paint a false picture" to protect Jefferson's
image on slavery.
In 2012, author Henry Wiencek, highly critical of Jefferson, concluded that Jefferson tried to protect his legacy as a Founding Father by hiding slavery from visitors at Monticello and through his writings to abolitionists.
According to Wiencek's view Jefferson made a new frontage road to his
Monticello estate to hide the overseers and slaves who worked the
agriculture fields. Wiencek believed that Jefferson's "soft answers" to
abolitionists were to make himself appear opposed to slavery.
Wiencek stated that Jefferson held enormous political power but "did
nothing to hasten slavery's end during his terms as a diplomat,
secretary of state, vice president, and twice-elected president or after
his presidency."
According to Greg Warnusz, Jefferson held typical 19th-century
beliefs that blacks were inferior to whites in terms of "potential for
citizenship", and he wanted them recolonized to independent Liberia and
other colonies. His views of a democratic society were based on a
homogeneity of white working men. He claimed to be interested in helping
both races in his proposal. He proposed gradually freeing slaves after
the age of 45 (when they would have repaid their owner's investment)
and resettling them in Africa.
(This proposal did not acknowledge how difficult it would be for
freedmen to be settled in another country and environment after age 45.)
Jefferson's plan envisioned a whites-only society without any blacks.
Concerning Jefferson and race, author Annette Gordon-Reed stated the following:
Of all the Founding Fathers, it was Thomas Jefferson for
whom the issue of race loomed largest. In the roles of slaveholder,
public official and family man, the relationship between blacks and
whites was something he thought about, wrote about and grappled with
from his cradle to his grave.
Paul Finkelman claims that Jefferson believed that Blacks lacked basic human emotions.
According to historian Jeremy J. Tewell, although Jefferson's
name had been associated with the anti-slavery cause during the early
1770s in the Virginia legislature, Jefferson viewed slavery as a
"Southern way of life", similar to mainstream Greek and antiquity
societies. In agreement with the Southern slave society, Tewell says
Jefferson believed that slavery served to protect blacks, whom he viewed
as inferior or incapable of taking care of themselves.
According to Joyce Appleby, Jefferson had opportunities to
disassociate himself from slavery. In 1782, after the American
Revolution, Virginia passed a law making manumission
by the slave owner legal and more easily accomplished, and the
manumission rate rose across the Upper South in other states as well.
Northern states passed various emancipation plans. Jefferson's actions
did not keep up with those of the antislavery advocates.
On September 15, 1793, Jefferson agreed in writing to free James
Hemings, his mixed-race slave who had served him as chef since their
time in Paris, after the slave had trained his younger brother Peter as a
replacement chef. Jefferson finally freed James Hemings in February
1796. According to one historian, Jefferson's manumission was not
generous; he said the document "undermines any notion of benevolence." With freedom, Hemings worked in Philadelphia and traveled to France.
In contrast, a sufficient number of other slaveholders in
Virginia freed slaves in the first two decades after the Revolution so
that the proportion of free blacks in Virginia compared to the total
black population rose from less than 1% in 1790 to 7.2% in 1810.