Speaking to schoolchildren, South Bend mayor Pete Buttigieg tried to ensure that they knew two things: that the Founders of the United States who wrote the Constitution were ignorant about slavery being a bad thing, and that they also did not respect civil rights, the implication being that only the enlightened Americans of today have a real grasp of what is right and true.
Buttigieg stated: “Similarly the amendment process; they were wise enough to realize that they didn’t have all the answers, and that some things would change. A good example of this is something like slavery, or civil rights. It’s an embarrassing thing to admit, but the people who wrote the Constitution did not understand that slavery was a bad thing. They did not respect civil rights, and yet they created a framework so that as the generations came to understand that that was important, they could write that into the Constitution too and ensure true equal protection for all.”
"The people who wrote the Constitution did not understand that slavery was a bad thing."
– @PeteButtigieg pic.twitter.com/rM7Njnm8pU
— Washington Examiner (@dcexaminer) December 30, 2019
Historian and columnist Jay Cost, who is the author of author of “The Price of Greatness: James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and the Creation of American Oligarchy,” ripped Buttigieg, starting by tweeting, “The ignorance is astounding.”
The ignorance is astounding. https://t.co/FX5Kt9aNvg
— 𝐉𝐚𝐲 𝐂𝐨𝐬𝐭 (@JayCostTWS) December 30, 2019
Cost continued, “The guy who literally wrote the text of the Constitution, Gouverneur Morris, gave an amazing series of speeches in Philadelphia denouncing slavery.”
The guy who literally wrote the text of the Constitution, Gouverneur Morris, gave an amazing series of speeches in Philadelphia denouncing slavery.
— 𝐉𝐚𝐲 𝐂𝐨𝐬𝐭 (@JayCostTWS) December 30, 2019
Sean Trende at Real Clear Politics tweeted, “A MAJOR PLOTLINE OF THAT MUSICAL THAT EVERYONE FELL OVER THEMSELVES ABOUT THE LAST FOUR YEARS WAS THAT THE PROTAGONIST, THE PRIMARY ANTAGONIST, AND THEIR FRIENDS WERE ALL EARLY ABOLITIONISTS.”
A MAJOR PLOTLINE OF THAT MUSICAL THAT EVERYONE FELL OVER THEMSELVES ABOUT THE LAST FOUR YEARS WAS THAT THE PROTAGONIST, THE PRIMARY ANTAGONIST, AND THEIR FRIENDS WERE ALL EARLY ABOLITIONISTS
— Sean T at RCP (@SeanTrende) December 30, 2019
To buttress his argument, Cost quoted the Madison debates from August 8, 1787, in which the notes stated:
Mr. Govr. MORRIS moved to insert “free” before the word inhabitants. Much he said would depend on this point. He never would concur in upholding domestic slavery. It was a nefarious institution. It was the curse of heaven on the States where it prevailed. Compare the free regions of the Middle States, where a rich & noble cultivation marks the prosperity & happiness of the people, with the misery & poverty which overspread the barren wastes of Va. Maryd. & the other States having slaves. Travel thro’ ye. whole Continent & you behold the prospect continually varying with the appearance & disappearance of slavery. The moment you leave ye. E. Sts. & enter N. York, the effects of the institution become visible, passing thro’ the Jerseys & entering Pa. every criterion of superior improvement witnesses the change. Proceed south wdly & every step you take thro’ ye. great region of slaves presents a desert increasing, with ye. increasing proportion of these wretched beings.
Upon what principle is it that the slaves shall be computed in the representation? Are they men? Then make them Citizens and let them vote. Are they property? Why then is no other property included? The Houses in this city [Philada.] are worth more than all the wretched slaves which cover the rice swamps of South Carolina. The admission of slaves into the Representation when fairly explained comes to this: that the inhabitant of Georgia and S. C. who goes to the Coast of Africa, and in defiance of the most sacred laws of humanity tears away his fellow creatures from their dearest connections & damns them to the most cruel bondages, shall have more votes in a Govt. instituted for protection of the rights of mankind, than the Citizen of Pa. or N. Jersey who views with a laudable horror, so nefarious a practice.