Talk:Frederick Douglass vs Thomas Jefferson/@comment-4328703-20160530201413/@comment-4328703-20160531190844

@Flats

I didn't necessarily mean that the purpose of the battle was to make me feel bad for being white, I'm just saying that it came across with the same nuances that the modern day movements have (movements which do guilt white people). I was just comparing the battle to the arguments that those movements make. I think a better phrasing I should have written would be, "I felt like the battle had the same attitude in which those who guilt white people have". In no way saying that was the intention, mostly just how it came across as.

As for accusatory comments toward Smoove, I wasn't aware that Smoove was not involved in the writing process. I just know that historically, ERB has made several references to slavery (Washington v Wallace, Caesar v Zulu) and the way in which it was delivered in this battle felt very out of character. If Smoove was involved in the writing process, it would be valid to suggest that this outside entity could have influenced them to act out of character.

Also, yes, slavery existed and it would be absurd to deny that - but that's my case. The entire battle, Douglass simply seemed to be trying to prove that slavery existed. That's it. He delivered line after line about how black people were enslaved and after a while I got tired of it. Then Jefferson responds by saying "yes, it happened, I'm sorry" and then Douglass then continued to go on about slavery- which was a point already established. I think a lot of the problem had to do with the inclusion of Douglass whose entire life revolved around slavery which didn't give way for much more content. Jefferson on the other hand has a RICH history, doing a variety of things. He is absolutely a Renaissance Man in every sense of the phrase and it irks me a bit how they wasted him to make his character all about slavery, which it really isn't.

Sorry it was long winded, just wanted to clear up a few of my statements.