• Nomorereddit@lemmy.todayEnglish
    5·
    21 days ago

    He also had slaves, and when in the free state of palennsylvania he rotated his slaves out after 90 days )back to his plantation so they didn’t have any claims to freedom under pa anti-slavery laws

    Edit: words,grammar, punctuation and your mom

    • astropenguin5@lemmy.worldEnglish
      7·
      20 days ago

      Tbf it wasn’t about whether washington was a food person or not, just that he had a better understanding of military readiness and science

      And I don’t think owning slaves or doing that particularly affects that.

      • Nomorereddit@lemmy.todayEnglish
        2·
        20 days ago

        Great point, but I’ll suggest we consider that his slave owning experience may have enhanced his military governance. Why? Because roughly 5,000 to 8,000 Black soldiers served in the Continental Army because George Washington ordered policies that allowed Black men who signed up, or who were signed up, to be freed.

        So yes I concede Washington had military readiness down. I’ll add that his slave owning background intersected with decisions that allowed for Black men’s lives to be sold one more time, now with the promise that this would be the last time.

        Those who benefitted from the system of slavery, even indirectly, are the ones I tend to question more critically.

  • dipcart@lemmy.worldEnglish
    2·
    19 days ago

    Its unbelievable how many times Pete has used that phrase. “It weakens our war fighting capabilities”. First of all, how do vaccines do that? If someone who doesn’t ‘believe’ in vaccines isn’t willing to sacrifice themselves to get a shot, will they be willing to sacrifice themselves to get shot?

    Also… Smallpox blankets were very effective for disrupting the “war fighting capabilities” of Indigenous people.