Nat Turner rebellion

[JRR883]

In the Nat Turner rebellion, the oppressed rose up against the oppressors. However, he and his comrades killed only 14 men, but 18 women and and 25 children. This was to leave nobody to lead the crackers to them and the freed slaves. Was this a necessary step, or an otherwise legitimate rebellion tainted by genocidal habits?

[manic expression]

It is ludicrous to expect people who are held as property to have any respect for the people who treat them as property. Don't expect slaves to have mercy for slave-holders.

Nat Turner's rebellion, the Stono Rebellion, the Vesey uprising and all slave revolts cannot be seriously criticized. At all.

[bcbm]

Boo hoo. Kill 'em all.

[JKP]

Just like the revolutionaries in 1789, 1917, and 1936 (and more) discovered, killing your oppressors is a liberating act.


"I wanted nothing and don't want anything to do with order, rank orders and commands. I am as I am, a peasant who learned to read in prison, who experienced pain and death closeby, who was an Anarchist without knowing it, and today, now that I know, I am even more Anarchist than yesterday, when I killed to be free" from Nosotros -- Anarchist daily -- March 1937

[Luís Henrique]

Originally posted by [email protected] 09, 2007 03:33 am
Just like the revolutionaries in 1789, 1917, and 1936 (and more) discovered, killing your oppressors is a liberating act.
No, it is not "liberating" at all.

But, to slaves in flight, it is the rational thing to do.

Luís Henrique

[RedAnarchist]

I looked at the list of slave rebellions in the us that is on Wikipedia, and you can see that there was resistance to slavery for hundreds of years. Nat Turner, like all other rebellious slaves during that era, should not be treated as a murderer, but as a human being angry at injustice being done to him and millions of other Africans. Slavery is a most reactionary concept and slaves should not be treated as criminals for attempting to free themselves.

[JKP]

Originally posted by Luís Henrique+February 09, 2007 03:54 am--> (Luís Henrique @ February 09, 2007 03:54 am)
[email protected] 09, 2007 03:33 am
Just like the revolutionaries in 1789, 1917, and 1936 (and more) discovered, killing your oppressors is a liberating act.
No, it is not "liberating" at all.

Luís Henrique [/b]
How the fuck is throwing off the shackles of oppression not "liberating" for you?

[Luís Henrique]

Originally posted by [email protected] 09, 2007 10:55 pm
How the fuck is throwing off the shackles of oppression not "liberating" for you?
Killing is never a "liberating" experience; this borders on nietzschean "will of power" ideology.

Killing children is hardly "killing your oppressors", too.

However, it is not likes slaves in flight have many options. So it should be analysed in this particular context, not as a generic act of killing.

And I don't know what sexual relations have to do with this issue, at all.

Luís Henrique

[Invader Zim]

Nat Turners rebellion, as a concept can be justified as it was that rebellion and others like it - especially the revolution in Haiti, which forced abolition and promoted the cause of emancipation. The philanthropists may have been convinsing, but not as convinsing as the threat of a massive rebellion, death and carnage.

The actual actions of Turner and the other rebels are however ethically questionable.

[WP_Joel]

Quite simply.... "their morals and ours"

[Janus]

Thread on Nat (http://www.revleft.com/index.php?showtopic=41109&hl=nat+turner)

Similar opinions thread but on John Brown (http://www.revleft.com/index.php?showtopic=60731&hl=nat+turner)

Nat Turner and his group were responsible for a meager 57 deaths. That figure pales in comparison to the number of deaths directly and indirectly caused by slavery. So, do you blame the "monster" or the institution that created and forced such a monster to act?

[Spirit of Spartacus]

Originally posted by manic [email protected] 09, 2007 12:45 am
It is ludicrous to expect people who are held as property to have any respect for the people who treat them as property. Don't expect slaves to have mercy for slave-holders.

Nat Turner's rebellion, the Stono Rebellion, the Vesey uprising and all slave revolts cannot be seriously criticized. At all.
Correct. Fanon, anyone?

[Jesus Christ!]

Originally posted by manic [email protected] 09, 2007 12:45 am
It is ludicrous to expect people who are held as property to have any respect for the people who treat them as property. Don't expect slaves to have mercy for slave-holders.

Nat Turner's rebellion, the Stono Rebellion, the Vesey uprising and all slave revolts cannot be seriously criticized. At all.
Yea seriously those 25 children definitely had it coming.

[Umoja]

I'm suprised that people who should have recieved a Western education (say what you want about brainwashing, and capitalist education) can't differentiate between necessity and morality.

Given the situation, what Nat Turner did can be understood, but he shouldn't be viewed as a moral hero. To accept his actions as premissable, would be to say anyone with opinions we view as caustic to the good of society should be killed. I don't know where we can draw that line, and as such I don't even think we should attempt to draw such a correspondence.

[cb9's_unity]

In all honesty Nat Turner was a nut who believed god sent him on some holy mission. He was also unnecesarily violent, in fact in he personally told the story that during his rebellion he had attacked a slave-holding family of five (or around 5). Him and his companions killed the parents, the two eldest children and then went on there way. After going a considerable distance they realized they had forgotten about the families infant so they went back to the house and slaughtered the innocent infant child.

So really i would have no problem with Nat Turner if it wasn't for his obsesive attitude towards killing children. Even the god thing doesn't bother me that much and I actually support the actions of John Brown, another religous 'god told me to do it' nut, who killed five 5 adult pro-slavery advocates with a broadsword to start off Bleading Kansas.

But anyways the worst part about the Nat Turner rebellion is it actually made conditions for slaves considerably worse. Turner blindly followed some halucination and a lot of innocent free people and slaves paid for it.

[manic expression]

Originally posted by Jesus Christ!+February 13, 2007 05:05 am--> (Jesus Christ! @ February 13, 2007 05:05 am)
manic [email protected] 09, 2007 12:45 am
It is ludicrous to expect people who are held as property to have any respect for the people who treat them as property. Don't expect slaves to have mercy for slave-holders.

Nat Turner's rebellion, the Stono Rebellion, the Vesey uprising and all slave revolts cannot be seriously criticized. At all.
Yea seriously those 25 children definitely had it coming. [/b]
What do you expect? For people held as PROPERTY to act like country gentlemen to their oppressors? Of course they wouldn't.

Those deaths were produced solely by the unspeakable mistreatment that their eventual killers were forced to shoulder.

[Jesus Christ!]

Originally posted by manic expression+February 14, 2007 08:17 pm--> (manic expression @ February 14, 2007 08:17 pm)
Originally posted by Jesus Christ!@February 13, 2007 05:05 am

manic [email protected] 09, 2007 12:45 am
It is ludicrous to expect people who are held as property to have any respect for the people who treat them as property. Don't expect slaves to have mercy for slave-holders.

Nat Turner's rebellion, the Stono Rebellion, the Vesey uprising and all slave revolts cannot be seriously criticized. At all.
Yea seriously those 25 children definitely had it coming.
What do you expect? For people held as PROPERTY to act like country gentlemen to their oppressors? Of course they wouldn't.

Those deaths were produced solely by the unspeakable mistreatment that their eventual killers were forced to shoulder. [/b]
forced to shoulder? When is anyone ever forced to kill infants? As cb9's_unity pointed out turner was willing to go back to houses to make sure he killed infants. It doesn't take a " country gentlemen" to no go back and kill infants.