"Slavery, genocide, and supremacy were not unique failures of the United States; they were the global norms."
A few relevant excerpts from 'Democracy in America' (1831) by Alexis de Tocqueville:
"Christianity suppressed slavery, but the Christians of the sixteenth century re-established it – as an exception, indeed, to their social system, and restricted to one of the races of mankind; but the wound thus inflicted upon humanity, though less extensive, was at the same time rendered far more difficult of cure...
Thus it is, in the United States, that the prejudice which repels the negroes seems to increase in proportion as they are emancipated, and inequality is sanctioned by the manners whilst it is effaced from the laws of the country...
These evils are unquestionably great; but they are the necessary and foreseen consequence of the very principle of modern slavery. When the Europeans chose their slaves from a race differing from their own, which many of them considered as inferior to the other races of mankind, and which they all repelled with horror from any notion of intimate connection, they must have believed that slavery would last forever; since there is no intermediate state which can be durable between the excessive inequality produced by servitude and the complete equality which originates in independence...
When I see the order of nature overthrown, and when I hear the cry of humanity in its vain struggle against the laws, my indignation does not light upon the men of our own time who are the instruments of these outrages; but I reserve my execration for those who, after a thousand years of freedom, brought back slavery into the world once more."
What those quotes reveal is that New World slavery in general, and American slavery in particular, was a huge backslide on the part of Europeans. Racialized slavery, the supposed inherent inferiority of Africans, and the concept of hypodescent go a long way towards explaining why America is stuck in a cycle of perpetually relitigating its history of slavery. Combined, those factors created a permanent obstacle to any meaningful sense of integration or assimilation of African Americans into mainstream society. The Spanish, the Portuguese, and the French were more receptive to racial mixing with enslaved Africans and their descendants which at least resulted in their colonies having less strict racial stratification and more racially inclusive national identities. However, greater racial stratification and racially exclusive notions of national identity in the U.S. have brought us to a place where calls to (selectively) "get beyond race" and unify as Americans will continue to ring hollow in the ears of African Americans into the foreseeable future.
What you’re missing is that the Europeans who went to South & Central America were mostly men. Those men mated with what was available: natives & slaves. That mating blurred racial lines.
Those who immigrated to the north more often immigrated as families and/or with thrir own women. That set them up for a clear racial class system. Not an excuse, just an important dynamic inherent in the fundamental difference between the groups you’re describing.
The differences are often consequences of practicalities & not necessarily a difference in moral character.
The point still stands: Slavery is not a product nor unique to America even if the nature of that slavery differs from other geographical areas.
"Slavery, genocide, and supremacy were not unique failures of the United States; they were the global norms."
A few relevant excerpts from 'Democracy in America' (1831) by Alexis de Tocqueville:
"Christianity suppressed slavery, but the Christians of the sixteenth century re-established it – as an exception, indeed, to their social system, and restricted to one of the races of mankind; but the wound thus inflicted upon humanity, though less extensive, was at the same time rendered far more difficult of cure...
Thus it is, in the United States, that the prejudice which repels the negroes seems to increase in proportion as they are emancipated, and inequality is sanctioned by the manners whilst it is effaced from the laws of the country...
These evils are unquestionably great; but they are the necessary and foreseen consequence of the very principle of modern slavery. When the Europeans chose their slaves from a race differing from their own, which many of them considered as inferior to the other races of mankind, and which they all repelled with horror from any notion of intimate connection, they must have believed that slavery would last forever; since there is no intermediate state which can be durable between the excessive inequality produced by servitude and the complete equality which originates in independence...
When I see the order of nature overthrown, and when I hear the cry of humanity in its vain struggle against the laws, my indignation does not light upon the men of our own time who are the instruments of these outrages; but I reserve my execration for those who, after a thousand years of freedom, brought back slavery into the world once more."
Thanks, but I'm not sure what your point is here.
Slavery has a lot of dynamics particular to the U.S., but slavery as an institution is not particular to the U.S.
What those quotes reveal is that New World slavery in general, and American slavery in particular, was a huge backslide on the part of Europeans. Racialized slavery, the supposed inherent inferiority of Africans, and the concept of hypodescent go a long way towards explaining why America is stuck in a cycle of perpetually relitigating its history of slavery. Combined, those factors created a permanent obstacle to any meaningful sense of integration or assimilation of African Americans into mainstream society. The Spanish, the Portuguese, and the French were more receptive to racial mixing with enslaved Africans and their descendants which at least resulted in their colonies having less strict racial stratification and more racially inclusive national identities. However, greater racial stratification and racially exclusive notions of national identity in the U.S. have brought us to a place where calls to (selectively) "get beyond race" and unify as Americans will continue to ring hollow in the ears of African Americans into the foreseeable future.
What you’re missing is that the Europeans who went to South & Central America were mostly men. Those men mated with what was available: natives & slaves. That mating blurred racial lines.
Those who immigrated to the north more often immigrated as families and/or with thrir own women. That set them up for a clear racial class system. Not an excuse, just an important dynamic inherent in the fundamental difference between the groups you’re describing.
The differences are often consequences of practicalities & not necessarily a difference in moral character.
The point still stands: Slavery is not a product nor unique to America even if the nature of that slavery differs from other geographical areas.