MovieChat Forums > Hatfields & McCoys Discussion > Why did they exclude slaves in this movi...

Why did they exclude slaves in this movie?


The movie begins in 1863 so there should've been slaves present in Kentucky and West Virginia. Asa McCoy was hidden from Jim Vance and had his slave bring him meals. Obviously the Hatfields must have had slaves as well because they were the wealthier family.

reply

[deleted]

I was so happy there were no blacks In this. Slavery wasn't important to the feud, it would have felt shoe horned if there were former slave characters to be politically correct

reply

Less than 2% of whites owned slaves back in the day and the ancestors of over 95% of today's Americans came to this country AFTER slavery ended(including my own), yet, even my family are made to feel guilty.

Slavery is nothing new to mankind. Its been around since pre-history. Politicians like to blame Western Europeans for the evils of slavery, but the fact is they were the last to get involved in human trafficking, and the first to abolish it.

The biggest slaver in history were the Islamic moors. They controlled the slave trade from the 7th to the 15th centuries, and were responsible for over 112 million deaths. Many millions more died before even becoming a slave, as the moors castrated African boys between the age of 8 and 14, to be pressed into service in Harems as Eunuchs. The women were not used for manual labor, but as sex slaves.

Long before any white man took a slave, the Moors enslaved over a million Europeans along the coasts of Europe. Thomas Jefferson's first Muslim problem was that of Barbary Coast Pirates capturing ships and pressing their captives into slavery. Europeans did not become involved in slavery until the 1500's, and in 300 years, they signed a treaty abolishing slavery in all Western European nations.

No, contrary to all the lies we are told, whitey not only didn't begin enslaving Africans, he actually abolished it. According to "The Slave Trade" by Hugh Thomas, approximately 4 million (35.4%) went to Portuguese controlled Brazil, 2.5 million (22.1%) went to the Spanish Nations of South and Central America, 2 million (17.7%) to the British West Indies (mostly Jamaica), 1.6 million (14.1%) to French West Indies, half a million to Dutch West Indies, and a half a million (4.4%) to North America. Those who went to America, were considered valued property, and were treated far better then the Irish and Italian Indentured Servants. Over a million immigrant Irish were sold into slavery in the Americas, before any black man was enslaved.

Its easy to blame the white man in America for all the evils of history, but the facts are these:
1.4% of white people owned slaves in America.
5% of Latinos in South America owned slaves.
African slaves were expensive (50 lbs. Sterling) while Irish were cheap (5 lbs. Sterling) and were treated accordingly.
American Indians owned slaves before the white man even got here, and many continued to own slaves into the 1800's.
White men never went into Africa to capture slaves. They were standing in chains at the docks when their boats pulled up...already captured and shackled by their own people, and the Arab slavers.
Many Africans survived slavery in America, and prospered, and owned businesses. Almost no Africans survived Moorish slavery, as the men were castrated as Eunuchs, and the women were raped and discarded when they became to old to satisfy their Arab masters.

Most of Europe and Asian was enslaved at one time. And in the African nations, slavery is still a common practice. Slavery is not fundamentally a race issue. It was a power issue. Race is used as a tool against the populace today, for political gain. The truth behind slavery is actually very different then some politicians, blacks and liberal groups today would have you to believe. They must demonize those they wish to control, just as the wealthy Democrats enforced slave patrols in the South, forcing the middle class and poor to patrol the streets looking for runaway slaves, with threat of escalating fines for not performing such duties. Once again, the wealthy government elitists, causing the misery, under color of law.

They also established Statutes that restricted or prohibited the right of an owner to manumit slaves. Slaves could not buy their freedom, and owners could not manumit (or liberate) their slaves in a last will and testament.

Always it is elitists working to divide the people and keep us fighting with each other, while they are the propagators of injustice and oppression.

Nicolas Augustin Metoyer(a black man) of Louisiana and his family members collectively owned 215 slaves. There were a lot of black slave owners(the original inventors of slavery), back in the day.

The following chart shows the Black slave owners and their slaves in Charleston, South Carolina area alone, between the years 1790-1860.(Yes, they kept records of slaves and who their owners were)

Year - Black Slave Owners - Slaves

1790s - 49 - 277

1800s - 36 - 315

1810s - 17 - 143

1820s - 206 - 1,030

1830s - 407 - 2,195

1840s - 402 - 2,001

1850s - 266 - 1,087

1860s - 137 - 544

The black population in 1860 was 4.5 million, with about 500,000 living in the South. Of the blacks residing in the South, 261,988 were not slaves. Of this number, 10,689 lived in the New Orleans area. In New Orleans over 3,000 blacks owned slaves, about 28 percent of the free Black population in the city.

This was just two areas of the country during those times.

reply

Excellent, excellent presentation of facts. In addition, I was under the impression that the reason there IS a West Virginia, is that people who resided in that area of the state DID want to abolish slavery and did not want to go to war with the union. In addition, both the Hatfields and McCoys were what were considered "hill folk". They certainly did not have the wealth to own slaves. People like to re-write history and make it sound as if every single white family in America from 1776 to 1865 owned at least ONE slave; the fact of the matter is, it was that dreaded "one percent" of citizens who actually owned slaves. You know, the "one percent" you hear about so much these days, controlling 95% of the wealth in this country? So if you want to blame slavery on white honky crackers, you better aim it at the top 1% of them, people like Warren Buffet, Bill Gates, Steve Forbes, Michael Bloomberg...you know, the rich guys.

reply

And Oprah Winfrey. She would have owned slaves back in the day too, as well off blacks owned slaves too.

reply

The slave population was not evenly distributed throughout the South. Some areas had a high percentage of slaves, while other areas had almost no slaves at all.

http://www.bowdoin.edu/~prael/branch/ex1/m2-slave-conc.jpg

reply

The people presented in the series weren't rich, it was the big industrialists who owned slaves, rarely the poor people.

reply

"it was the big industrialists who owned slaves"

Plantation owners.

Didn't the Hatfields and McCoys live in a mountainous region? Slaves were not very useful in those areas.

reply