Scan barcode
Reviews
The Half Has Never Been Told: Slavery and the Making of American Capitalism by Edward E. Baptist
kwtingley's review
5.0
A powerful case for the direct impact of slavery on the growth of American capitalism and on those held captive in the "whipping machine" itself
susanbrooks's review against another edition
3.0
Good, ranging history. I lost the thread sometimes. That may be due to my own attention span with audiobooks.
tkkemo's review against another edition
4.0
A little uneven, sometimes heavy handed, but in the end a compelling and complex explanation of some of the most formative years of the United States. Baptist has a difficult job of balancing the horrors of slavery with the big picture of American economic development. He’s probably best when dealing with the latter but I understand the effort put into the former. Though I don’t know if all of his arguments hold absolutely, namely that slavery was inherently more efficient than free labor, he does a good job in shifting the perspective of the 19th century from strictly moral terms to a complex web of speculative investing, formation of key financial innovations, and the U.S.’s evolution to industrial power. Regardless of how terrible slavery was this is how America’s economy was forged.
Edit: This paper by John J Clegg does a great job of putting into perspective some of my issues with Baptist’s arguments in terms of economics. I didn’t think the argument about productivity growth and slave labor was very convincing and the paper does a really good job of diving deeper into it.
https://www.academia.edu/33968225/Capitalism_and_Slavery
Edit: This paper by John J Clegg does a great job of putting into perspective some of my issues with Baptist’s arguments in terms of economics. I didn’t think the argument about productivity growth and slave labor was very convincing and the paper does a really good job of diving deeper into it.
https://www.academia.edu/33968225/Capitalism_and_Slavery
adamrshields's review against another edition
5.0
Short Review: I am rounding up a little for content. This is well written and important. I think there are a few places where a tighter connection could have been made. The biggest hole for me was why the North that had been consistent in its economic support for slavery shifted toward a greater support for abolition. (My impression is that the north was mildly abolitionist and had the South not seceded and started the Civil War that slavery would have lasted much longer in the US.)
But that one hole in the book did not over shine the overall helpfulness. There was a lot of focus on what slavery was really like, primarily by focusing on slave accounts. The economics really is the important part that I have not understood previously. The early US economy, especially that in the south was far more modern than I previously believed. Banks were much more wide spread. Slave expansion was a largely financed event. Slaves were a form of liquid capital that was in many ways the root of US economy.
This is part of slavery that I think is not understood.
My full review is on my blog at http://bookwi.se/half-has-never-been-told/
But that one hole in the book did not over shine the overall helpfulness. There was a lot of focus on what slavery was really like, primarily by focusing on slave accounts. The economics really is the important part that I have not understood previously. The early US economy, especially that in the south was far more modern than I previously believed. Banks were much more wide spread. Slave expansion was a largely financed event. Slaves were a form of liquid capital that was in many ways the root of US economy.
This is part of slavery that I think is not understood.
My full review is on my blog at http://bookwi.se/half-has-never-been-told/
jsisco's review against another edition
4.0
Exhaustive research and fantastic job tying together multiple states, threads, and decades of back story leading up to the Civil War. Truly a fascinating text.
crummeyforthewin's review against another edition
4.0
The author makes a compelling case, drawing on statistics as well as personal accounts, that slavery, and primarily the threat of torture under slavery, drove unprecedented rates of cotton production and was the engine that fueled the U.S. economy's explosive growth and allowed it to modernize at a previously unseen rate.
rachelwalexander's review against another edition
5.0
An incredible overview of early American history, slave labor and the build-up to the Civil War. Should be required reading for everyone (along with The Warmth of Other Suns and The New Jim Crow).
dejahentendu's review against another edition
5.0
Wow! What a brutal, vivid, fascinating book. Quite the condemnation of the roots of modern capitalism and an excellent read for those who wonder at the idea of reparations.
https://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/05/books/review/the-half-has-never-been-told-by-edward-e-baptist.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/05/books/review/the-half-has-never-been-told-by-edward-e-baptist.html
tzurky's review
5.0
Reading this book now was a comfort, as counter-intuitive as it may seem. But given it’s starting point, the book does end on a higher note (even though it does mention Jim Crow). But mostly it was a comfort because it feels right. It feels right to reclaim history and add one more tiny piece to the puzzle that is my understanding of the world.
And the book’s contribution to that understanding are significant. It sets out to prove that slavery was the defining force for young America (before and even after the Civil War), in all important realms: politics, economy, geography, society, religion and culture. And it succeeds on all counts. It also does so in a very readable and understandable manner and with beautiful poetic prose.
Lots of people have commented on how its language is not as dry and academic as they prefer and how it interweaves facts and eye-witness accounts (filled out and supported by many individual sources). Your preferences may vary (and personal taste always plays a central role in book enjoyment), but in my view the argument that this undermines the book’s claim is ridiculous. Why would adding flavor to statistical data make the data less relevant. If anything, given that history is a social science, showing how both period testimony and hard data point to the same conclusions make the conclusions more compelling. Analysis and weighing of sources is, after all, at the core of historical science. In any case, in my view this is history at its best because it weaves psychology, sociology, economics, law and politics together to paint a coherent picture of the period and place analyzed (America after the Revolution and before the Civil War). And thus you get a complete, nuanced, layered view.
On a personal note, this book reminded me of my own grievances and stoked my anger. My history has been stolen from me (I’m not American). All throughout school I suffered through textbooks and history classes presenting truncated views of history, glorifying national “heroes” and sometimes outright falsifying history by what they left out. Not to mention the dry drone of dates (the beginning and end of reigns, battles and church-building, of all things). Oh, and history officially ended shortly after 1945 in my country. I’ve since overcome my resentment of, and disinterest in, history, but I’ve never been able to make up for lost time, nor have the generations after me. Needless to say, our lack of understanding of our own history robbed us not only of our national identity but also (and that was obviously the goal) of our political voice and our activism. The plunder of our nation safely hidden, our politicians could rest easy for another couple of decades. And the glorifying nationalist textbooks created an ideal breeding ground for ethnic patriotism combined with pseudo-religious fervor (by which I mean glorifying a particular form of religion solely for its ethnic and nationalistic connections and not observing its actual tenets).
When the dust settled at the end of 2016, we had thus made a very similar and equally catastrophic choice in our own elections. Naturally, any and all subsequent protests have proven futile and the exploitation of our nation and its national resources continues unhindered by any popular opinion (if it even is popular opinion that thieving lying scoundrels should not rule our nation). So I consider stealing history from a country’s people a crime of the highest order and its ripple effects cannot be overstated.
And the book’s contribution to that understanding are significant. It sets out to prove that slavery was the defining force for young America (before and even after the Civil War), in all important realms: politics, economy, geography, society, religion and culture. And it succeeds on all counts. It also does so in a very readable and understandable manner and with beautiful poetic prose.
Lots of people have commented on how its language is not as dry and academic as they prefer and how it interweaves facts and eye-witness accounts (filled out and supported by many individual sources). Your preferences may vary (and personal taste always plays a central role in book enjoyment), but in my view the argument that this undermines the book’s claim is ridiculous. Why would adding flavor to statistical data make the data less relevant. If anything, given that history is a social science, showing how both period testimony and hard data point to the same conclusions make the conclusions more compelling. Analysis and weighing of sources is, after all, at the core of historical science. In any case, in my view this is history at its best because it weaves psychology, sociology, economics, law and politics together to paint a coherent picture of the period and place analyzed (America after the Revolution and before the Civil War). And thus you get a complete, nuanced, layered view.
On a personal note, this book reminded me of my own grievances and stoked my anger. My history has been stolen from me (I’m not American). All throughout school I suffered through textbooks and history classes presenting truncated views of history, glorifying national “heroes” and sometimes outright falsifying history by what they left out. Not to mention the dry drone of dates (the beginning and end of reigns, battles and church-building, of all things). Oh, and history officially ended shortly after 1945 in my country. I’ve since overcome my resentment of, and disinterest in, history, but I’ve never been able to make up for lost time, nor have the generations after me. Needless to say, our lack of understanding of our own history robbed us not only of our national identity but also (and that was obviously the goal) of our political voice and our activism. The plunder of our nation safely hidden, our politicians could rest easy for another couple of decades. And the glorifying nationalist textbooks created an ideal breeding ground for ethnic patriotism combined with pseudo-religious fervor (by which I mean glorifying a particular form of religion solely for its ethnic and nationalistic connections and not observing its actual tenets).
When the dust settled at the end of 2016, we had thus made a very similar and equally catastrophic choice in our own elections. Naturally, any and all subsequent protests have proven futile and the exploitation of our nation and its national resources continues unhindered by any popular opinion (if it even is popular opinion that thieving lying scoundrels should not rule our nation). So I consider stealing history from a country’s people a crime of the highest order and its ripple effects cannot be overstated.