Giddy Multitude

In Takaki Chapter three the main heading of it is The "Giddy Multitude". The Giddy Multitude were a discontented class of indentured servants, slaves, and landless freemen who led revolts against the ruling class. The revolts they led were very volatile. Also it delves into the competing social class structure during that time period.
The government in Virginia tried to create wedges between white and black indentured servants in order to suppress any rebellion they wanted to iniate. The government enacted laws that put restrictions on the freedoms of blacks. They did this to squash any rebellion or threat of one they saw. White indentured servants weren't treated any better but there sentences were much more light compared to black slaves who would get far more longer sentences than white slaves.
One of the most famous conflicts between indentured servants and the Virginia government was the Bacon's Rebellion. Nathaniel Bacon who was a landholder and a member of the Virginia council saw danger from the Indians and raised an army with the giddy multitude. That angered Governor William Berkeley who was more worried about the giddy multitude than the Indians. Berkeley charged Bacon with treason. Bacon then led his rebellion against Berkeley. It was extremely bloody and after some early successes the rebels were defeated. After this the Virginia government made some transitions. They increased the number of black indentured servants and decreased the white servants, that way there would be less tension and less up risings. Even though white elites saw white lower class as a bothersome problem. It was a very delicate balance the government in Virginia had to decide. On the one hand they needed the work of lower class whites, but on the other hand they did not want to give them too much power or more rights because then the government could see their authority slipping away. Even powerful leaders of that time period were conflicted about the issue of slavery. The governor of Virginia during the Revolution, Thomas Jefferson felt torn about the actions he was doing. He wanted to create more opportunity for white men to be farmers because this would lead to less conflict among the social classes. Jefferson benefited from slavery very much , but he wanted sometime in his lifetime to abolish slavery after he paid off his debts. This was often contradictory of what he would do though. He would treat his slaves extremely cruel, and would often be unmerciful if they disobeyed him. The conflict many individuals faced in this era was extraordinary.
Would people like Thomas Jefferson have abolished slavery or would they just keep using it as a tool to make more money? I believe Jefferson would have kept on allowing slavery and not abolished it like he said he would. That is very good political speak but its the test of a true man in order to see it through. You can go to one audience that is sympathetic to abolishment and say you are really against and say once my debts are paid off I will abolish it. Then in private you will say the exact opposite. Jefferson would not have found the courage to do so because he saw slavery as a very profitable business and one that kept him in power.
I was very disappointed when it came to the Virginia government who pitted lower class whites against black indentured servant in order to save the government. It just shows you how bad at governing the people of Virginia really were. If you are more worried about your own people like William Berkeley was rather than the Indians you have a serious problem about the way you are governing Virginia. Nobody in government wanted to see slavery abolished because like Jefferson they saw it as a tool to make money and have power and they were not going to give that up easily. The workers of that period were true heroes. They showed true sacrifice by risking their lives in order to provide a better way of life for future generations.