Yes, fact check.

There are no "favorable conditions" to slavery. Slavery sought to find moral ground on the hypothesis that the master knew what was best for their slaves. Stowe repeatedly makes the point that even kind masters were prevented from freeing their slaves.

Hale supported the work of the courts until his second wife was accused of practicing witchcraft. Hah.

This is, in fact, why it's so difficult to fight these things. Interpretation has trumped over documentation, context "fades", lies are so much easier to propagate, refuting bullshit could be an actual 24/7 job. How could anybody keep up. Maybe we're doomed to having morons destroy a few tens of millions of people every 100 years.

But you are checking different facts.

The original fact being checked was:

> never in the history of history have people fought against discrimination, corruption, and oppression by saying "but they might have a point too"

No, I replied right on point. Let me spell it out:

1. No "favorable conditions" to slavery means Stowe never recognised advantages to slavery. Not only he does not, but he laments it despite those "favorable conditions".

2. Hale didn't excuse the courts; he actively supported their work. That is, until he decided he didn't want to. Later commentators on the trials mark this as the defining moment that helped turn public opinion against the prosecutions.

To sum up my point, read your history.

Uhh, Stowe is Harriet Beecher Stowe, so "he" ought to be "she". Because this is HN, I'll assume good intent and presume this is just a slip and doesn't indicate your lack of familiarity with the material you're discussing.

First of all:

> Let me spell it out

> read your history

Seems pretty aggressive to me. If you are refuting these points, why not include all relevant information?

But in any case, the second point (that Hales work didn't end the witch trials) you only just make here, and the first you clarify.

Nice try, but it's really the same things in both comments.

In your head?

If you don't have the necessary context, I can't help.

You can't help? By providing that context?

Precisely. There are literal stacks of books on these matter, and I can't condense a single one of them in a HN post more than providing the facts. If you're interested, you're going to have to read them. It's dreadful, I know.