Find local, breaking news for the Bronx, Queens, Brooklyn, Staten Island and Manhattan; plus, a New York events calendar and vintage NYC photos

10 Lies You’re Told About American Slavery


Slavery remains one of the most uncomfortable subjects in the history of the United States of America. Indeed, it can hardly be relegated to being only American “history” as we’ll soon see in greater depth. There are large groups of historical revisionists that have a vested interest in trying to downplay it or reshape it in a way that’s more comfortable for their agendas. There are also some people that have grown up with overly simplistic versions of slavery in the past and its current state. We here at TopTenz will strive do our small part to push back against both.

→Subscribe for new videos every day!

Help us translate our videos: – Learn more why you might want to help:

Find more lists at:

Entertaining and educational top 10 lists from TopTenzNet!

Subscribe to our Facebook:

Business inquiries to

Other TopTenz Videos:



Text version:

Coming up:

10. “Abolitionism was a Popular Northern Movement”
9. “The American Civil War was Not About Slavery”
8. “Slaves Fought for the Confederacy”
7. “Slaves were Rarely Killed by Labor”
6. “Freed Slaves Took Control of Southern Governments After the American Civil War”
5. “Slaves Were Only Owned by the Wealthiest”
4. “Even if the South Won the Civil War, Slavery Would Have Ended Shortly After”
3. “The First Slaves in America Were White People!”
2. “Slavery was a Southern Problem”
1. “Slavery is Illegal in America”

Source/Further reading:

  1. TopTenz says

    Please check out our New Channel: BIOGRAPHICS –
    Biographies twice a week.

  2. moist faucet says

    Nobody has a clean History. our ancient human screw up and dirty.

  3. Cobra9798 says

    I don't necessarily agree with number 9. Not because I supported the Confederates in any way, but the war, at least until 1863, was not about slavery. The Southern state's did concede from the Union because of the slave's issue, but they did not want war. They attempted to leave peacefully but Lincoln did not want the Union to break apart. The Union played it smart and poked and antagonized the South until they felt the need to attack, hence Fort Sumter. Later, once the Emancipation Proclamation was issued, many from both sides believed that the war had turned into slavery, of course once the Union won at Gettysburg and were then on the offensive.

    So, in all, the war had started and continued to be about the Southern state's rights the entire time but popular northern figures like Fredrick Douglass and Lincoln made the war about slavery as well a rally cry and hope for the enslaved in the South. I think its fair to say that States Rights was the lighter and Slavery was the fuel to the war (Once the turning point of the war occurred)

  4. Petar S. says

    American Civil War was fight for future direction of American economy. Feudal or Industrial. Ending slavery was convenient political/propaganda/humanitarian (in that order) way to destabilize the enemy.

  5. Callsign Spencer says

    Dude you put like 5 Adds in wtf

  6. Matt Blackwood says

    Totally biased video bases on some false info in places. Boo

  7. David Ray says

    This is interesting and all, but we are forgetting the bigger point that the Atlanta Falcons blew a 28-3 lead late in the 4th quarter of Superbowl LI

  8. Thomas Conrow says

    The cause of the secessions was indeed slavery, as you've proven, but the cause of the war was the North's invasion of the South. The South would have never invaded the North, they were happy just being independent.

  9. Dennis Polyblank says

    You Are Daft

  10. James Martinelli says

    A civil war would entail congressmen killing each other etc. That was NOT a civil war. It was Lincoln's war. He wanted it and manipulated it into being.

  11. Iamanother Yourself says

    So much time and energy spent on trivia Whoam i to judge tho

  12. ParadigmBlaster says

    Even with Wilbur Wilberforce and his contributions to the ABOLITIONIST movement in Great Britain…Leave it to a CROWN SUBJECT(slave by any other concept) to OVERLOOK the CROWN's efforts in STARTING and PROLONGING the American Civil War(!)…BUT, OF COURSE(!)…

  13. James 717 says

    Inmates should be forced to work. They essentially have a free ride while incarcerated. Rehabilitation through labor

  14. Tim Easter says

    Red power

  15. Kenny Miller says

    Top tenz presents 10 lies we're going to tell you are true about slavery in america.

  16. Otto DeYahel says

    What about telling the world the greatest profiteers of the "Slavery Trade" were mostly jews?

  17. Matthew Chenault says

    The problem is not that slavery was not an issue at all. The problem that I see reoccurring time and time again is that Slavery is made into the only issue that mattered about the war. Even President Jefferson Davis himself argued that the entire fuss over making the war about slavery was simply short-sighted and simply wrong. Why is that?

    Well, the main problem is that slavery, in the American Civil War, was nothing more than a hot issue of the times that could get people angry over it. After all, in practically every other Western Nation, Slavery was ended without any sort of major violence of any sort. So, why would the United States descend into a Civil War over slavery alone? Simple, it did not.

    The debate over slavery only exposed the massive, underlying problems with the Union and the rapidly growing division between the political, social, and economic situations between the North and South. The North had become increasingly industrialized and had major cities and urban populations while taking much of their political perspectives from Founding Fathers like Alexander Hamilton; who supported a strong, central government. The South, by contrast, was mainly rural, sparsely populated, and had adopted Jeffersonian-style political beliefs, which advocated for smaller, decentralized government and more power to the states. With the North becoming increasingly more powerful, the South, as a region, became increasingly underrepresented to the point it had become rebellious.

    This can be seen with the Nullification Crisis of 1832 and 1833 where South Carolina outright threatened to secede from the Union because of a highly unfair tariff that would have badly impacted her economy. What prevented this entire crisis from boiling over into a Civil War was Andrew Jackson stepping in and dragging both sides to the negotiating table to iron out a fair agreement. This ended up working well and finally ended the crisis by making the tariff in question more favorable for all parties involved. This crisis, itself, made it obvious that the nation was already on the breaking point even before slavery became the hot topic issue of the time. Most importantly, it proves that the American Civil War was not a product of slavery, but an inevitability as a result of decades – if not centuries – of division between the North and South that threatened to go off at any point.

    This is why I generally dislike it when the issue is brought up because I find the focus on the institution of slavery, for what is, to truly miss the entire point of what brought about the war. What brought about the war was the problems that already existed within the country itself and all slavery did was light it all up and blew the entire thing up.

    If anything, slavery is analogous to the assassination of Arch Duke Franz Ferdinand of the Austro-Hungarian Empire by a Serbian Nationalist. In the grand scheme of things, the assassination was not the problem. The problem that brought about the Great War, just as what brought out the American Civil War, was the political tension in the Balkans and the massive web of alliances and the tensions between the European powers. This is why historians spend more time studying these connections and the overall tensions building in Europe more than they do the assassination itself because the former is what brought about the war. The latter issue only instigated it.

  18. Matthew Chenault says

    Also, yes, slavery would have ended within a decade or two because, if the South had won the war, the British Empire would have begun boycotting Southern Cotton because of the use of slave labor. Also, with industrialized labor, slavery is highly ineffective because such jobs require a certain amount of skill to perform and with cities like Richmond becoming increasingly industrialized even before the war, slavery would have begun to die out over time or would have ended simply because it would become less profitable with labor-saving equipment. That also doesn't include how the land was becoming increasingly degraded over the years due to the planting of cotton as a cash crop, which would have also led to the cotton industry collapsing and would have made slavery less and less profitable.

    So, yes, it would have ended within a decade or two after the war simply because the west would have not accepted it and, if the South wished to maintain its independence, it would need the support of the British Empire and France.

  19. vorkev1 says

    you are wrong in a way. I was on sever times a tour back when I was a child in places wear the underground railroad took place. par of what I seen a lot and was told and seen in old papers. was that slaves did fight for the south but they wear never given guns or rank they wear told they would be freed to go and fight if they wished but that they would have no protection from the south or north just a understand that some people would be happy if they defended the south and that if they lived and came back to their owners after the south won that they would not be treated as slaves but as workers. most of the time when this was the cas they wear given papers saying they wear owned buy so and so and that if they wear found during war time it was do to the fact their owner had sent them to fight to defend the south and their owners family and that shale they be found after the war has ended they should be treaded as a freed slave and give so many days from wars end to go back to their owner and if they wear found after to then be treated as a run a away and returned alive if possible. their wear different varations on this but most times that is what the paper work sed or something close. I sugest you do better research and instead of using books and the internet actuley visit places that have historical paper work.

  20. michael joseph patton says


  21. Dave Todd says

    BLM & Obozo aren't legitimate historical reference material

  22. Joe Martin says

    Most of what this man said is not supported by primary sources….this is mostly propaganda. This man is wearing Nike's and supports modern day slavery like most liberals do.

  23. Jerry Pearson says

    The Gullah wars ended slavery. Runnawsy slaves and Indians in Florida came together and formed a formidable army. We took our freedom.

  24. bretmaples says

    I love all your channels and am subscribed to all of them. I admire your fact checking to get the real truth. I love trivia and knowledge and you give me a lot of that.

  25. Storm Shadow117 says

    this video is absolutely stupid.  please find Daniel U U and Ken Brown's comment those say more.

  26. 28913dave says

    I have a picture that could shut his black service men of the south down

  27. Jerome Davis says

    whites didn't work

  28. Paladin One says

    Truly shocking

  29. william Clarke says

    Seriously this is the most propaganda filled video on this channel. I saw nothing of proof just the same lies they teach in grade school. Lol those are even page for page the photos in my niece's book.

  30. Tomasina Covell says

    Just rounding up and liquidating every single Drumpf voter, contributor, supporter would do more to free this country from its chains of bondage than if we had eliminated every African slave and their masters at the end of the civil war!

  31. NoMorThanMost says

    <Facepalm> Watered down history once again.

  32. claudiasmemaw says

    If Simon's hairy face, chest & arms are supposed to make him seem more credible, more 'stylish' or more academic, he's failed miserably. I think he's trying a lot too hard to be relevant, to look & seem trustworthy.

Leave A Reply

Your email address will not be published.