Well, of course, southerners weren't for colonization. They wanted to keep their slaves.Such thinkers were not in the south were laws carefully controlling free blacks already existed.
Not really fair minded thinkers would have noted that many blacks were literate, that they had established a continental scale system to smuggle people and learned about every physical trade there was and spoke the common tounge. Something the majrity of the immigrant population could not claim. Or maybe they would have looked at new Orleans (placage), church attendence or frontier racial mixing....
First of all, fair-minded thinkers see all sides and sincerely look for a solution best for all. They would have seen that many free blacks were educated, skilled and responsible members of the community. But they would have also seen they suffered racial discrimination despite all their accomplishments, even in the north. That was all grist for the mill when, envisioning the day all black men would be set free, they believed assimilation would be near impossible. The idea of colonization seemed the best solution to them.
Those are the facts. If you want to argue with a bunch of dead men, go ahead. I am already convinced it was a bad idea.
The one Congress was considering at the time was voluntary. They figured, wrongly as it turned out, that literate freed blacks would lead other blacks to a new country where they would be free, first-class citizens like whites here.Most of the colonization schemes resolved around kicking the blacks out.
Seems contradictory. You're saying assimilation was a problem, only that it came from a different quarter than expected.The problems with assimilation was post-war planter assimilation. The union of black and poor whites under the Republican umbrella shows this. As did numeorus pre-war examples.