Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Papaofmonsters t1_j2bzpzf wrote

Reply to comment by smoothjedi in was django an abolitionist? or only in it for broomhilda? by [deleted]

Schultz freed the rest of the slaves at the beginning. And even he wasn't a staunch abolitionist. It was just the pragmatic thing to do. He had no problem owning Django and using his freedom as a bargaining chip.

4

Resident_Bitch t1_j2c26vk wrote

Schulz did have a problem with owning Django though. He did it anyway because he needed the information Django had, but he specifically stated that he had a problem with it when they were drinking beer and waiting for the sheriff.

6

Papaofmonsters t1_j2c9qgl wrote

Dr. King Schultz: I must admit, I'm at a bit of a quandary when it comes to you. On one hand, I despise slavery. On the other hand, I need your help. If you're not in a position to refuse, all the better. So, for the time being, I'm gonna make this slavery malarkey work to my benefit. Still, having said that, I feel guilty...

Yes. He felt so bad about it he was willing to own Django for his own personal profit... I think there is a word for that.

−1

Resident_Bitch t1_j2cbxtd wrote

I don’t think it’s really fair to call Schulz a hypocrite. Yes, he was willing to “own Django for his own personal profit” but I think that the “for the time being” part of that quote makes it pretty clear that his intent was to free Django.

2