Disagreeing on Slavery Essays

Disagreeing on Slavery Essays Disagreeing on Slavery Essay Disagreeing on Slavery Essay The Declaration of Independence clearly and famously states, â€Å"All men are created equal† and have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. In the early years of the United States, however, this affirmation of basic rights did not extend and apply to all. African Americans, who were at the time viewed simply as property rather than as human beings, had these rights completely deprived of them by being kept in slavery on southern farms and plantations. Slaves on these plantations did various work and tasks but mostly harsh manual labor farming in the fields for their masters. Slavery had been an established institution in the country since colonial times and while there had always been several opinions on the issue, it had been basically accepted or at least acknowledged as part of the Nation’s culture and framework. Eventually the opposing views became more defined and ultimately split into the Anti-Slavery North and the Pro-Slavery South. Both perspectives had legitimate reasons to back up their different views and ideas about how to handle slavery as the country grew and matured. In the years leading up to the Civil War, the opinions of the North and South on the future of the existence of slavery differed because of economic, social, and political reasons. By the mid 1800’s Northerners commonly agreed on the belief that the complete abolition of slavery was imperative to the future success of the country. Up until this point most thought of slavery as a necessary evil, and so it was tolerated with the expectation and aspiration for it to eventually die out (Stolyarov). Disagreements over slavery date back as far at the American Revolution. During the war Northerners were bothered by the fact that the white Southern slaveholding population was more concerned with protecting their slaves than fighting and defeating the British. Many, including commander-in-chief George Washington, were disturbed by the fact that Southern slave owners were showing desperation and weakness to the enemy in order to retrieve their â€Å"involuntary work force from the clutches of the departing British soldiers† (Dudley 18). The disapproval of African American servitude and the desire to end slavery led to the formation of a movement called Abolisionism. The movement was made up of anti-slavery activists, who were key in â€Å"leading the momentous struggle against slavery, informing it, [and] inspiring it† (Aptheker xi). The abolitionists were the main force behind the eventual emancipation of slaves and were responsible almost every action and event leading up to it. Abolition was also backed by some of the great leaders of the American Revolution, including President Jefferson and author Thomas Paine. Other leaders such as future Presidents George Washington and John Adams also expressed their aversion to the insistution of slavery (1). Abolitionists†¦agreed that the movement to emancipate the slaves, immediately and without compensation to the masters, was a revolutionary one† (15). Abolitionists felt very strongly about this issue and had several reasons for fighting for the emancipation of slavery. They were prepared and willing to go to great lengths to do what they felt was in the best interest of the future of the country they had so recently worked hard for and fought relentlessly to gain as their own. White Southern plantation owners were not the inventors of slavery. The use of human beings as an unwilling labor source had existed all over the world for thousands of years before the Southern United States even existed and was able utilize the practice. At that point in history, life without slavery was almost unimaginable to many communities and regions, including the Southern states of the U. S. (Higgs). Since even before the creation of the United States, when these areas were nothing more than British colonies, people living in the lower part of the country found the use of slaves to be invaluble. While today’s knowledge and morals make it seem nearly impossible that there are any legitimate justifications for the slavery that took place in the United States, it is vital to keep in mind the culture and values of the location and period in history in which it took place. Pro-slavery supporters had valid reasons for why they fought to keep slavery in the South. An inevitable and reccurring theme in most prominent historical events, financial and economic concerns contributed the Abolitionist’s crusade to end slavery. By 1860, economic liberals†¦linked†¦progress with the concept of free labor in a competative society† (Stampp 19). Many Northerners believed that the nation could not progress or develop economically if half of the country was still heavily involved with and economically dependent on such an archaic, primitive practice. Aside from this fear that slavery was holding the country back from reaching its economic potential, there really was no significant profit or benefit to be gained by the North if slavery was ended. However, the industrious Northerners were making miniscule amounts of money from slavery compared to the huge profits made by the slaveholding Southerners, so while economics was not a majorly significant reason for the average Northerner to actively fight against slavery, the lack of financial prosperity they were obtaining from it examined in cotrast with the tremendous revenue of the Southern slaveholders gave them no reason to support it. The prosperity of the southern economy was by far the most significant as well as understandable pro-slavery argument. The financial profit of the South was dependent on cotton, and the demand for cotton from outside the South, which was high for much of the 1800’s. Slavery was an essential part to this because slave labor accounted for ninety percent of all southern cotton production. The trade of slaves themselves from the upper south to lower also contributed substantially to the economy, as the price of slaves continued to rise through the early 1800’s. In an excerpt from Slavery in the Light of Social Ethics, Chancelor Harper divulged the Southern fear of not being able to produce adequate crops to sustain the agriculturally dependent economy without slave labor; â€Å"The first and most obvious effect [of emancipation], would be to put an end to the cultivation of our great Southern staple†¦I need hardly say that these staples cannot be produced to any extent where the proprietor of the soil cultivates it with his own hands† (Elliott 617). Without slave labor, Southerners were certain their economy would crumble. There was no possible way for the landowners to singlehandedly work their own farms, and hiring farm hands would ultimately result in less profits for the landowner. Southerners realized this and it was a major reason they so desperately wanted to keep slavery legal. â€Å"There was no country, in the most ancient times of its history, in which the people had made any considerable advances in industry or refinement, in which slavery had not been previously and long established, and in general use† (McKitrick 69-70). Southerners thouroughly believed that slavery was essential to their financial wellbeing and the overall success of the southern economy. Social and moral beliefs were a major part of the Abolitionist’s desire to end slavery. Religion played a big role in this. Many Abolitionists thought that all humans were created equal in the eyes of the Lord, and therefore African Americans were not racially inferior to whites. The cruelty and injustice towards slavery was another reason northern Abolitionists called for emancipation. The majority of slave masters treated their slaves brutally, often beating them to near-death. Anti-slavery supporters were bothered by the fact that slaves were stripped of natural and inalianable rights including the right to choose a religion and the right to own property. Abolitionists generally believed that no man could have ownership of another man, so they strongly disapproved of the southern slave owner’s concept of reducing African Americans to mere property (Garcia). Slavery was a socially accpeted practice in the South, as well as a valuble part of the culture. It therefore became a notable pro-slavery argument. While a small minority of Southerners actually owned slaves, all southern farmers aspired to. In the South, owning slaves gained the master influence and power. Slave ownership was a necessary precondition to move upward socially in the South. â€Å"Slavery has existed from as early time as historical records furnish any information of the social and political condition of mankind†¦Ã¢â‚¬  (McKitrick 69). Southern slave owners, therefore, were not creating a new system of labor, and did not view slavery as barabric or sadistic. It was not the production or brainchild of a single sadistic and money-hungary Southerner. Slavery had long been an axiomatic part of society and humanity globally, and because of the fortune and prosperity it brought, its morality and existance generally went unquestioned and undisputed in the South. It was a shared belief that slavery was a natural function of life. Southerners believed in a variation of â€Å"Social Darwinism,† where the â€Å"weak†, the blacks, were naturally inferior to the â€Å"strong† superior white man. According to this theory, white enslavement of blacks was justified because the weak are characteristically prone to domination by those who are above them in some way. Since it was common practice to ban African Americans from any education and having or voicing any ideas or opinions, it was undeniable that whites had superior skills and intellectual abilities. President Abraham Lincoln presented this opinion in one of his infamous debates with Senator Stephen Douglas, â€Å"[T]here is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And†¦there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race† (Higgs). Another prevailing pro-slavery argument was that Southerners felt blacks were not capable of caring for and supporting themselves. Southerner slaveholders held that, â€Å"it would be cruel to set free people who would then, at best, fall into destitution and suffering† (Higgs). This belief led slave owners to claim they had a paternalistic attitude toward slavery, and referred to it as a â€Å"caring institution. The white southern land owners considered themselves as â€Å"benevolent guardians of an inferior race. † They also felt that this reasoning was justified by the Bible because it stresses the authority of the patriarch, which is the role slave masters assumed. They believed slavery was an Institution ordained by God, and â€Å"part of God’s plan to Christianize an inferior race. † The end of slavery would greatly impact and significantly alter the social aspects of southern society, making it a valid pro-slavery argument. Political issues were a huge aspect of slavery and were vital to emancipation. While economic and social beliefs influence behavior, politics lead to laws, which enforce behavior. Because these laws and policies affected the nation as a whole, it is logical to directly compare the North and South’s political opinions on slavery. The main issue was if the new Western states would be slave-allowing or free. The North and South argued about this because it determined who had the majority in the Senate. Several compromises were made to settle the conflicts. In 1820, Kentucky Senator Henry Clay created the Missouri Compromise, which divided the territory between slave and free. Thirty years later Clay again settled a similar dissension with the Compromise of 1850 in which most of the disputed territory, including California, was admitted to the country as Free states. To appease the pro-slavery South, the Compromise included a policy known as the Fugitive Slave Act. This Act made stricter laws concerning run-away slaves (Compromise). The pro-slavery South and Abolitionist North had credible reasons for valuing political power as a way to carry out their ideals and goals. In the pre Civil War era the North and South’s aspirations and ideals for the future of slavery conflicted because of economic, social, and political reasons. Ultimately, the Abolition Movement of the North prevailed and after a brutal Civil War between the Union and Confederacy, President Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation put an official end to slavery. For the South this meant a period of reconstruction as well as significant and unwelcome changes to their economy, society, and politics; but for the United States as a whole it meant a new found unity and the ability to progress and develop into the global power it is today.