The South and Slavery Prompted by the moral attacks by Garrison and his American Anti-Slavery Society, the southerners felt their very own livelihood is at stake. They, the southerners, decided to draw up an elaborate defense to counteract these "preposterous" accusations. The slaveholders went to no end to justify holding slavery. In my opinion, they were trying to justify it to themselves as much as they were justifying it to the abolitionists. First of all, anti-slavery movements were not popular in the south. Slavery is the foundation in which all the south's economy stands upon. To take away the slaves would be to cripple the south. Only a small amount (2,292 out of 4,6274 planters) held over a hundred slaves. Those that hold zero to twenty slaves supported slavery in the hopes that they one day will become part of the "Planter's Elite." It is the holding onto that hope that they support slavery. The belief that the white race is superior to the black also played a role in retaining slavery in the south. If the south emancipated all the slaves then they would have to give all the rights of a free citizen to the black. This would lead to equality between the races, which the "superior" whites can not stand. Holding slaves is like "holding a wolf by the ears." If they let go of slavery, the slaves can wage war upon the white race. Through fearing for their lives, the southerners also held onto their slaves. The south's proslavery argument is a basis in which the southerners defend the right to own slaves as a positive good rather than a moral evil. They found sanction in history by pointing out that many of the great civilizations in the past (Greece, Rome, Egypt) used slavery. Thus thinking that the slaves made those civilizations great would in turn make this nation also great. The southerners also found some support of slavery in the Old and New Testament. However, there isn't really a strong religious argument to justify slavery. They said that a lot of people from the Bible had servants and slaves. According to the southerners: who are humans to object what god has ordained? By looking upon scriptures of the bible, the southerners found a religious sanction for holding slavery.
The United States began to dissatisfy some of its citizens and so the concerns of sectionalism, or the split of the country began to arise. There was a continuous riff between the south and the north over a few issues, a major one being slavery. The south argued that the slaves were necessary to support the southern economy. According to document A, the south were angry that the north was creating taxes that hurt the southern economy, thus increasing the need for slavery since they had to make up for the expense of the taxes. The south felt that the north was able...
At the time, the South depended on slavery to support their way of life. In fact, “to protect slavery the Confederate States of America would challenge the peaceful, lawful, orderly means of changing governments in the United States, even by resorting to war.” (635) Lincoln believed that slavery was morally wrong and realized that slavery was bitterly dividing the country. Not only was slavery dividing the nation, but slavery was also endangering the Union, hurting both black and white people and threatening the processes of government. At first, Lincoln’s goal was to save the Union in which “he would free none, some, or all the slaves to save that Union.” (634) However, Lincoln realized that “freeing the slaves and saving the Union were linked as one goal, not two optional goals.” (634) Therefore, Lincoln’s primary goal was to save the Union and in order to save the Union, Lincoln had to free the slaves. However, Paludan states that, “slave states understood this; that is why the seceded and why the Union needed saving.” (634) Lincoln’s presidential victory was the final sign to many Southerners that their position in the Union was
The loose interpretation of the Constitution by Chief Justice Marshall had greatly infuriated and scared the Southerners because if the government could regulate interstate commerce, then it could one day regulate slavery; it's technically commerce. Therefore, states such as South Carolina passed the Negro Seamen Act, which was later struck down unconstitutional, greatly hit the issue of slavery. South Carolinians had great bases for their beliefs because of the recent Denmark Vesey uprising.
During the 1980's southern blacks from the United States dedicated to migrate to the north with the belief that the north had more opportunities and advantages blacks. Although, Frederick Douglas and Booker T. Washington opposed a migration to the north, millions of blacks migrated northward. The industries for the blacks migrating t o the north was what Douglas and Washington feared, black northern workers being placed in the same situation prior to their movement. Blacks were going to experience the same obstacles and disadvantages as they had in the south just with different situations. Northern blacks were going to experience prejudice, riots and murdering.
Dr. Richard Fuller, a southerner from Beaufort, South Carolina, writes the second side of the argument. In Fuller’s mind slaves are acceptable because it has become a way of life in the South. Large Southern plantations need slaves to help harvest and plant the crops; because of this importance the slave trade becomes a big part of Southern economy during the 1800s. Fuller also points out in his opening letter to Wayland that slavery was not invented by the Southern states, but was actually an ideal brought over from England. Fuller also goes on to explain the racism that occurs within the Southern States. “It would suddenly give them a liberty for which they are wholly unprepared, and which would be only a license for indolence and crime”
The southern economy was largely dependent on slaves, who worked on the numerous plantations of the South. Moreover, the main purpose of slavery in the South was for the cultivation of these cotton plantations. (Doc 4) For this reason, southerners believed
...ecause they feared that Slavery would soon be completely abolished. These tensions eventually led to the civil war where the North won and slavery was ended although there were still slave like laws in place after.
"The American constitution recognized slavery as a local constitution within the legal rights of the individual states. But in the North slavery was not adaptable to the local economy, and to many, it contradicted the vision of the founding fathers for a nation in which all men are to be free. The South considered slavery as a necessary institution for the plantation economy. It was linked to the local culture and society. As the United states expanded, the North worried that the South would introduce slavery into the new territories. Slavery had become both a moral issue and a question of political power." (Kral p61)
By 1860, the slave states had approximately four million slaves making up approximately one-third of the South's population. However, opposition to slavery began as early as the 1700's by religious leaders and philosophers in North America and Europe who condemned the practice, arguing that slavery was contrary to God's teachings and violated basic human rights. During the Revolutionary War, many Americans came to feel that slavery in the United States was wrong because they believed that protection of human rights was one of the founding tenets of the United States, and slaves were not accorded rights. Slavery was likely opposed more rapidly in the North in part because fewer people in the North owned slaves. Northern abolitionists began organized efforts to end the practice of slavery in the 1800's. But much of the American South, believed that slavery was vital to the continuation of its livelihood and lifestyle and therefore defended the institution of slavery.
Slavery was an integral part of the South. Not only vital to the southern economy, the existence of slavery became ingrained in the southern culture and way of life. As such, there were a variety of arguments that the southerners posed to rationalize and defend their lifestyle of slavery.
Constitutionally the North favored a loose interpretation of the United States Constitution, and they wanted to grant the federal government increased powers. The South wanted to reserve all undefined powers to the individual states themselves. The South relied upon slave labor for their economic well being, and the economy of the North was not reliant on such labor or in need of this type of service. This main issue overshadowed all others. Southerners compared slavery to the wage-slave system of the North, and believed their slaves received better care than the northern factory workers received from their employers. Many Southern preachers proclaimed that slavery was sanctioned in the Bible. Southern leaders had constantly tried to seek new areas into which slavery might be extended (Oates 349).
A solution to limit slavery debates led to the creation of a doctrine known as Popular Sovereignty. “A territory could decide by vote whether or not to permit slavery within its boundaries.” Therefore, this doctrine gave the territory right to be pro-slavery or anti-slavery. Although the doctrine ruled in favor of the majority of the population of a territory, not one hundred percent of the territory’s population was always in compliance. It is commonly discussed that slavery was something that greatly segregated the north from the south. With the south being pro-slavery, many were aware that the south needed slavery for particular services or else they would not feel so strongly to preserve slavery. “Slavery was basically a system to control labor, being a great investment for slave-owners to profit from.” Slaves were necessary for cotton production and other farm duties. “Cotton was king in the Old South: its primary export and the major source of southern wealth.” Furthermore, the south
Today, it is often debated whether the Civil War was truly caused by slavery. I would suggest that the people who dismiss slavery as a cause have either not realized that the other potential causes all trace back to slavery, or are reluctant to believe that southern citizens would go to war over such a cause. When even the highly-supported secession documents clearly outline how important slavery was to the southern states, it is hard to deny its fault in the war. The argument that the Confederacy was fighting for states’ rights is the most-often suggested alternative, however all one needs to do is dig deeper and calculate what these
One broad argument supporting slavery is, in fact, the economic side of slavery. During that time period, slaves brought in profit for the New World. Though they did, slaves were not paid, the allocation of money was not used towards the slaves, considering they hardly got food, the majority of money was given to the plantation owners. Plantation and slave owners in the New World were not the only ones financially affected by the slavery institution. The Spaniards that stole the Africans struggled with distributive justice, so much that they were picking which Africans to feed and which ones were not getting fed.
The movement against slavery had begun before the mid-nineteenth century; it was not new to anyone. However during the mid-nineteenth century the movements against slavery increased and gained more force. These movements were centered specifically towards the slavery system in the South. Before the 1830’s there were antislavery movements; after the 1830’s, abolitionist movements began. Despite the fact that both were against the same issue, both had different impacts on the nation. One was more peaceful, the other was considered fanatical and dangerous because of those who supported it.