Slavery Vs Slavery

The North’s economy was based on textiles, shipping, and skilled trades. Their climate was not suited for the same type of agricultural products that the South produced like cotton, sugar, rice and tobacco. Northern states like New England manufactured and shipped goods like guns, clocks, plows and axes (page 399). One reason for the South’s dependence on slavery is because their economy relied on the existence of slave labor. For example, the cultivation of cotton depended largely on slave labor, with 75% of the crop grown on plantations,

In American Slavery 1619-1877 written by American Historian Peter Kolchin, he wrote “south developed as a true slave society, in which slavery served as the bedrock of the economy and of the social order” (Kolchin, Pg 29). This shows that the south relied on Slavery as a means to help run their society because being that the South was prominently farm country they needed to rely on slave labor to grow and sell their crops like cotton, tobacco and wheat which supply majority of their financial income. The south was never evolved into a more practical and modern way of life thus, the demand for slave labor in the south became increasingly more frequent, even when the need for slave labor according to the rest of the world was no longer a necessity. Just like the South, the northern states used slavery as their main source of income at first, however what set the North apart from the south is their advanced thinking. Slavery in the North while legal was not as excessive, in fact according to Kolchin, “ In most of the north, lack of substantial commercial agriculture preclude a demand for large scale forced labor; slaves served in a variety of capabilities, from house service to skilled crafts and day labor, but slavery did not serve as the basis for the economy” (Kolchin, Pg 27.) This depicts that while slaves did serve a purpose in the North’s financial

The introduction of Africans to America in 1619 set off an irreversible chain of events that effected the economy of the southern colonies. With a switch from the expensive system of indentured servitude, slavery emerged and grew rapidly for various reasons, consisting of economic, geographic, and social factors. The expansion of slavery in the southern colonies, from the founding of Jamestown in 1607 to just before America gained its independence in 1775, had a lasting impact on the development of our nation’s economy, due to the fact that slaves were easy to obtain, provided a life-long workforce, and were a different race than the colonists, making it easier to justify the immoral act.

The author also explores the profitability of slavery as an institution, as while the tendency of slave owners to keep their capital invested in slaves rather than industry resulted in a lack of economic diversification in the South, it also resulted in great profits during times of high demand for agricultural products. Phillips states that more research is required in this area.

     In the later 1700’s to 1863, slavery was an intricate part of the South. Slaves were needed for plantation work like planting, caring for, and harvesting crops to maintaining the land. After

Was slavery an economic engine for the Southern economy before the Civil War? Men like Senator and businessman James Henry Hammond would say yes immediately without a second thought. People like Hammond believed that slavery in these times were critical to the growth of the southern economy. They made points such as that agricultural sales were a main percentage of business in the south and with the large area of fertile land that slave ownership was a necessary evil. Along with those, the decades preceding the civil war, the north began to industrialize, which in turn created a large demand for cotton, which was heavily supported by slavery. Not only was slavery a supporting crutch for the immense cotton market, but also slave trade proved to be a highly profitable market of his own. Finally, from the perspective of a plantation owner as a business enterprise, owning slaves proved to be most effective by implementing business strategies, much like Henry James Hammond’s. Without slavery, small planters would have been unable to make a steadfast profit, leaving the cotton industry to rely on large plantation owners who would mainly invest their fortune in British luxurious imports, instead of diversifying and reinvesting in schooling or infrastructure. I personally believe that James Henry Hammond and others were correct, with exception to my ethical beliefs, that slavery was a key factor in the growth and preservation of

The Southern Colonies developed race-based slavery because of the rising need to increase labor and to decrease costs. The move toward profit-based agriculture over subsistence farming meant that there was an expanding need for laborers, which would increasingly expand with success, necessitating a further increase of cheap labor. In addition to being labor intensive, the Southern crops: rice, tobacco, sugarcane, and indigo were grown for cash rather than for immediate need. Technically there is no such thing as enough with a goal as abstract as profit and so would not end with a fulfilled, finite, need but rather with means and a desire to expand. With profit as a goal expansion is only limited by available, usable, acreage and becomes a goal in and of itself. With expansion as a goal, a self-replenishing and unpaid workforce allows for greater profit and thus greater expansion. It was a snowball effect creating a market for humans.

Southern economy was the center of plantation that cultivated cotton. Many the rich started to carve the plantation to earn money by exporting cotton. They needed a lot of labor and slavery was proper to use. The majority of white southerners did not own slaves because planters monopolized the best land. They could not help taking possession of the land that was not proper to cultivate cotton. Most of them earned a living by self-sufficiency even though the slave population was growing: from 697,624 in 1790 to 3,953,760 in 1860.

Slavery was the focal point of the economy in the South, this inthrallment was the fuel for the agricultural South as well as the industrial North. Slaves would work the lands of their masters and bring in the raw materials produced, and these raw materials, commonly tobacco and cotton, would be shipped to the North and Europe. The North used the raw materials for the textile mills from the South because it made more economic sense because it cost less than the raw materials coming from Europe. Both regions became dependent upon each other, "the ruin of thousands and hundreds of thousands in the manufacturing states..." (Doc A) would occur if slavery was prevented from spreading by the Republicans. This claim being that if the North continued its free-soil mentality, it would fail as well due to a lack of raw materials caused by an insufficient amount of land for slaves and plantations; "a blow at slavery ia a blow at commerce and civilization..." (Doc R). The North was strongly tied economically to the products of slavery, the South was immensely impacted by slavery, it was the foundation and

The South, on the other hand, was highly dependent upon the institution of slavery. It was still primarily an agricultural society that needed as many laborers as possible in order for the plantation owners to make ends meet. According to historian Douglas Harper, “In 1793 came the cotton gin, which brought a 50-fold increase in the average daily output of short-staple cotton, promoted the rapid expansion of a ‘cotton kingdom’ across the Deep South, and made large-scale slavery profitable.” Because of this, the slave became an essential tool to the farmers of the south; more money became invested in slavery rather than in industrial improvements. Based upon the 1860 U.S. Census, there were almost a whopping total of four million slaves in the South alone. In fact, the more slaves an owner had, the more prestige. “Most slave owners owned fewer than five slaves, and only 12 percent of Southerners had twenty or more slaves. Many whites who had no slaves looked with envy upon the wealthy, and to a degree admired them.” This hierarchy had a clearly defined social structure which created distinctions between rich and poor whites as well as racial segregation. This agricultural society and its strict hierarchy only increased the social and racial disparities found in the southern region of the United States.

“Farming in the New England colonies was a challenge. Due to the cold, long, and harsh winters, the growing season was very short. The soil was also rocky, so farmers had to take all the rocks out of the ground before planting. Due to these shortcomings, the farmers in the New England colonies only farmed enough for their family, themselves, and their farm animals” (Diamond). Due to this issue, they didn’t have much need for slaves because of the lack of crops. They also couldn’t afford slaves because for one they didn’t have enough work to keep them busy and two they didn’t have enough crops to share. “At first, the south also relied on the forests and the water, but tobacco and cotton later emerged as cash crops. Initially these crops were harvested by indentured servants, but with the growth of plantations, planters started to import slaves from Africa” (Rosenzweig). So the opposite goes for The Southern Colonies; they needed slaves to help with the large lands they owned. They knew that without slaves their own family wouldn’t be able to keep up with the land/crops so therefore they hired several slaves to do

The stability that slavery created in the American South between 1820 and 1860 was phenomenal. Economic stability was like no other country had ever seen, this economic stability created a global marketing network throughout many different nations, trade routes that still exist within modern America today. Slavery became the bedrock of American South livelihood; it became so valuable that it was almost seen as unimaginable to live without slavery. “It was inconceivable that European colonists could have settled and developed America without slave labour taking place,” this was according to……. The reason the south prospered and grew like it did was due to slavery. The value that slaves had to their slave owners was unquestionable. Slave owners were able to receive loans, whilst using their slaves as guarantors; these loans would then have been used in the purchasing of further land, more livestock and more slaves. It was also said that slave owners used their slaves to pay of any outstanding debt they may have had. It is clear to see the economic value that slaves possessed; they were included in the valuation of estates, for example; (Example), and this in turn became a source of tax revenue for the National as well as the local Governments, it was also

Slavery lives on all era in world history till lately, but its life has not constantly had the similar economic trait. Two questions ought to be answered to properly examine any definite cause of slavery: (1) what further systems of labor live in the civilization also to slavery? And (2) what system of labor is leading? In this manner we can make a difference among ancient slavery (e.g., in Greece and Egypt where free farmers live together with slaves, but slavery was leading) and antebellum slavery in the United States (which live together with free farmers, but was conquered by the industrially-based capitalism of the urban North). The past dominance of capitalism in the United States made antebellum slavery the most uncivilized system of slave work. Not

Although Slavery was the most profitable to the Southern Planters, there were some alternatives. For instance, sharecropping was an alternative that would easily remove the need for slaves. Sharecropping was the process of a farmland owner renting out space for poorer farmers to use, in exchange for a small portion of their crops to the owner of the farmland. This was actually done a lot after the civil war, when slavery was abolished, and the newly freed slaves needed work in order to support themselves and their families. However, this process was still not put into effect largely until the Union had won the civil war. This is since sharecropping didn’t provide as much of an economic boom to landowners as slavery did to plantation owners,

In antebellum America, the peculiar institution of slavery was seen as a positive good. “I believe when two races come together which have different origins, colors, and physical and intellectual characteristics, that slavery is, instead of evil, a good, a positive good…” (John C. Calhoun “The American Pageant”). The farming of crops like rice, sugar and tobacco had been abandoned and were taken over by King Cotton. Cotton was the staple crop for the south and everything that the south did revolved around it. The high demand for cotton and the eventual invention of the Cotton Gin (Eli Whitney) increased the need for slavery. The Transatlantic slave trade was outlawed in 1808, but slavery in countries still existed. Bondage labor and child labor are two examples of slaveries that are still prevalent throughout the world. While the institution of slavery is still practiced in our modern world, slavery has changed in the sense that it is no longer displayed in a public manner and it’s not necessarily based on race anymore.