White Slavery


Warning: Undefined variable $num in /home/shroutdo/public_html/courses/wp-content/plugins/single-categories/single_categories.php on line 126

Warning: Undefined variable $posts_num in /home/shroutdo/public_html/courses/wp-content/plugins/single-categories/single_categories.php on line 127

Roediger explained in his essay how and why white freemen, that were earning wages, compared themselves to the slaves in the South and said they were white slaves. The growing abolition movement made it a necessity to define the difference between slavery and freedom. Then came the consideration of ‘white slaver’ as a category as more and more urban laborers and especially artisans publicized their experiences. The workers looked to Britain as an example of reform, just as the abolitionists had done. The labor activists did have some evidence of work place incidents where the workers were subjected to slavery rhetoric. The textile manufacturers mostly employed young single women and called “their management practices as paternalistic.” This obviously led to slavery comparisons. Some employers were even accused of calling their textile workers “their slaves.” Some laborers claimed to have ‘masters’ and be ‘slaves.’ However, some  tried to make some almost laughable comparisons about how the labor conditions were worse in the North than the conditions slaves experienced in the South. Activists claimed that the masters in the South were concerned with prolonging the life of the slave as long as possible, whereas northern employers did not care about their workers’ lives. What seems to me as a huge contradiction, many of the advocates for labor reform in the North were proslavery advocates at the same time. Proslavery advocates who were trying to end white slavery. As WIROBERTSON said his post, many of the proslavery advocates were scared of the African Americans slaves taking the jobs for lower pay. WIROBERTSON also said that the poorer whites had a fear of equality with the slaves. This statement agrees with one that Roediger made in his essay. Roediger said that the white workers didn’t want to relate too much with the slaves because that would suggest that they were unworthy of freedom. There was a fine line between comparing the northern workers and artisans to southern slaves and actually relating with them. The labor activists had to walk this tight rope, while still making strong  and gripping argument for labor reform.

MPIAH, David R. Roediger: The Language of Liberty


Warning: Undefined variable $num in /home/shroutdo/public_html/courses/wp-content/plugins/single-categories/single_categories.php on line 126

Warning: Undefined variable $posts_num in /home/shroutdo/public_html/courses/wp-content/plugins/single-categories/single_categories.php on line 127

Sherwood Callaway

HIS 141, Blog Post 9

The “coffin handbill” that Roediger describes acknowledges an incongruity between the spirit of ’76 and the persistence of slavery—something that my classmates and I have been hung up on since the pre-revolutionary period.

The journeyman tailors who wrote this handbill use the language of slavery to describe their condition, although there are certain fundamental differences between workers and slaves that they do not acknowledge. The tailors are afforded a wage, while the slaves are not. The tailors are free not to work, should they wish, while the slaves are not. Furthermore, the tailors are not bound and whipped and abused like slaves. So why make the comparison?

These are not the parallels that the journeyman tailors are trying to make, when they said “freemen of the North are now on a level with the slaves of the South” (319). These “freemen” sought to demonstrate the deprivation of their freedom, above all else. Roediger writes: “They were cast as slaves not because they were “hirelings” but because the state had deprived them of the freedoms necessary for defending their rights” (319). In order to manipulate peoples’ liberal sensibilities, this document acknowledges the incongruity between the spirit of ’76 and the persistence of slavery. America was founded to protect our freedoms, right?

The level of comfort with which the tailors treat this incongruity is new and astounding, but it doesn’t necessarily imply that slavery was out of fashion. The tailors were not so inclined to make a full comparison between themselves and slaves, because they weren’t abolitionists; they probably didn’t have a problem slavery, and were definitely used to it being around. The journeyman tailors, like other wage laborers, used only half the analogy and ignored the rest.

Of course, it didn’t take much longer for people to fill in that other half. The language of wage labor movements questioned the ethics of forced labor, and “chattel slavery stood as the ultimate expression of the denial of liberty” (319).