Sherwood Callaway<\/p>\n
HIS 141, Blog post 5<\/p>\n
In response to this week\u2019s readings, one of my classmates wrote:<\/p>\n
\u201cWhile I certainly agree that the tension between the nation\u2019s founding principles and the oppression of slavery contributed to masters\u2019 desire to see their actions as a form of paternalism rather than overt oppression, I don\u2019t believe slave owners had any interest in acquiring the affection of their slaves.\u201d<\/p>\n
http:\/\/sites.davidson.edu\/his141\/author\/alkarout\/<\/p>\n
I understand this perspective; it is hard to imagine a way in which \u201cbenevolence\u201d can be associated with such a horrendous institution. Southern plantation society seems completely consumed by capitalist gain and self-interest\u2014 lacking a sense of morality, and malevolent\u2014 especially from a modern perspective. This conclusion is accurate, but not entire.<\/p>\n
Consider this angle. We often conclude that northerners were more morally inclined than southerners because of they held more progressive positions on the institution of slavery. But the northern colonies also participated in slavery\u2014 the difference being that they maintained a \u201csociety with slaves\u201d, rather than a \u201cslave society.\u201d I would argue that the north was independent of slavery only out of convenience. If the institution had been more useful for shipbuilding, fishing or commercial activity, I\u2019m sure it would have had greater influence in those spheres. After all, it is reasonable to assume that southerners sought the same thing as northerners: monetary gain. The prevalence of slavery in a particular region seems to have depended solely upon its potential to produce in said region.<\/p>\n
The issue of racism in the south, however, is less excusable. We learned from studying the Chesapeake colonies that racism was not necessarily a reason for slavery, but rather a byproduct. White solidarity developed out anxiety and fear\u2014the anxiety of being a minority, and the fear of a deadly slave revolt. But over time, white solidarity developed into an aggressive, indiscriminate defense mechanism. This trajectory\u2014 from prolonged fear to aggression\u2014 is strikingly similar to colonial perspectives of natives during the 17th<\/sup> century.<\/p>\n (On a more general note, I think that the innumerable dangers of the \u201cnew world\u201d explain the colonists\u2019 aggressive behavior. They seemed to be constantly on edge!)<\/p>\n Ultimately, racism became malevolent, andcontributed to sustaining the institution of slavery. But this isn\u2019t the complete story. Because of their spread-out communities, southerners enjoyed plenty of freedom from both the law and their peers. Their sense of personal liberty was second only to the frontiers peoples\u2019. Also, they were English protestants. They held \u201cgood\u201d Christian values, and wanted to save souls by spreading the faith. Southerners likely struggled to marry these ideological and religious beliefs to the institution of slavery. In some capacity, I feel sorry for plantation owners, because they absolutely needed slave labor to compete economically, but the institution was incompatible with their beliefs. Sustaining their livelihoods meant burdening an ideological and religious conundrum.<\/p>\n This is where I return to my classmate\u2019s post. I would argue that \u201cpaternal benevolence\u201d likely existed as an attempt to reconcile notions of freedom and Christian kindness with the institution of slavery.<\/p>\n In sum: slavery was perpetuated by commercial interests and malevolent racism, but slave owners were not necessarily without benevolence.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Sherwood Callaway HIS 141, Blog post 5 In response to this week\u2019s readings, one of my classmates wrote: \u201cWhile I certainly agree that the tension between the nation\u2019s founding principles and the oppression of slavery contributed to masters\u2019 desire to see their actions as a form of paternalism rather than overt oppression, I don\u2019t believe … <\/p>\n