Few Slaves In The North example essay topic

Thesis: Slaves managed to be the main beneficiaries of a movement so entirely unintended for them because, in a series of coincidences brought about by certain effects of Northern progress and improvement, the promotion of their interests became profitable to to the concerns of other classes. Counter-argument: some might argue that slaves could not have been the primary beneficiaries of the progress and improvement taking place in the North in 19th century america b / c there were very few slaves in the north; they were primarily concentrated in the south which was little affected by these changes and with slaves being so remote from the situation, how could they have benefited from it? -- while the south obviously did not experience the level of transformation that the north and midwestern regions underwent, it did not go untouched by this era of change -- it apparently made southerners even more sealed in their determination to 'preserve their way of life based on slavery,' as evidenced by their attempt to secede from the Union. Merely the fact that they reacted so strongly to the changes they perceived in the North indicates the force of the effect that progress had on them. -- the very fact that there were few slaves in the north and so many in the south only contributed to the progress-fueled growing distinction between the North and South, the former of whom could not understand -- likely because there were so few slaves in the North -- the 'semi feudal economic and social system' to which the South was 'hopelessly attached' due to their dependence on slavery (p. 5, Sheriff). Point: Wage laborers necessary to the realization of improvements in the 19th century began to be perceived as a morally inferior permanent underclass -- this elicited fears & changes in opinion involving progress -- some (i.e. Bethel society) began to think that one man's (the businessman's) profit came at another's (the worker's) expense -- brought about increasing desire for moral reform -- leading to 2nd Great Awakening -- which in turn led to popularity of abolitionist sentiment. Point: Decreasing reliance on slavery as a necessity to the maintenance of a stable economy, coupled with the still-strong Revolutionary ideals of liberty & equality, drew attention to injustices inherent in slavery. -- slaves were necessary before because men were trying to produce huge quantities to ship over to England, at first to pay back their joint-stock companies and then to secure their stability in the 'New World. ' but in the 19th century people were settled into their ways of life, and farmers did not feel such urgency to overproduce... ' farmers sought ways to unload their agricultural 'surpluses,' but the very term 'surplus'... suggests that the average farmer did not intentionally produce for trade, and certainly not for a market beyond the local community. ' (p. 11 Sheriff book) -- popular rhetoric began to reflect these (liberty & equality) ideals, i.e. in Doc. 4 which pointed out the 'absurdity... that... a very great part, of the human race, are doomed of right, to the slavery of toil, while others are born, only to enjoy. ' = = = even the use of the word slavery here with such an evidently negative connotation suggests the fact that it was becoming distasteful. also in Doc.

4: 'Is there one sort of rights for one class of men, and another for another? May one do lawfully what the other will do criminally; have we two codes of law among us? ' = = = must have at least subconsciously reminded Americans of the inequality of legal treatment of blacks. in Doc. 5 '... their Yankee spirit -- their pride, penetration, independence, and love of 'freedom and equality'... ' ; in Doc. 6 '... constituting herself a slave, a very slave to the caprices of him for whom she labors. ' Point: The advent of free-labor ideology (the belief that no matter what kind of person you are, regardless of background or whatnot, you could be capable of citizenship & upward mobility), which was used to quell fears of inherent inequalities among wage laborers & other classes by saying 'it's OK because they too have opportunity', necessitated Northern opposition to slavery -- 'Slavery was antithetical to their vision of a fluid society' (p. 175 Sheriff book) Point: Abolitionism, as a subsidiary of moral reform in general, became 'fashionable' in the middle and merchant classes, more as a status symbol than out of genuine support for the cause. By supporting causes generally perceived as 'benevolent,'s uch as the abolition of slavery, 'women and men confirmed their standing as upright citizens' (p. 166).

Also on p. 166 -- 'member of the commercial classes were eager to define their class status in terms of culture rather than simply economics;' in other words, they wanted others to know who they were (and to feel justified in considering themselves members of certain classes) not only by their money or possessions, but also by their actions, actions which were characteristic of the class with which they identified. For example, it helped to define businessmen as who they were by 'allowing [them] to feel as though they were fulfilling their paternal role in society,' as well as the added benefit of calling attention to the fact that 'others depended on the businessmen's goodwill,' which was all the more reason for people to do business with these men. Counterpoint: Certainly, many classes other than slaves benefited a great deal, and much more directly, from the revolutionary events of the 19th century, a fact so evident it is almost redundant to say. A natural response to this is that, surely if other people who did not have such menial beginnings benefited at all, then those people must have benefited more than the slaves. After all, slaves stood only to gain, at best, what even the lowest classes already had -- to everyone else, freedom was not considered a luxury, but an unalienable right.

While other classes climbed ever higher on the economic and social ladder, slaves were merely approaching the bottom rung. Consider, however, the magnitude of the change in each situation. Was it not a greater step for slaves to have become free than for poor men to have become competent, or competent men to become rich, or rich men to become richer? Are these matters not trivial when compared to an entire people's first realization of such a now-instinctive American ideal? Is it not a greater thing to be called your own man after generations of being another man's property, to be the master of your own destiny rather than being born into a contemptible fate? To say that others benefited more just because they achieved a higher level of sophistication would be like saying that a man who gets a nice Christmas bonus should count his luck better than a man just awakened from a decade-long coma.

In addition to the infinitely higher significance carried by the benefit of the slaves, most classes who benefited from progress and improvement also contained members who took losses and suffered from the effects of the changes. Slaves, on the other hand, had nothing to lose and everything to gain; from their situation, their was nowhere to go but up. While members of other classes might have gained a little extra jingle to their pockets or polish to their names, they were also at the risk of losing entire businesses or thousands of dollars in investments, or even a son or daughter to the wicked ways of canal life.