Proponents of slavery argued it was necessary for economic development and that slaves were better off and cared for. Opponents argued slavery was criminal and unjust, depriving slaves of basic human rights and liberties like freedom, family connections, and self-determination. While slavery supported some economies, alternatives were possible and slavery inherently robbed individuals of personal achievement, initiative, and dignity.

1. Slavery<br />#2 Present the arguments offered by proponents of slavery in support of the institution. Assess the merits of these arguments. Present the arguments offered by the opponents of human bondage. Assess the merits of these arguments.<br />The institution of slavery in North America began out of economic necessity. Regardless of this fact, the arguments for and against slavery continued to be voiced throughout the years of British colonization and on into the first century of a newborn United States. While some viewed slavery as demoralizing and criminal, others justified it for economic or social reasons. Either way, the debate was passionate on both sides and led this nation into one of its greatest internal conflicts.<br />For those supporting slavery, many sited the necessity of slave labor in supporting a robust and expanding economy. The historical perspective supports this in that many believe without the slave labor supply, it would have been difficult for America to have settled and “exploited its resources” in creating and sustaining a new land (McClellan, pg. 84, David Brion Davis). Not only was it argued that it was necessary for developing this new land, but it was needed in order to allow the newly created United States to rise to a global commerce leader in the 18th and 19th centuries (Gerald Foster, Slavery and Race). Some believed that God had “committed” slaves to their care and justified that because of this divine cause, it was not necessary to “speculate on abstract questions of theoretical liberty,” but rather an obligation to uphold (McClellan, pg. 71, Robert Young Hayne). Along the lines of the divine obligation of plantation owners, there were supporters of slavery who proclaimed that the black race was an inferior race and that by employing them, even as non-paid slaves, “they were elevated from the condition in which God first created them…” (McClellan, pg. 77, James Henry Hammond). In so elevating them, it was believed that the slaves were provided the food, clothing, shelter, and medical attention that was lacking for their free counterparts (McClellan, pg. 74, Orestes Augustus Brownson). Furthermore, there were those who believed that the slaves introduction to America improved their quality of existence through such means as intellectual development, morals, and comfort, and that they are “cheerful and faithful” (McClellan, pg. 80, Professor C. F. McCay). <br />While the need for slaves in the agricultural south for economic prosperity seems to be a valid argument, some felt that while growth in the South might have taken on a different course with smaller farm units and would have developed more slowly, there was no “specific need” that couldn’t have been handled differently (McClellan, pg. 82, Kenneth M. Stampp). In contrast to the argument that slaves were happy in their situation, it was counter-argued that in spite of the demoralizing influences of their state, “I have seen him (a slave) dance in his chains, it is true; but he is not happy” (McClellan, pg. 72, Angelina E. Grimke). Slaves probably had to adapt emotionally to their station in life and in so doing, could have been perceived as happy, whether they truly were or not. As for the argument that the slave was provided for better than the free black man, there were testaments to the fact that situations arose where one slave could produce enough in one season to repay the price of his purchase, and so it could be even more profitable to “work him to death than to take care of him” (McClellan, pg. 81, John Fiske). While it was in the best interest of a landowner to provide for his investment the necessities that would ensure his survival and ability to contribute to the cultivation of the land for profit, it seems apparent that there were times when it was not profitable to do so, and other times, mistreatment as a method of controlling his slaves to prevent the possibility of insurrection went against the argument that they were well provided for. <br />Regardless of these supporting arguments, there were voices of strong opposition as well. One primary opposition was the argument that slavery was criminal, in that it took from the slave “all that a man can call his own;” from his ability to earn income to the right to stay connected to his family (McClellan, pg. 73, Horace Mann). It was argued that slavery was an injustice, for it made one man subject for the profit of another, and because of this need of one man for another’s gain, it was deemed necessary that the “inborn sentiment of liberty” must be “extinguished,” in order to maintain perpetual control of the slave population (McClellan, pg. 75, Victor Cousin). Slaves clearly were treated as chattel and had few liberties beyond duty.<br />By controlling a slave’s right to his life and liberty, and by taking away his ability to make a living on his own, I believe one is greatly robbed of a sense of personal accomplishment, initiative, and self-actualization. Initiative becomes that thing imposed by outside sources in the form of expectation of output, with the possible punishments that come when that output is not met. Personal accomplishment comes from external expectations as well. Without these internal motivations being expressed, and with survival in the hands of one’s owner, how is one to rise to the desired awareness of self-actualization? Therefore, in subjecting another human to the bondage of slavery and in controlling the environments, values, and elements of survival of another man, slavery is indeed a form of injustice, stealing the basic life force that should be a right of every man.<br />While slavery is no longer an issue in American society, wide class stratification still exists. With that stratification, there will exist to some extent, the elements of those who try to control others and use their powers in a way that can limit the opportunities for growth and personal accomplishment for those considered below their status in life. This has always existed, but in examining the negative effects of the historical abuses of power, it is in our best interest to be mindful and respectful of the value that each person adds to the collective society. <br />