Elizabeth
Rockett
November 12,
2014
HIST 205:
Slavery in the United States
Reaction Paper 3
The Antebellum South: known for its
agricultural success, farmlands and southern pride was established and
controlled by the violent institution of slavery. The institution of slavery
constructed the political and economic structures of the South. Slave markets
became central to the narrative of the American South and perpetuated the
process of commodification. This process continued to be a profit-driven
practice that violently scaled down life and robbed individuals of their
agency. Historians Walter Johnson and Peter Kolchin effectively demonstrate how
the Antebellum South was constructed to further the institution of slavery and
enabled white America to politically and economically succeed. In addition,
slavery not only defined the identity of blacks but it shaped and defined the
white identity. An identity rooted in the institution of slavery. Johnson and
Kolchin examine how slavery influenced every aspect of the Antebellum South and
was the central narrative of the “American Dream”. An ideology that dominated the lives of white
slave owners and non-slave owners. In short, Johnson and Kolchin highlight how
the institution of slavery controlled and constructed the economic, political, and
cultural structures of the American South.
As slavery continued to influence
the political and economic structures of the South, slave markets became
central to the “American Dream” narrative. It was the public space that allowed
white males to sell and buy black bodies- black bodies that determined white
bodies’ status and success in a capitalistic system. Johnson articulates that
“the entire economy of the antebellum South was constructed upon the idea that
the bodies of the enslaved people had a measurable monetary value, whether,
they were actually sold or not.”[1]
This commodification of slaves was the core motivation of the slave markets.
White males would occupy this public space in attempt to make a commission and
participate in the economy. White men’s identities depended on their involvement
in the slave markets. Kolchin supports Johnson’s claim by acknowledging that
the number of white southern men with an economic stake in slavery was higher
than the number of white men who actually owned a slave.[2]
This fact represents the power of the “American Dream” ideology. An ideology
that envisioned white men owning large plantations that were full of content
slaves and prosperous agriculture. Many white individuals, however, did not
have the monetary wealth or social status to own a slave, which restrained
their capacity to exercise their privileges. Johnson articulates that, “some
were outsiders [white men] buying their way into full participation in the
political economy of slavery and white masculinity.”[3]
They were buying black bodies to improve the status of their white bodies in a
white patriarchal society.
This American Dream ideology and
white identity was also present in the political thought of the Antebellum
South. In addition to the construction of the economy, the institution of
slavery produced a political framework that benefitted white America while
systematically oppressing black America. For instance, Dred Scott of 1857
allowed the Federal Government to sanction slavery.[4] Dred Scott was a slave in Missouri and
traveled all over the country with his master who was a doctor. He sued for his
freedom but the government ruled that he was not free and therefore denied
blacks the right to become United States citizens. The Chief Justice of the
Supreme Court argued that, “negroes have no rights that the white man is bound
to respect.”[5]
This crafted language allowed the Federal Government and the Supreme Court to
deny blacks rights while also defining the white male identity. According to
the government, the white man inherited and deserved respect while blacks did
not. These political decisions directly impacted the white south. It created a
psychological benefit in which whites were able to create a hierarchal system.[6]
They were able to view themselves superior to slaves. Johnson acknowledges that
white men cemented this hierarchy through their social ties and participating
in the political and economic structures.[7]
The more slaves they owned, the higher they were on the imaginary ladder of
success.
This racial hierarchy also
manifested itself in the relationship between slaveholders and slaves. As more white men started to own slaves, the
ideology of paternalism pervaded the south. Slaveholders felt as though they
had to take care of their slaves’ well being. Kolchin explains that “masters
saw their slaves not just as their laborers but also as their “people”,
inferior members of their extended households from whom they expected work and
obedience but to whom they owed guidance and protection.”[8]
This need to control and protect their property created a tension between
slaves and slaveholders. Slaveholders wanted to control slaves’ mobility by any
means possible while simultaneously attempting to be father figures. This
tension was rooted in the fear of revolt. Historian Stephanie Camp argued that
slaveholders would use paternalistic mechanisms to suppress revolt and produce
social control.[9]
For instance, slaveholders would throw plantation parties and holiday parties
for slaves. Camp further explains that, “these sponsored frolics were supposed
to control black pleasure by giving it periodic, approved release.”[10]
This was just one way in which slaveholders would use their paternalistic power
to please the slaves and subdue the fear of revolt. They were able to use their
privilege to create a contained space where slaves were forced to obey. In the
end, a successful slaveholder was able to control his slaves and achieve the
American Dream.
The institution of slavery was a
coercive and perpetual slavery that constructed every aspect of the Antebellum
South. Slavery was at the forefront of political, economic thought. On a macro
level, the Antebellum South was constructed to benefit slavery and sanction the
commodification of black bodies. Similarly, on an individual level, slavery
gave meaning to individuals’ way of life and identity. Johnson and Kolchin
effectively highlight how the institution of slavery controlled the political,
economic, and cultural structures of the American South. The institution of
slavery did not exist alone but was embedded into every facet of life.
[1] Walter Johnson. Soul by Soul: Like inside the Antebellum
Slave Market. (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press 1999) 25.
[3] Walter Johnson. Soul by Soul: Like inside the Antebellum
Slave Market. (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press 1999) 88.
[5]
Ibid.
[6] Charles McKinney. “Life in
the Shadow of the Market” (lecture, Rhodes College, Memphis, TN, November 4,
2014.
[7] Walter Johnson. Soul by Soul: Like inside the Antebellum
Slave Market. (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press 1999) 137.
[9] Stephanie M. H. Camp, “The
Pleasure of Resistance: Enslaved Women and Politics in the Plantation South,
1830-1861,” The Journal of Southern
History 68 (2002): 546.
No comments:
Post a Comment