Economics of Slavery and its Impact on Nation

Economics of Slavery and its Impact on Nation Slavery was an economic factor in America since its colonization by European powers in the 16th and 17th centuries. The colonies were originally worked through the indenture system (where European servants worked for a number of years for free, and then gained citizenship in the country). A need for more workers than Europe could provide, was the primary economic reason for slavery. The first slaves were Indian slaves, shipped to Carolina and Charles town between 1670 and 1715. This period was also the beginning of the most well-known of the American Slave systems: African prisoners shipped in to the Caribbean, Brazil, and Spanish south America.
African slaves were bought cheaply in African countries, and shipped into the Caribbean in the hold, in much the same way as other commodities. They were not only kept by those with large amounts of land, but also by small farmers, and city dwellers.
It is generally believed that the economics of large acreages of Cotton and Sugar, combined with low levels of servant indenture, meant that America came to rely upon slaves to work the land. It would have been impossible to farm the vast amounts of these goods without slave labor, as liberated workers would have demanded pay, and probably better working conditions and fewer hours. slaves, on the other hand, were not employees, and could be worked in extreme conditions. African Slaves were able to repopulate, like livestock, and were also supposed to be immune to Malaria and other diseases (Racism saw them as stronger, and better suited to physical labor than white people). unlike Indian slaves, black people (at least in the early to mid 18th Century) stood out among the general population. These were the main reasons for keeping black slaves: Need for unpaid workers to farm cotton and Sugar, upon which the economy relied. black slaves could be worked hard without fear of retribution, and would not gain rights or citizenship through this labor. Slaves would reproduce, whereas indentured labor was not renewable, and black workers were seen as stronger and more ‘suited’ to physical labor. and black escapees were more likely to stand out from the free population, making their capture easier.
The Louisiana Purchase allowed slave owners to move their slaves into Louisiana. While other states were effectively outlawing slavery, the Louisiana Purchase allowed slave owners to move into a new territory with no anti-slavery laws.
This purchase, and the connected antagonism between the Slave-owning and anti-slavery states, would eventually result in the outbreak of Civil War. attempts to resolve the antagonism between the two sides, such as the Missouri Compromise – which outlawed slavery in the Louisiana territory to the North of the 36’30 parallel (Except near the boundaries of the new state of Missouri). As can be seen from this attempt to describe it, the Missouri Compromise is not really committed to anti-slavery, and provides many ways for landowners to escape the new law.
An abject failure, the Missouri Compromise was effectively written out by the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854, and its wings had already been clipped by the attempts in 1850 to find a compromise, which added the Fugitive Slave Act to the mix. one of the key elements which resulted in America erupting in Civil War. This compromise allowed the North to build a vast industrial infrastructure, which the South could not do, as it was based upon crop yields.
The resolution of the Dred Scott case for his freedom, which ended in his being returned to slavery (until being freed by this former owner’s sons). Anti-Slavery campaigners saw this as a move by the South to expand slavery. the Southerners saw it as a defense of their rights. This provided the positions for the Civil War. Northerners attempting to hold back the South, and Southerners attempting to resist what they saw as removal of their rights.