The Deep South experienced a tremendous amount of soil erosion due to cotton planting. King Cotton was very profitable. Meanwhile, slaves were in such high demand that they were forced to suffer through horrific conditions inflicted upon them by their owners. Farmers could no longer thrive in the years to come because their land had become so damaged. A hydrology and soil professor at the University of Georgia, by the name of Aaron Joslin, stated that slave labor and cotton planting caused such an enormous amount of damage to Southern soil that it can still be seen today. Our country created a successful economy off of slavery, but it is easy to say that the abolition of slavery was somewhat of a phenomenon. New England’s Textile Industries, Great Britain's wealth, and the North's banking system were all the results of slavery. It always makes me wonder if it had been abolished for economic and environmental reasons rather than moral values.
The Reconstruction Era highlights cotton’s importances just as much as the Antebellum Era. After slavery was abolished sharecropping became the driving force behind America. The initiation to stop forced labor was not a moral case. From an environmental standpoint, the damage was not worth the cost. We must remember the fact that slaves were able to contribute to the economy once they were released. Much like slavery sharecropping encouraged trade between the United States and Europe enabling expansion to occur throughout the Southwest and creating commercial success in New York. Cotton was “King” primarily because it was America's leading export throughout the early 18th and 19th centuries. “King Cotton” is what ignited the Civil War. It was arguably the biggest deciding factor in 19th century America. “King Cotton” ultimately caused the United States most tragic battle. Hence, the reason why it was nothing short of a surprise that the North joined the war to abolish slavery. Knowing the history behind the slogan “Cotton is King” allows us to appreciate the courage of abolitionists, both black and white alike. It enables us to realize the seriousness of their achievements as well as the roles that the U.S. and Great Britain played. “Cotton is King” generates irony because it sparked America's economic dominance while opposing morals behind abolitionism all in the same breath. The crop was the world's first large consumer product. Cotton was not just a phenomenon throughout the Deep South but globally as well. It was a luxurious commodity; the world's first.
The “Cash Crop” ultimately displaced farmers in the South. In Tallahassee for example, as much as three fourths of land was lost by 1860. As a result, some landowners moved even further South. Instead of planting cotton they produced other “cash crops” such as tobacco, rice, sugar, and, indigo. Unfortunately, slaves were sent to the Deep South also. Slave owners in the Upper South did so as a source of investment. Blacks were expected to use their skills to help create plantation solutions for their masters. The economic world had been destroyed. According to Joslin "The cotton growers did not obey the precept that we inherit the earth from our children, and they destroyed the soil to the point that their children could not use that land in any sort of productive way. So the evil then was much as the evil of corporations is today: Go for as much profit as you can right now and who cares about future generations.Additionally, the evil to me is that they were completely unconcerned with their place in the ecology of their home, elevating the importance of themselves while devaluing the soil and its ecological functions that they depended on. The androcentric nature of their worldview allowed their greed and self-importance to prevail while undermining their empathy and pursuit of balance and harmony with the world around them.” The well-being of African Americans was the least of white Southerner’s concerns seeing as how their livelihood depended on slave labor. It is easy to say that Southerners allowed their greed to cloud their rationalism. The conditions of the war gave Blacks the opportunity to take control of their own lives. The Civil War tore apart the South’s infrastructure and white population. The economy in the South was at the brunt of poverty and turmoil. In the generations to come the world watched it slowly reconstruct.
I find it hard to believe that the new world would have been able to develop without slavery. slave labor was stable and economically efficient. The cotton economy was America's source of energy. It’s our country's oldest and most popular crop. On a grand scale, Global request were created because of cotton. It is only fair to categorize it as a United States fiber. Until social and economic issues tore it apart. Cotton was the fiber and slaves were the seeds. They worked as planters and farm hands to keep our country thriving for years to come. Millions of African-Americans were hauled down south to feed the cash crop. Innocent people were beaten down, and our land was ultimately demolished all as a means to feed America's greed. We have to ask ourselves if this type of exploitation was worth the hype. Millions of lives had been ruined, and our nation was ripped apart. Cotton and its planters were the engines behind our economic growth when all of that went away we were left in shambles. The phrase itself exemplifies that slavery was not abolished due to moral conviction but rather economic self-centeredness. When slavery was labeled as too much of an obstruction to economic progress, it was suppressed. However, when it was viewed as more of a hurdle to innovation, it was ok. I do not believe that the North waged war to put an end to prejudice. Whites in the Northern states were said to have perceived their society as accelerating. Cotton was the main staple all over the country. By the Civil Wars end, a lot of the nutrients that was once found in the South’s soil was gone. The land had been destroyed by the “cash crop” which was due to the lack of fertilization. Fertilizing fields was quite expensive. Thus, the amount cotton decreased drastically. From an environmental standpoint, slavery ended due to the exhausted soil.
The slogan “Cotton is King: Slavery is the Light of the Political Economy” allows us to see different perspectives. The phrase leads us to the conclusion that cotton was very important to economic life. “King Cotton” was America's fuel. On the other hand, it also signifies that free whites had no issue with slave labor because it benefited them in the long run. The creation of sharecropping solidifies this argument. With the destruction of Southern soil and the popularization of the cotton gin, slavery came to an end for social and economic reasons. After all, cheap agricultural labor was booming after the Emancipation Proclamation and well into the 20th century. Basic economics will show you that cotton farming would have kept slave labor alive for years to follow. Northern Banks essentially financed Southern Slavery. As a matter of fact, many financiers and banks in New York were rooting for the Confederacy during the war. As northern states began emancipating, a number of slave owners sold their slaves to Southern planters rather than losing capital. If slavery wasn't illegal who's to say that blacks would not be in the field picking crops today. Even at this day and age, thousands of field hands are abused in our country.
The saying “Cotton is King: Slavery is the Light of the Political Economy” basically defends slavery. it acknowledges the United State’s economic need for “King Cotton” and symbolizes that slavery was perceived to be ok. “Cotton is King” displays that at one point in time, Americans felt as though it was alright to treat blacks like cattle simply because it benefited the economy. Just as America is driven by salary slavery in third world countries today, the same was done on our very own soil for in the past. Cotton was “King” and America was its throne.
No comments:
Post a Comment