What reasons did slaves states give for justifying their need for slaves?

Answer 1

== ==

The whole southern economy was based on agriculture. The production of cash crops (mainly cotton and tobacco) fueled their economy. The production was slow, labor intensive, and did not generate huge enough profits that would enable a farmer to pay its workers. Therefore, to produce its products, slaves were needed.

Answer 2

The economy of the south and the prosperity of this nation. Experience for the white man, as to own and controll a race of people. Think I'm crazy? George Bush is putting the experience to use in Iraq!

This isn't a real quote... just saying

Answer 3

There were many reasons, but I'll concentrate on the main reason and maybe others can add to it.

Now, I'm not saying they were the RIGHT in their collective thoughts and sentiments, but given the TIMES, the main reason was they felt justified in owning slaves. It was their "right," in order to maintain their status quo, i.e., their agricultural society.

The South was almost exclusively an agricultural society ... as opposed to the North, which was agricultural, pastoral and trade-oriented. The West was primarily pastoral and also agricultural, but mostly to support livestock and the farmer's own needs for his family.

The large tobacco, cotton, rice and wheat crops needed personnel for harvesting. It was common in the Dutch and British Empires to take, trade and sell slaves from Africa for that purpose so they did not have to PAY the workers and could make a bigger profit. (Although I've never read it, somewhere in The Bible it supposedly says this is a "right.") So when they arrived in America, they just followed the practices they were used to. For the most part, New England was highly religious. Pilgrims, Quakers and Shakers did not believe in slavery (some Puritans did have slaves, but not the majority). Also, the Methodists and Baptists of Upstate New York, Northern New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Ohio did not believe in slavery. This is the main reason for the difference in attitude. Another key point is that after the Revolutionary War, almost all the Northeast abolished slavery, most notably Pennsylvania and New York. So as soon as the nation was formed, it split along the slavery line the following day in Congress, and I mean that literally.

The South felt justified in owning slaves, because they felt they would have no economy if they didn't. People live to keep life progressing as usual and aren't open to change. This was even more true in those days. The people of the South felt that their way of life was being attacked by fat wallet Northern bankers and businessmen who sat in an office all day, hundreds of miles away from their farms ... the farms that gave them the raw goods they would manufacture, sell and trade at an enormous profit. And they didn't like that. So, the need for the South to unify and isolate themselves grew larger every day, especially with pressure consistently mounting from the rest of the country. It took 80 years to get to the point of Civil War, but you can see it was inevitable from the beginning.

One could say that though the South seceded, the North kept pushing them toward it. One of the biggest problems was the North gave them few options and whatever options were given were unacceptable to the Southerners. I think had the North given the South more support and SOLUTIONS, and the South was a little more open-minded about change, there wouldn't have been a Civil War, and slavery could have ended with no fear of the South's economy declining. After all, it happened in other places in the world. But they felt all the North did was chastise them and dictate and demand what they should do. Their entire way of life was threatened and the South didn't like it and wouldn't accept the intrusion.

Another reason was the collective Southern opinion of the slaves was horrendous. I don't even want to elaborate on what they thought because, frankly, it's pretty disgusting, and an extremely sad situation. In addition, they also thought that the slaves couldn't survive on their own, so they were doing them a "favor" by keeping them and telling them what to do, how to live, etc. They "wanted" to be controlled and kept as slaves.

Of course, Southerners later learned that was the farthest thing from the truth, and that the South was able to have a thriving economy without slavery. Ironically, the war they instigated did them in far worse than if the entire South simultaneously freed all the slaves at the exact same time. They would've still had the money spent on the war, the buildings and towns that were burned down, and the lives of the men that were lost. They could have easily stood tall with their pride intact for a relatively short period of adjustment--probably shorter than the period it took to fight the war---and gone on with their heads held high with consistent improvement. Instead, their lives were in complete shambles for decades (it took Atlanta, alone, almost 100 years to recover to its former glory) and, to some, the shame of it all still lives on today.

Answer 4

the south had big plantations. they needed someone to do all the labor.