Kris Maulden's Questions - Dec. 7/8
This week we'll be covering the coming of the Civil War. My apologies to the Friday sections for not getting to Celia, but I'll answer questions and cover the book as quickly as we can. As for reading, please read the Elliot Gorn article in online unit 11; it's very interesting and should be a good way to end the semester. As for the questions:
1. How do the fighters in the Gorn article show Southern commitment to a code of honor? What does that code consist of, and how does it allow Southerners talk of the Civil War as a defensive action when they took the first steps in it by seceding and then shelling Fort Sumter?
2. As Dr. Pasley mentioned in lecture, is slavery just an economic or a social system? Did slavery exist to make profits for the owners or was it a "way of life"? Please explain your reasoning and what you think are the implications of your response.
1. How do the fighters in the Gorn article show Southern commitment to a code of honor? What does that code consist of, and how does it allow Southerners talk of the Civil War as a defensive action when they took the first steps in it by seceding and then shelling Fort Sumter?
2. As Dr. Pasley mentioned in lecture, is slavery just an economic or a social system? Did slavery exist to make profits for the owners or was it a "way of life"? Please explain your reasoning and what you think are the implications of your response.
posted by Anonymous at 7:51 AM
4 Comments:
I think slavery is both economic and social for the south. It was their number 1 to make money was from the land, and it also placed you in your social class. Slavery made people who they are and brought them wealth and high class, meaning that it was a way of life for people and with it taken away, many wealthy individuals would find themselves in a completely different lifestyle. I think it was so easy for the North to act against slavery because the they were not as dependent on the land as the South. The North had other opportunities for wealth and income, while the South was dependent upon the slaves, which is ironic.
Slavery could be considered a way of life for the South. Having slaves gave the South an air of being in Britain as Dr. Pasley said. Slavery was much more important as an economic system, but still held its place as a way of life. Without slavery, many poor southern whites would be pushed into "wage slavery", making it seem closer to the North. This is an important implication. This prevents the South from meshing with the North and increases the nation's sectionalism that caused the Civil War.
Slavery is both social and economic. Slavery was economic because it helped the planters earn all of their money. Slavery was a social system because (even today) it has engrained into many minds the idea of white sumpremecy.
Slavery can be referred to a social and economical system, because both were emphasized greatly. Social, because the existence of slaves allowed the master's to have a status boost in regards to how many and the quality of their slaves. Economic, because depending on how many and the strength of the slaves it effected how much was produced, which consequently effected how much each master was able to make.
Post a Comment
<< Home