Abolishing Slavery In Colonial America

During the Enlightenment, American colonies and established European countries faced the difficulties of shifting economic system, religious system, and a shift in mindset. The monarchs of the European countries used enlightened ideas in order to advance. Colonization was at its peak and the rise of mercantilism and the price revolution broke its breaks. Due to the shifting economic structure, slaves were utilized as an alternative to paid laborers. This however, was not reasonable from the perspective of the enlightened. They viewed it as unreasonable, selfish, and manipulative. The supporters of slavery argued that slaves were a necessity in the shifting economic structure. Supporters also argued that slavery wasn’t as severe as it was
made out to be and even argued environmental determinism as a cause of slavery.
The enlightened thinkers believed All men are created equal and slavery was an unreasonable and barbaric institution that had to be eradicated. Because of this, the printed word of the enlightened thinkers, the Encyclopedia, was censored in France because the rhetoric contradicted the policies of France and her policy on slaves and colonies. Diderot, a contributor to the encyclopedia wrote that the Christian powers of Europe is only using slavery as a means to advance their plantations and colonies. He claims, as an enlightened man, that this is a contradiction to the doctrine in the Bible. Being an enlightened man, he deems it as unreasonable, clear hypocrisy, and implies that slavery is for the well being of special interests. He believed that the effects of abolition would have a positive effect on religious doctrine because the believers would be more aligned with the Bible. (Doc #4). Necker, who had ties with the estate generals, would agree with Diderot. He gave a speech to the Estate generals and claimed that the poor people of Africa have been molded and indoctrinated into an object of trade and greed. He believes that Africans are the same as the European and are just as capable as them. He hopes that the generals would come to a realization and see the suffering they’ve caused. He believes as an enlightened thinker that the fact that people of equal ability are enslaved, that the institution set up is unreasonable and therefore should be eradicated. He knew that the effects of this would help slaves who were seen as property and drastically change the social structure, which ultimately was his goal(Doc. #8). Mirabeau, who also gave a speech around the same time at the National Assembly, believed that people of color were underrepresented and forced into an unjust system. At the speech he said that a small minority of white Europeans spoke for a larger group of slaves, freed blacks, and mulattoes. He claimed that people of color are denied their right to a representative and the right to vote. He knew this would completely throw of the political discourse but in a good way where more people are equal under the law (Doc. #9).
The opponents of abolishing slavery, many who resided in France, claimed abolishing the slave trade and ending slavery would cause an economic collapse for not only the colonies, but also the citizens of the European countries.
French elites also explained why slavery was set in place and doubled down on their position. Raynal, a French author, wrote in his Essay that the climate and environment of Europe made men of this region unsuitable for the hot fields of the colonies. He claims that the mild climate would be easy for the slaves because they come from such an oppressive environment. This echos the concept of environmental determinism. He believed the climate contributed to the traits of people in the region. This train of thought can cause the racist ways Raynal thinks. He implies that slaves are there to work for whites and that’s how the social order should stay. (Doc. #6). A french delegate who spoke at the National Assembly, also believed that ending slavery would negatively impact the economy. He states that losing slavery would cause the economic bubble to bursts. He goes on to say that this would result in stagnation and would cripple the five million French citizens who’ve profited off this system. However, due to the delegate being French, a biased point of view emerges. He wants to keep slavery because this a large part of the power of France. (Doc. #10). Another delegate from France also gave a speech to the National Assembly. He claimed that the Rights of
Man does not apply to black people or their children. He also believes that France did them a favor by taking them away from Africa and putting them in colonies by a humane government. This speech is majorly biased because he rejects enlightenment ideas and sugarcoats the effect of slavery on Africans. Slavery has caused deaths from simply transporting them. This speech is a good way for the delegate to spread misinformation in order to satisfy his private interests. (Doc. #13). Barnave, who also worked in the National Assembly, claims that the colonies helped France become more prosperous. He advocates to postpone the independence of slaves because it’d cause economic shock and disturb political balance. However, the French revolution had just started and this could be used to criticize the institution of slavery.
Slavery was unreasonable from the point of view of enlightened thinkers.
They saw through the sugarcoating and propaganda and claimed it was selfish and manipulative institution. Slave owners argued that slaves were a necessity in a shifting economic structure. Supporters argued that slavery severe argued environmental determinism as a cause of slavery. Slavery was contradictory with the Bible, unequal, and unrepresentative. The supporters acted like the medieval mind and held unto old ideas, specifically of economic gain. Ultimately, all of the European countries would stop the selling of human beings and would shift to the discrimination of those human
beings,