Howard Zinn’s unique perspective on American history and the beloved American heroes makes for an interesting story. His book, A People's History of the United States, paints history in a whole new light. The ninth chapter of his book, “Slavery Without Submission, Emancipation without Freedom” discusses the abolition of slavery in America and its effect and ulterior motives; it benefitted the elite, while not strictly freeing the slaves. He uses other like-minded historians, key people, and key events to prove his claims. His claims that the government’s support of slavery was due to practicality, and by ending it there was a safe and profitable reconstruction, rather than a radical one.
Zinn uses the support of both respected and like-minded
…show more content…
And, while this happened the government stood by doing nothing to enforce the law. Zinn goes on to describe the peoples’ fight against slavery including slave rebellions such as those led by Prozser, Vesey, and Turner, and even Brown’s raid on Harpers Ferry in 1859. However, despite this the government still did nothing since the time was not yet right for a profitable intervention. Though the government remained passive, Hammond, a slavery supporter, spoke up and said that if not for the violence threatening slavery the slave owners would not be able to reconcile the idea of giving up “a thousand millions of dollars in the value of [their] slaves, and a thousand millions of dollars more in the depreciation of [their] lands” by setting free their slave …show more content…
Zinn then goes on to mention overseers discussing dealing with their “problem slaves”. One said that when they resist to be taught, one “ ‘must kill them’ ” as simple as that. This is important because it proves that it was easier for plantation owners to just get rid of the “troublesome” slaves rather than wasting time trying to break them. They would much rather take the easy route in hard situations, thereby highlighting Zinn’s thesis that the elite ended slavery because it was easier for them and towards their own agendas. Genovese adds to this idea of benefitting the whites with a quote from his study of slavery, Roll, Jordan, Roll, about fear and rebellion in the community. He stated that slave owners believed that “non-slaveholders would encourage slave disobedience…out of hatred for the rich planters and resentment of their own poverty.” This again supports Zinn’s claim that slavery’s abolition was for the benefit of the elites as it showed the widening divide between the rich and the poor. The rich clearly had more say due to their wealth, proven by the strict police measures against mixed race fraternity during this time period, and due to this strong voice it was important that the governmental changes regarding slavery satisfied them. Not only the police, but as Zinn states, after the