Could Slavery of Whites have actually occured in an independent CSA?

I'm asking because I frequently see that on here, and I haven't really seen any sources that make it look likely.

What would be impact of white slavery be if it did happen? Would it be debtors slavery, indentured servitude, or a criminal punishment. I have to assume branding would be part of it, or else it would be too easy to escape.

Edit: just realized I posted in after-1900 when I meant to post in before. Please move.
 

Driftless

Donor
Once you've made the original decision that people can be property rather than human; then you just move the legal definition over a notch. Change the definition to suit your needs. Any group on the margins of society already is an easy mark. Demonize that group and it becomes easier to act and to remove any sense of guilt.

People can often find ways to defend the indefensible.

That's mighty cynical, but we've done even worse....
 

Morty Vicar

Banned
Yes and no. Yes poor whites could easily be put into forced labor, probably 'justified' by some trumped up charge or debts. But they would never be regarded in the same vein as non-white slaves, there would be a massive outcry if that were to happen, as slavery was basically 'justified' in the minds of most at the time by rationalising that black people were an inferior race, who were only fit for manual labor. So you could have white slaves in all but name, but as soon as you put them in the fields with African American slaves you'd have an almost universal backlash from rich and poor white people alike. You could maybe at a stretch enslave some Catholics, at least Mestizo Hispanics, probably European jews, but anyone else would cause an outcry.
 

Driftless

Donor
Yes and no. Yes poor whites could easily be put into forced labor, probably 'justified' by some trumped up charge or debts. But they would never be regarded in the same vein as non-white slaves, there would be a massive outcry if that were to happen, as slavery was basically 'justified' in the minds of most at the time by rationalising that black people were an inferior race, who were only fit for manual labor. So you could have white slaves in all but name, but as soon as you put them in the fields with African American slaves you'd have an almost universal backlash from rich and poor white people alike. You could maybe at a stretch enslave some Catholics, at least Mestizo Hispanics, probably European jews, but anyone else would cause an outcry.

The POD would need to be pre-1900 as DT notes...

I'm taking a more cynical view than you, but your points would be the more likely case. The narrow distinctions and murky lines of who could be enslaved, would open a whole can of worms about slavery in general.

*edit* The need to enslave other humans beyond Africans, would highlight the un-sustainable nature of a slave economy, and highlight the morality problems/immorality inherent in the system.
 
Last edited:

Anaxagoras

Banned
From the point-of-view of the elite in Southern society before the war, one of the side benefits of race-based slavery was that poor whites could see themselves as a step above the bottom rung of the ladder ("Hey, at least we aren't slaves, right?"). Therefore, even though Southern society was a strict hierarchy in which the elite lorded it over the poor whites, race-based slavery gave the poor whites a stake in preserving the status quo and put them on the same side as the elite.

If you take that away, you give the black slaves and the poor whites something to unify them in opposition to the powers-that-be. Revolution would be right around the corner.
 

TFSmith121

Banned
There WERE "white" slaves; it was historical reality:

I'm asking because I frequently see that on here, and I haven't really seen any sources that make it look likely.

What would be impact of white slavery be if it did happen? Would it be debtors slavery, indentured servitude, or a criminal punishment. I have to assume branding would be part of it, or else it would be too easy to escape.

Edit: just realized I posted in after-1900 when I meant to post in before. Please move.

30disunion-harpers-slide-GJ5O-articleInline.jpg



As per:

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.co...-faces-of-slavery/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0

And, in fact, they were something of a "luxury good" - look up the origination of the term "high yaller."

To deny these facts means you are accepting the historical validity of the "one drop" rule ...

And yes, there were southerners who openly advocated for slavery across the racial spectrum, and from positions of power.

George Fitzhugh is the obvious one, but there were others. In a society where wealth was tied up in human cattle, so to speak, the wealthy were happy to slap their brands on as many beeves as they could...

Best,
 
It was actually proposed by some, uh, "radicals" I guess is how I'd describe them, in line with southern paternalism and contempt by the planter elites towards the southern poor white class, but realistically it would be a radical departure from contemporary views on race and slavery and very unlikely to actually happen. If for no other reason than as Anaxagoras says, because it would result in a rebellion of lower class whites.

But as several posters have pointed out, enslavement of people who would have been considered white in any other country was already happening OTL, because those people had a smidgen of African blood through their matriline.
 

TFSmith121

Banned
The other point worth making is that in an "independent CSA"

It was actually proposed by some, uh, "radicals" I guess is how I'd describe them, in line with southern paternalism and contempt by the planter elites towards the southern poor white class, but realistically it would be a radical departure from contemporary views on race and slavery and very unlikely to actually happen. If for no other reason than as Anaxagoras says, because it would result in a rebellion of lower class whites.

But as several posters have pointed out, enslavement of people who would have been considered white in any other country was already happening OTL, because those people had a smidgen of African blood through their matriline.

The other point worth making is that in an "independent CSA" presumably the planter class would have been in the leadership positions, which basically guarantees their control and political position for at least a generation.

Couple that with the presumed expansion of poverty and destruction of economic resources and stability in the event of any war, and people with power and money will be looking for ways to increase their power and money.

In a society predicated on honor and mastery, and know for litigiousness and feuding, the idea that any enemies could be denounced as "colored" and sued into slavery would undoubtedly have advocates, and those willing to force the issue.

Consider it the ineivitable aftermath of a sucessful revolution - scores are going to be settled, which means any southern "white" who expressed Unionist sympathies before or during the war is first in line for being dispoessed...

One could even call it the (Confederate) Culture War...

Best,
 
Top