slave trade
Slavery is precisely the ownership of human beings. Under legal terms, it then means that the human being is a property. Slavery denies human beings the fundamental rights they are supposed to enjoy. The history of slavery takes back to the early 16th century spreading through to the 17th and 18th centuries lasting even to the 19th century. During the period, the ancient civilizations and societies kidnapped Africans and took them to other foreign countries where they were forced into slavery. During the time, the enslaved people were seen as commodities of exchange. In countries such as America, the slaves were a source of cheap labor in the coffee and cotton plantations, among other roles. The activities of the slave trade beginning from the transatlantic slave trade were booming trading activity with most of the African war captives and prisoners of war being significant victims. Several reasons were given by those in support of the slave trade activities, whereas those opposed to the activities also quoting various purposes to back their arguments. This essay paper aims at not only highlighting the different reasons given in either support or opposition of the activities by the abolitionists but also aims at weighing the intensity of the arguments.
Early civilizations, such as the European kingdoms, Portugal, and America, had various reasons for slavery. The pro-slavery apologists gave various reasons in support of their acts and the institution of slavery. For instance, Britain believed it was a competitive area, and should they cease, their rival competitors, like the Dutch and French, would venture into the activities which will even endanger the Africans even more. In their argument, the supporters believed that their actions were fair and benefitting and offered protection to the Africans from their rivals like the French and the Dutch. Those lobbying against the practices, however, were not convinced by the claim arguing that the act in itself was wrong and whether others would take over the activities was not reason enough for Britain to continue with the activities.
Another argument made by those in support of slavery and to be precise, Britain, was that slavery was vital in the continued growth and success of their economy; thus, abolition would collapse their economy. However, those in support of abolition like Thomas Clarkson strongly argued against the notion. The abolitionists would not be made to believe the rhetoric but instead opened an outstanding and compelling dispute. They instead offered alternative thinking offering alternative choices for trade. They opposed the ideology the economy of a country would rely on the slave trade. On the same point, they provided other alternatives to the items of commerce like the cereals, crafts, and minerals, thus opposing the acts of the slave trade.
The supporters of the slave trade strongly defended their actions purporting that slavery was biblical. The advocates of the slave trade quoted from various writings of the bible, especially the early writings which they felt were in favor of the acts the most quoted texts being about the times of Abraham. To counter the argument, the abolitionists of slavery equally quoted other bible concepts that opposed the actions of slavery. Books like Luke resists the possibility of any man serving two masters, God and human master. The bible advocates for equality while referring to all people as equal before God, the Creator. Close scrutiny of the bible rebukes oppression and slavery.
Generally, although the supporters of either side, the abolitionists, and the pro-slavery apologists believed strongly in their arguments, it is crystal clear that the motive for the support of the institution was malicious and based on selfish interests. The British, for instance, were concerned about sustaining and growing their economy and outshining their political rivals like the French. These were not reasons enough to continue supporting the oppression and enslavement of the Africans. In this respect, the abolitionists seem more open-minded and fair in their reasoning. Their argument is informed and compelling, thus more persuasive.