Who is more to blame for slavery continuing -- the presidents or the people? don't be shy

Expert Answers

An illustration of the letter 'A' in a speech bubbles

I have to agree that the fault for slavery continuing lay on the shoulders of those who did not speak out against it.  Certainly, one could argue that the President, any of them before its abolition, should have had the courage to act in defiance of slavery.  However, the President...

Unlock
This Answer Now

Start your 48-hour free trial to unlock this answer and thousands more. Enjoy eNotes ad-free and cancel anytime.

Start your 48-Hour Free Trial

I have to agree that the fault for slavery continuing lay on the shoulders of those who did not speak out against it.  Certainly, one could argue that the President, any of them before its abolition, should have had the courage to act in defiance of slavery.  However, the President acts at the behest of the people and should the people allow it to continue, the President must execute the will of the people.  In the end and in my mind, the blame for slavery constituting the "original sin" of America has to rest with the people who profited from it, did not actively reject it, or lacked the courage to stop it.  These individuals allowed it to continue and while leadership should guide, it does not absolve people of their fundamental responsibility as both citizens and people to speak out against injustice.

Approved by eNotes Editorial Team
An illustration of the letter 'A' in a speech bubbles

Have to hand it to the people on this one.  While President James Monroe tried compensated emancipation - buying slaves' freedom and then returning them to Africa, it was not a popular policy or a successful one.

Other Presidents who might have leaned towards abolition had to be very careful.  I would compare it, just for the sake of comparing, to gay marriage today as an issue.  That is, right or wrong, many people in the United States oppose making it legal, so if I was to campaign for that issue, it would be difficult to get elected, especially in certain states.

Presidents at that time knew they could not get elected with a majority if they were openly for abolition.  The only reason Lincoln won - and remember, he did not campaign for abolition, only stopping slavery's spread - was because there were two Democrats running against him, and they split the vote.  He only had 41% of the final vote.

Approved by eNotes Editorial Team
An illustration of the letter 'A' in a speech bubbles

Not all of the Presidents did let it go. President Abraham Lincoln did not agree with slavery and spoke about the injustices of slavery very openly. This was one of the major causes for the Civil War.

Slavery was a normal practice in the United States. It was common for white people to own slaves and most of the time they were not looked down upon for doing so. This would make it the fault of the people. Slavery was an acceptable practice back then so many did not view it in a negative way.

Approved by eNotes Editorial Team
An illustration of the letter 'A' in a speech bubbles

There is no question that it was the people.

First of all, you say that it was the presidents' fault for letting it go on.  That ignores two things:

  • It ignores the fact that Congress is the one that makes the laws, not the President.  And in those days, Presidents didn't even go around trying to make Congress do stuff -- they thought it was not their place to do that.
  • It ignores the fact that the Constitution allowed slavery.  It would have been very hard to abolish slavery without an amendment, and the President can't do that either.

The peope generally were okay with slavery.  That is true of people in the South and in the North.  Most Northerners were fine with slavery if it just stayed in the South.  So it's their fault it went on.

Approved by eNotes Editorial Team