had great political power—some even held office—and owned at least 50 slaves. 

Second to them were more modest planters. This was still a rather select group, comprising only three percent of the white population. They owned between 100–1,000 acres and between 20–49 slaves. This class was also comprised of political leaders.

Beyond the planters, we reach the plebeians or commoners, of the time. However, even this group had a hierarchy. At the top were the small planters. This group made up around 20 percent of the white population and owned fewer than 20 slaves. They were small farmers, but they made a good living. Some even made additional profits as merchants. It was also common to loan out skilled slaves (e.g., blacksmiths) or to sell their wares for additional income. 

Most whites, however, were not slave owners. More than three-quarters of all white people belonged to this class. They may have owned their own small piece of land which they or a handful of slaves would have farmed. Some were day laborers. Others were squatters. Sundry others were employed as overseers on plantations. 

It is easy to understand why planters wanted to maintain the slave system. They amassed great profits due to not having to pay laborers. Small slaveholders, in many instances, probably had the ambition of becoming major landholders. They, too, would have had little incentive to oppose slavery. Moreover, they probably valued the slaves they could afford to buy and retain. What is more difficult is understanding why many poor whites were committed to the perpetuation and expansion of slavery.

In the late seventeenth century, when slavery became a race-based system, the lives of both slaves and free blacks became more circumscribed. For example, in Virginia, black slaves were less likely to be allowed their own plots of land and livestock; free blacks were no longer permitted the right to testify in court. What now determined a free person from a non-free person was skin color. Some poor whites took advantage of their newly elevated status. One way was to seek employment on plantations as overseers. 

Though slavery limited poor whites' job opportunities, many remained committed to and supportive of a system that gave them privilege due to being white. No matter how poor or desperate many were, they took comfort in the fact that they were not black; they were still free.

Very few people in the South at any given time actually owned slaves, but the majority of white Southerners wholeheartedly supported the maintenance and expansion of slavery.

The “peculiar institution,” to use John C. Calhoun's notorious euphemism, was the bedrock of Southern society. It was the foundation of the Southern economy, as well as the hierarchical society on which it was based. No wonder, then, that most white citizens in the South gave such unswerving allegiance to an institution from which only a handful benefitted directly.

At the top of the social ladder were the elite plantocracy, who between them owned the lion's share of slaves. They owed their elevated position in society, not to mention their economic prosperity, to the ownership of slaves. Owning slaves was a status symbol in the South; the more slaves you owned, the higher status you enjoyed.

Even at the bottom of the social ladder, among poor Southern white people, slavery was hugely popular. Many of these people dreamed that one day they would get rich, and that when they did, they too would own slaves.

As Emory Shi points out, slavery gave poor Southern white people a sense of superiority over others, despite their lowly social status. In the words of Georgia attorney Thomas Reade Cobb, every white man felt

That he belongs to an elevated class. It matters not that he is no slaveholder; he is not of the inferior race; he is a free-born citizen.