Final answer:
South Carolina and Barbados shared similarities in their initial economic reliance on slave labor and agriculture. They differed in their political trajectories, as South Carolina became a Royal Colony due to dissatisfaction with proprietary rule, while Barbados remained under proprietary control before becoming a crown colony later. Their political dynamics diverged as South Carolina faced internal division, leading to the creation of two separate colonies.
Step-by-step explanation:
The politics of South Carolina and Barbados are both similar and different in various respects. Initially, both regions had economies based on agriculture, reliant heavily on slave labor. In South Carolina, a wealthy class of rice planters, many of whom came from Barbados, used enslaved Africans for labor, mirroring the plantation system of Barbados. The legal framework supporting slavery in South Carolina was even based on the Barbados slave codes. However, when considering the political evolution, South Carolina was unhappy with the proprietary rule and became a Royal Colony seeking protection directly from the Crown in 1719. This diverges from Barbados, which remained a proprietary English colony at that time before transitioning to a crown colony later in history.
Moreover, while both regions participated in the trans-Atlantic trade, exporting products like livestock and rice from South Carolina to the West Indies, the political dynamics within each colony were distinct. South Carolina eventually split into two royal colonies due to internal tensions and disagreements. In contrast, Barbados maintained a more unified governance, albeit with its own set of conflicts and issues. Despite the initial similarities, such as both being English colonies with systems of land grants and slavery, their paths diverged in terms of governance and colonial administration.