Final answer:
Prior to 1800, educated and aristocratic Southerners commonly defended slavery with arguments that it maintained social order and benefitted both master and slave. Some justified it through racial superiority theories and paternalistic views that depicted African slaves as needing governance akin to children.
Step-by-step explanation:
Prior Perspectives on Slavery Among Educated and Aristocratic Southerners
Prior to about 1800, educated and aristocratic Southerners often justified the institution of slavery through various arguments that reflected their cultural values and economic interests. Notably, slavery was not only seen as an economic system suited for the agrarian lifestyle of the South but was also rationalized through a paternalistic worldview. Southern aristocrats, deeply influenced by a culture that valued honor and a sense of superiority, defended slavery by arguing that it preserved a societal structure that allowed for their leisure and prosperity.
The institution of slavery was deeply embedded in American society and by 1790, after the ratification of the Constitution, a substantial number of slaves resided in the southern states. Southern theorists such as Thomas R. Dew and George Fitzhugh used arguments of racial inferiority and a paternalistic ethos to justify the enslavement of Africans, claiming it brought about a greater sense of liberty and equality among white Southerners. In essence, the defense of slavery among the southern elite often rested on the belief that it was a benevolent system that provided care for the enslaved and upheld the social order that benefited the whites.
While some members of the educated and aristocratic South defended the practice, it's essential to recognize that views on slavery were not monolithic, and there may have been some within this group who held different perspectives, especially when moral considerations against slavery gained momentum in the following years.