Question

Historian Eric Williams argues that slavery was based on economics rather than racism. Historian David Eltis doesn’t disagree that slavery served economic purposes, but argues that there was definitely a racial component. With which historian do you agree? Why?

Answer 1

Both historians have valid arguments. Eric Williams emphasizes the economic motivations behind slavery, while David Eltis highlights the racial component.

Step-by-step explanation:

Historian Eric Williams argues that slavery was based on economics rather than racism, while historian David Eltis acknowledges the economic purpose of slavery but argues that race also played a role.

A strong argument can be made for both perspectives. Williams emphasizes the economic motivations behind slavery, highlighting how the Southern economy relied heavily on the labor of enslaved people to produce lucrative crops. This economic dependence on slavery led to a racial component, as African laborers were primarily targeted due to their availability and durability.

On the other hand, Eltis argues that racism played a significant role in the perpetuation of slavery. The belief in racial inferiority and the association of Blackness with subservience were used to justify the enslavement of Africans. The racial component of slavery was not solely a result of economic factors but also reflected deeply ingrained prejudices within society.