Question 1
The colonists devised new strategies to support their colonies as well as thwart any rebellions from the poor, regardless of their skills. In an attempt to achieve the goal, they devised various methods to raise funds using dubious means. One of the strategies they used was the Stamp Act. The British colonists imposed the Stamp Act to amass enough funds to repay debts and support their vast colonial territories in America (Taylor, 2002). The Stamp Act was a legislation that imposed a direct tax on printed materials of profitable nature and legal use in British territories. Stamp Act affected materials such as dice, pamphlets, newspapers and playing cards.
The colonists stamped authority to exercise their power over the weak. A succinct demonstration was through imposing taxes to impoverish the poor. Stamp Act was a mean to squeeze from the poor the last coin they had. In modern times, the poor and the immigrants are also experiencing the same problems, like in the colonial times (Taylor, 2002). Laws are being passed with significant effect on their wellbeing. Discrimination regarding race, educational background, and employment are common challenges affecting the poor and immigrants.
The colonists had laws which classed the poor into various categories and also prove of residency was mandatory for anyone to start receiving any aid. The first type was the dependent persons. This group consisted of the unemployed, vagrants and the helpless. Further, the laws separated the poor into two distinct classes, the worthy and the unworthy. The laws detailed means for dealing with a particular category. The laws established to deal with the poor were expected to reduce the colonists spending on relief among the poor population in their territories.
The fear the colonists had during the colonial period is still evident to date with the poor and the immigrant today. Many countries have devised laws that address specifically the poor and immigrants. The focus accorded to the poor is very minimal. Rather that uplifting their lives, the laws created has exploited them leaving them poorer. For instance, some governments have set up relief aid to meet the basic needs of day to day life. However, the assistance is not consistent, and sometimes it does not come at all. Immigrants also have encountered rejections in other countries they have sought refuge. Governments have tightened immigration rules which bar immigrants from entering, despite wars, upheavals and harsh economic times in their mother countries.
The colonists feared social disorder. They thought that when it happens in the colonist, then it would spark a revolution which would dislodge their rule. To avoid such a repercussion, the colonist had created classes for the poor, the blacks and the poor whites (Taylor, 2002). They viewed that the poor whites, who were a majority, can be convinced with prospects of new freedoms and liberties in yet to be declared a republic. However, the blacks had nothing to gain from the colonists. The class created by the colonists meant continued rule and steady growth of their economies without social order disruption.
Question 2
The invention of a cotton gin was a game changer for the South. The gin simplified the removal of seeds from cotton, making south the biggest exporter of cotton in the United States. The South economy blossomed considerably, with landowners expanding their lands devotedly for cotton production. Before its invention, the United States was producing about 750,000 of cotton in 1830. However, this quantity increased to 2.85 million bales (Aiken, Loyd, and Schuyler, 2003). The chief importer of the South cotton was the Great Britain. England was the most powerful nation in the world by 1860. Being the root of industrial revolution, a large part of its industries were cotton textiles. A large percentage, seventy-five, was imported from the South, contributing to a significant boom in the American South economy.
The invention of gin was a direct connection for increase and expansion of slavery. According to Aiken et al. (2003), while the gin scaled down the quantity of labor required to extract seeds from cotton, it did not lessen the amount of slaves required to pick or grow cotton. Growing and harvesting cotton was very intensive. Thus, large-scale plantation demanded more slaves to assist in growing and harvesting cotton. During the nineteenth century, it is estimated that slave population in the United States surged fivefold, and the South accounted for two-third of cotton supply in the world (Aiken et al., 2003). The Southern economy was largely reliant on cotton. Thus, they could not succeed without slave labor.
I feel that the economy of the South was based solely on slavery and not the gin. As more cotton plantations were expanded, so the demand of slavery was needed. The gin did not resolve the challenge of growing and harvesting cotton. These two processes are labor intensive. If slaves were to be paid, then the South economy would not have been anchored on cotton. In fact, the economy would have shrunken. Thus, slaves were the principal pillars of the South economy. Also, had the invention of cotton gin taken place, then I believe the South lands would have remained comparatively small, and cotton would not have been a central cash crop. Through aspects such as diversification of farming, many South farmers would have practiced subsistence farming rather that embracing the plantation culture associated with cotton farming. In this case, slaves would have served no value in the South.
In conclusion, the colonists used diverse strategies to maintain their economies from any form of economic threats. They devised laws as well as coming up social classes to categories the poor. These types of strategies still exist today where the poor and the immigrants face similar challenges, although in a different age and time. Additionally, the South had a robust economy. The invention of gin contributed to massive economic growth making more landowners to expand their plantation farming. This led to more appetite for slave labor to assist in the harvesting of cotton.
References
Aiken, C.S., Loyd, B., and Schuyler, D. (2003). The Cotton Plantation South Since the Civil War. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press
Taylor, A. (2002). American Colonies. London: Penguin Books
