Barbarism with a smiley face

Very few people are aware of the vast volume of instruction manuals,
novels, essays, pamphlets, newspaper articles and speeches - identical
in scope and magnitude to the pro pet literature found in today’s
society - which enthusiastically and aggressively defended, even
extolled, the institution of slavery which was considered a positive
good for both slaves and society.
Even more compelling, the arguments used in defense of Negro slavery
were strikingly identical to those employed to vindicate the use of
animals for recreative and therapeutic purposes. Like our relationship
with pets, Negro slavery was glorified to the point of virtue; its
defects curtly dismissed as minor and trivial, the product of overly
emotional radicals.
An ideology carefully crafted around the words children, love, kindness,
compassion humaneness, care, parent, adoption, guardian, family, shelter
etc. imparted to this lifestyle a legitimacy, a veneer of
respectability, which is identical to the rhetoric found in all pro-pet
propaganda.
Books showed pictures of sick slaves actually sleeping in master’s bed
while he sits by, patiently nursing them to health. Other pictures show
slaves sitting in the master’s living room, happy and content, well
clothed and enjoying all the «benefits» of modern civilized society.
The condition of the slave was trivialized by colorful village dances –
the equivalent of agility contests – where all the characters are jubilant.
In his novel Nellie Norton: Southern slavery and the bible (1864),
clergyman Ebenezer Willis Warren writes a romanticized apology of
slavery which he idealizes with what might be deemed the escapist
argument, a vision of a paradisiacal order as unreal as the 'pets on a
pedestal' theory defended by our pet-crazy society: 'Slaves have many
rights. The right of limb, the right to be fed and clothed, to be nursed
when sick, and cared for in old age when they become helplessly infirm.
They are rightfully entitled to protection from ill treatment'. Slave
children in this make believe world are depicted as 'fat and saucy,
jolly and lively', they engage in 'cheerful songs and merry laughter'.
Adults are 'happy Ethiopians' with 'bright countenance, smiling faces
and ivory teeth' who are 'fed bountifully, clothed well, nursed when
indisposed' and 'afforded a suitable diet' and who 'talk and laugh and
sing and pat and dance and spend their time singing and dancing
laughing, chattering'. In this best of world’s, the slaves love and are
utterly devoted to their masters who are 'highly cultivated...men of
superior general intelligence, refined, polite, and genteel.'
Slavery was thought to be 'a fact of life we have to contend with'; «The
truth is, there has always been slavery and there will always be',
argues one of Nellie Norton’s main characters. 'Responsible slave
ownership' was advocated, as the only way of preserving a lifestyle
falsely believed to be irreversible, natural and legitimate. A
proslavery thinker was anyone who argued the indefinite perpetuation of
slavery for any reason whatsoever.
Doesn’t it sound familiar?
Why were such books and defenses written, why was reality so carefully
hidden behind such a screen of high sounding words, in spite of the fact
that the vast majority of white southerners (slaver owners and non slave
owners alike) defended slavery.
Historians disagree on the answer but some say that they were hopelessly
trying to defend and promote a dangerously threatened style of living;
others think that the real motive was to assuage the guilt feelings they
felt about keeping other human beings in bondage and treating them as
chattel.
It was probably a little of both.
But that’s not the whole story.
Contrary to popular belief, slavery was dropped for economical rather
than humanitarian reasons. The war was a political war, which had
nothing to do with compassion. In the context of that particular time,
the maintenance costs of slaves had become prohibitive. Blacks were
therefore given their freedom for the same reasons they were enslaved:
financial reasons. This is why they are still considered as second-rate
citizens, a subspecies by the white American majority in spite of their
physical liberation.
In other words, slavery was ended but not racism, nor the underlying
mentality. Its just more buried now.
There are indeed Blacks in important positions but these 'Uncle Tom’s'
are used as foils to soften the image of the white dominant aristocracy
and attract votes (Uncle Tom’s were slaves who refused their freedom and
defended their masters until their death).
Besides, this attitude was not specific to the south. Instead of an
aberration limited to a few precise segments of the American society,
slavery was a blatant projection of the nature, character, and values of
the entire American nation. It is Protestant priests and Harvard
University professors of New England who crafted the ideology of slavery.
There were very few slaves to the north solely because the climate was
too harsh. This increased the maintenance costs and lowered the profits
below the profit margin. There were indeed a few slaves in Canada for
example but it was the exception to the rule. Slavery on a large scale
always took place in warm countries. Had it been warmer in Canada,
chances are we would have done the same thing. The slaver mentality is
universal even amongst Blacks judging by their fondness for pets.
In short, we can see the presence of this mindset in our relationship
with animals, which is a projection of who we are.
It’s difficult to see ourselves in that mirror because there is little
resemblance between animals and us. Their suffering is also a lot harder
to read for most people considering only about 1% of the population
really knows anything about the psychology and physiology of the animals
under their domination. If instead of birds, reptiles, gerbils,
hamsters, fish, dogs and cats we had a predilection for primates, a
species that shares a lot of our morphological traits, the cruelty of
this barbarism with a smiley face would be quite glaring.

References:

Ebenezer Willis, Nelly Norton: Southern slavery and the bible, 1864
(this book only exists on microfilm at the University of Georgia School
of Law. Professor Wilkes of the same university sent me on request a
photocopied version)
Larry E. Tise, Proslavery: A history of the defense of slavery in
America, The University of Georgia Press, 1987.
Professor Wilkes, Roots of racism, University of Georgia School of Law.