How was slavery justified by the slaveholders? Had they no morals?

Why should its existence be prolonged one hour? Is it not evil, only evil, and that continually? What does its presence imply but the absence of all fear of God, all regard for man, on the part of the people of the United States? Heaven speed its eternal overthrow!
(Douglass 39)

Slavery is evil without a doubt, but from the perspective of the white American slaveholders it was justified. It seems hard to believe that enslavement- beatings, manual labor, rape, scant rations, and poor excuses for shelter- could be perceived as just by anyone. It was common for “good” Christians to use biblical quotations to substantiate their claim to morality. One argument used by southerners was that “God cursed Ham, and therefore American slavery is right” (Douglass 50). To understand this quote a little background on Ham may be necessary. Ham was Noah’s son, punished for seeing his father drunk and naked then telling his brothers about it. The punishment was a curse on Ham’s son Canaan and thus all descendants- some of which are “black”. The basic reasoning therefore is that African American slaves are cursed to be in such a miserable condition because they are the descendants of Ham.

In addition to using the Bible to justify their wrongs, slaveholders would proclaim a “natural inferiority” of those they enslaved (Douglass 36). Would it not seem natural for intelligence to be hindered by a lack of opportunity? Despite the fact that the slaves were never given a chance to better themselves intellectually, it was assumed that they were unable to learn. Working long hours in the fields, living on meager food stuffs, having barely any clothing or shelter, and no access to books, yet these people were expected to somehow show signs of intelligence. Without access to books or at least a teacher who possesses the knowledge, how could one possibly learn? Of course, however, the slaveholders overlooked these minor details, preferring to justify their behavior through false information.

Slaveholders not only believed that the people they enslaved were unintelligent, they also believed that they could not learn from their mistakes unless physical violence was involved. Unless there was blood dripping from and clotting on slave’s back after an infraction, most of the overseers would not be satisfied that their authority was safe. One maxim adopted by slaveholders was, “It is better that a dozen slaves suffer under the lash, than that the overseer should be convicted, in the presence of slaves, of having been at fault” (Douglass 65). Such drastic views on the brutality the slaves experienced was another fault of the slaveholders. Did these men really believe that even an unintelligent human could not be punished by some less violent means? This is a way that the slaves were compared to animals- animals must be broken by the use of whips. From the slaveholder’s perspective the slaves they owned had not the intelligence or sense enough to look out for their own well-being. They went so far as to say that slavery was beneficial to the African American men and women because they “could not survive without the help of the slave-owner” (Douglass 116). The slaveholders actually believed that without their “generosity” the slaves would bring about their own ruin through their lack of intelligence and common sense. They could even justify this in their minds by deceiving the slaves into this type of behavior at holidays by granting them free time then betting on a slave’s ability to drink more than another slave. The end result would be slaves that were so sick from drunkenness that they would believe “slavery to man better than to rum” (Douglass 115-116).

NOTE: Text Quoted from : Douglass, Frederick. Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, an American Slave. Ed. Houston A. Baker Jr. New York, New York: Penguin Classics, 1986.