answers to questions 1, 2, and 3

[megan freiburger]

1. The U.S. government based its support on overpowering practicality
that was rooted in a deep system that could only be altered with
either slave-rebellion or a war. The government knew how beneficial
slavery was to the economy and advancement of the nation as a whole.
While there were many figures advocating for abolition, the majority
resisted the ideals of free blacks because they were so set on their
beliefs.
2. The government had a network of controls that were supported by
regulations and laws, courts, and armed forces. All of this was shaped
by the prejudiced national leaders who would do everything in their
power to keep slave rebellions at bay. In reality, the government was
saying that the "peculiar institution" was not going down without a
fight. Therefore, this does equate with Zinn's assertion. The wealthy
southern elite wanted to have complete control over the ending of
slavery because their society revolved and relied so much on the
institution. Because of this, timing was key in the hopes of making a
profit.
3. While slaves suffered unthinkable brutality, they had to keep on
living because if they did not persevere, they would be "completely
broken"(172). Family life and traditional celebration was truly what
kept them going because it reminded them that they were still someone,
and that they could still hold on to some of their identity.