Now it is a fact that politics is simply the reflex of economics. The
material foundation of society determines the character of all social
institutions—political, educational, ethical and spiritual. In exact
proportion as the economic foundation of society changes the character
of all social institutions changes to correspond to that basis. Half of
this country was in favor of chattel slavery, and half was opposed to
it, geographically speaking. Why was the church of the south in favor of
chattel slavery? Why was the church of the north opposed to chattel
slavery? The northern capitalist wasn’t a bit more opposed to chattel
slavery from any moral sense than was the southern plantation owner. The
south produced cotton for the market by the hand labor of negro slaves.
On the other hand, the north wasn’t dependent upon cotton—could raise no
cotton. In the north it was the small capitalist at the beginning of
capitalism, who, with the machine, had begun to manufacture, and wanted
cheap labor; and the sharper the competition the cheaper he could buy
his labor. Now, chattel slavery to the southern plantation owner was the
source of his wealth. He had to have slaves, and what the plantation
owner had to have in economics the preacher had to justify in religion.
As long as chattel slavery was necessary to the southern plantation
owner, as long as that stage of the economic condition lasted, the
preachers stood up in the pulpits of the south and said it was ordained
of God, and proved it by the Bible. I don’t know of any crime that the
oppressors and their hirelings have not proven by the Bible.