Author: MOLLY VASHOVSKY

https://cdn.knightlab.com/libs/timeline3/latest/embed/index.html?source=1bvquJgBxIkrGgE8JQvxps-2tScsBAvveyq_9zaYOIc4&font=Default&lang=en&initial_zoom=2&height=650

 

Throughout this course, I have learned so much about the history of American business, beginning with the early settlement of the Americas by European settlers through almost current-day. One book that I found especially interesting in this course, was our study of Rosenthal’s Accounting for Slavery. While I had studied slavery in past American history classes, this book truly added a new dimension to my understanding of the plantation system in the antebellum South. Specifically, the vast amount of charts and images Rosenthal includes in the book helped me truly understand the meticulous records plantation owners kept on their slaves’ productivity. Prior to this course, I never contemplated how the Southern plantation system may have been an early form of capitalist activity. Furthermore, I had never considered that the extensive network of managers on plantations may have set the stage for the managerial systems in factories during industrialization in the North. Studying these interpretations of the time period has made me really question my pre- existing notions about the emergence of capitalism in the United States. 

 

I think the importance of studying American history from a business or economic perspective is extensive, especially at Baruch College, which is predominantly a business school. Most students in Baruch College believe that the study of history may be irrelevant to a business school education. However, history is a unique field in that it can relate to just about any major or field of study. Any business student, or student in general, benefits from learning the background of their field of study. Learning American Business History enables a business student to have a more thorough understanding of their field.

Stein’s use of international comparisons added extensively to my understanding of the time period in question. Prior to this course, the books I have read on the subject of American history, focused primarily on the inner workings of American society (specifically politically and culturally). Stein uses an interesting approach in this book, as she compares the political party in power in the US, to the political party in power in European countries. “In the 1950s, conservatives headed European governments, too— Konrad Adenauer in Germany, Harold Macmillan in England, and General Charles de Gaulle in France.” (Stein, Chapter One: Politics and Society) The author then explains how during the time of “postwar prosperity” both American and European governments did not long for progressive governments (Stein, Chapter One: Politics and Society). While I had learned from my previous studies that the U.S. experienced a great economic improvement after the conclusion of the Second World War, I have not learned about the effect of this time period on European politics. Furthermore, I have not learned how U.S. and European politics reflected and mirrored each other. Stein writes, “But in the 1960s the moderate left regained power in the United States and Europe.” This adds additional support to prove the notion that U.S. politics do not form in a bubble. I think this is a really interesting example of the effect of globalization, and the impact it can have on a political party’s success. Politics in the U.S. and European governments do influence one another, even if traditional history textbooks may gloss over this fact. 

 

In order to demonstrate that prevailing notions about the plentifulness of the time period may not indeed be accurate, Stein employs various figures of the average yearly incomes for families of various socioeconomic levels from the 1940s through the 1950s. Instead of basing her argument on numbers and statistical data alone, Stein offers a close examination of a family’s budget that was ranked “intermediate” by the Bureau of Labor Standards (Stein, Chapter One: Politics and Society). Stein writes, “The husband will take his wife to the movies once every three months and that one will go to the movies alone once a year” (Stein, Chapter One: Politics and Society). This is just one example of the incredibly specific examples given by Stein. I believe that writing out the budget in this way, allows readers to gain a better understanding of this time period and truly understand the living standards experienced by the masses. In addition, I think using these forms of evidence creates an incredibly strong argument about perception of a historical time period, in comparison to the reality of everyday life during this time period. 

 

 

Chapter Five of Rosenthal’s “Accounting for Slavery” made me think deeply about the extent to which emancipation of enslaved people in the United States changed the dynamic between plantation owners and workers. Rosenthal writes “Planters found that their relationship with their workers had suddenly become market relationships. Now they would have to recruit, maintain, and pay workers” (Rosenthal 158). After I first read this sentence, I was hesitant to believe this notion of a seemingly immediate transformation from slavery to recruited workers who are treated with respect. Rosenthal makes it sound a bit too easy. As I continued reading, Rosenthal came back to this idea several times and he used different pieces of evidence to both support this statement and challenge its truthfulness. 

 

There is no doubt that after the emancipation of enslaved people in the United States, there was an immediate transformation. Workers had to be paid, and they could quit their jobs. One piece of evidence Rosenthal uses to demonstrate this is figure 5.1, which shows a chart outlining the productivity on Pleasant Hill Plantation. While these carts normally included the total amounts of cotton picked on the plantation, after Emancipation, they, instead, included days of labor completed by a worker. This wasn’t just the case in regards to the Pleasant Hill Plantation. After Emancipation, there are rarely any instances of plantation owners keeping specific records on the amount of cotton picked by workers. This demonstrates how the degree of control of plantation owners over their workers greatly decreased. 

 

Throughout chapter five, Rosenthal also introduces evidence to refute her claim about “market relationships” between planters and workers. One great example of this is figure 5.3 which shows how plantation owners charged their workers for basic necessities and for absences from work. Plantation owners charged their workers for “shoes, bacon, rice, beef, and taxes” (Rosenthal 163). At the end of the fiscal year, workers were in debt to their bosses on many old Southern plantations. This certainly raises some questions about the reality of “market relationships” between former enslaved people and plantation owners. 

 

The dynamics and relationships between planters and workers in the newly Emancipated South are complex, and undoubtedly, they varied from place to place. It is difficult, if not impossible, to define such a unique time. While it may be true that following Emancipation “market relationships” formed between planters and workers, it is also safe to say that this was not the case in every situation.

This reading added extensive knowledge to my understanding of the slave trade. Prior to reading chapter two of Rosenthal’s Accounting for Slavery, I did not understand the amount of meticulous records that were kept on the births and death of slaves working on Caribbean sugar plantations. My view was definitely similar to Alfred Chandler, the author of Strategy and Structure, who viewed the role of administration and administrative records as only playing a significant role in the sphere of industry. However, Rosenthal writes, “On these plantations, violence and control complemented organizational innovation.” (Rosenthal 13) Figure 1.1 in this chapter shows how the bookkeeper of a plantation recorded how many people were born each month, and it had the added totals on the bottom of the sheet. (Rosenthal 12) As plantation owners placed little value on an enslaved person’s life, it is surprising to see such an organized record. Figure 1.4 is a photograph of an extremely in depth record kept on the Dawkins Plantations. This chart includes skills, age and health of enslaved individuals (Rosenthal 21).

 

While reading the chapter and learning about the incredible rates of death among enslaved individuals, I found myself considering the question of, ‘why didn’t these plantation owners, invest a small amount of money into keeping their slaves alive.’ Rosenthal writes, “In the British Caribbean, some estimates suggest that as many as half of ‘New Negroes’ died within three years of arrival.” (Rosenthal 12) After seeing the extensive bookkeeping plantations owners had completed, it was clear to me that they were very interested in spending as little money as possible and making a large profit. It surely is cheaper to keep an enslaved person alive than purchase more enslaved individuals. I can’t help but wonder that if plantation owners spent a bit more money on things like proper food for those enslaved on their plantations or giving them some time off to rest, they could have kept these enslaved individuals alive for longer and ended up making a larger profit in the long run. 

 

While reading this chapter, I learned, for the first time, about the different role slaves played on plantations aside from physical labor. Rosenthal writes, “Just as planters made use of elderly and inform slaves as supervisors, they also made use of children on this special gang devoted to lighter tasks.” (Rosenthal 34) This chapter also explores other roles a slave may have had including being a midwife or a healer. Learning about this aspect of varying roles on plantations adds a multidimensional perspective that is lacking from much of mainstream High School level education in America.