Eric Foner’s Nothing But Freedom: Emancipation and Its Legacy discusses the aftermath of emancipation and Reconstruction in the South by comparing it to the experience of Haiti, the British Caribbean, and early twentieth century southern and eastern Africa. After emancipation in the South, the system of agriculture was in jeapordy due to a class struggle between the planters and the newly freed slaves. Planters were focused on maintaining the production of their crops for revenue and their old source of labor – slavery – was now obsolete and needed to be redefined. As we discussed in class, the newly freed slaves wanted to have their own land and to be able to have control over themselves and their own family. Both parties wants and desires resulted in a difficult struggle, but one that ultimately resulted in the popular system of “sharecropping”. Foner explains:
“The eventual solution to the labor problem in the post-Civil War cotton South was the system of sharecropping, which evolved out of an economic struggle in which planters were able to prevent most blacks from gaining access to land, while the freedmen utilized the labor shortage (and in many cases, the assistance of the Freedmen’s Bureau) to oppose efforts to put them back to work in conditions, especially gang labor, reminiscient of slavery.”(45)
Sharecropping was a compromise between the two parties where the newly freed slaves “rented” the land from the planters. They worked the plantations and cultivated sustenance and cash crops, but gave a portion of their cash crops to the planters as their “rent”. So, did freedpeople view sharecropping as wholly opposed to their interests? I would argue that no it was not wholly opposed to their interest, but it was not the ultimate freedom and independence that many wanted. In essence, it was as good as it was going to get, a compromise. Foner posits:
“Sharecropping afforded agricutlural laborers more control over their own time, labor, and family arrangements, and more hope of economic advancement, than many other modes of labor organization. Sharecroppers were not ‘coolie’ laborers, not directly supervised wage workers.”(45)
Sharecropping did provide the newly freed slaves some degree of control and independence, but there were still limitations put in place to maintain the control of the labor force for agriculture. “Laborers leaving their jobs before the contract expired would forfeit all wages up to that time, and the law empowered every white person to arrest any black who deserted the service of his employer.”(49) Foner continues, “Finally to ensure that no economic opportunities apart from plantation labor remained for the freedmen, they were forbidden to rent land in rural areas.”(49) Freedpeople were forced to rent the land on which they worked and that satisfied their desire for land, but it did not completely satisfy their ultimate desire for individual autonomy.
Newly freed slaves wanted their own land and to have control over themselves and their family. Planters wanted to maintain a labor force to support the system of agriculture and sharecropping allowed for both. Although, it was not the best situation for freedpeople, it provided them with a certain degree of autonomy for them and their family and allowed them economic aspirations that they once never had.