RC Passage 4 Explanation, by LSATHacks
Paragraph Summaries
- Williams said Britain ended slavery for economic reasons. Two studies reexamine this.
- Drescher argues that abolition had too much popular support to be explained by economics.
- Eltis says that the growing domestic market convinced capitalists that they should try to satisfy people’s “wants”.
Free labor started to produce the products that fulfilled people’s “wants”. So it started to seem strange to use slaves to provide products for the common people.
Analysis
This passage has an atypical structure. Williams’ view is introduced in the first paragraph. He thought that slave labor was no longer profitable, and that this led to abolition. The author implies this view
is flawed.
Drescher’s view is given. The author agrees with him that abolition had much popular support. But then the author criticizes Drescher.
The author uses Eltis to further criticize Drescher. Then the author presents Eltis’ theories, which are not completely clear.
Eltis seems to be arguing that the imperial economy could afford the higher wages paid to free laborers because these laborers also became new consumers. But this isn’t clearly stated.
It’s implied that free laborers were able to use their new purchasing power to buy products such as tobacco, coffee and sugar.
This provided an incentive for producers to pay laborers, who could then buy the products they produced. But the passage is unusually unclear on this point.
Finally, Eltis and the author agree that Williams was partly correct. Abolition had an economic motive, even if the slave colonies were still profitable.
Hi, I'm Graeme Blake
Founder of LSAThacks; I scored a 177 on the LSAT.
I created the LSAT Mastery Seminars, which are part of the Ultimate LSAT Prep Bundle
If you like the explanations you're reading I'm 100% confident you'll enjoy the courses. Satisfaction guaranteed.
---------
Updates:
For updates, sign up for my email list. I update whenever I have new posts.
Leave a Reply