The black-sharing contract is then like the Freddie Mac scandal – a complete and total scam, but not just that it`s fraud. From this excerpt, I know several things 1) loan players offer on the ignorance of Sharecroppers or business 2) They use the concerns of sharecroppers for the family and survive and offer what is like many and 3) they catch them in a deal. They made it just as attractive, but it wasn`t really the case. If a person has to pay for something and put his sweat and blood into something, never harvest the Bennefits, but someone else who has sacrificed absolutely nothing, harvests the Bennefits; it is not a market, it is a trap and it is morally and ethically wrong; it seems, however, that the white men of the south did not have one at the time. Sharecropping has a long history and there is a wide range of situations and types of chords that have used a form of system. Some are subject to tradition, others to the law. The Italian Mezzadria, the French Metayage, the Spanish Mediero, the Slavic Poowcy and the Islamic muzara`a system are examples of legal systems that supported the sharing of actions. The system began with black farmers when large plantations were divided. In the 1880s, white farmers also became “sharecroppers.” The system differed from that of the tenant who rented the land, provided his own tools and mules and received half of the harvest. Landowners provided more oversight to tenants, and tenants with less or none. Sharecropping in the United States probably comes from the Natchez District, which is in Adams County, Mississippi, along with Natchez County. [20] This contract is totally false, and not, where almost logical, reasonable or fair.
It is simply the way in which white men conform to the law while maintaining their sense of superiority over the black race. Dawson is not technically the owner of the country or has anything in his life, he is simply a supervisor. The contract explicitly states all of Dawson`s expected maintenance work and is very specific in explaining how it has no possession. “To ensure payment of the rental and delivery bill,… Accepts that all his belongings be confiscated and sold to pay this rent and this late delivery bill, as agreed here. This means that the country can be confiscated at any time, with or without its consent. It is a more “respectable” form of slavery, a form of slavery that allows the black race to feel a little more comfortable in its bondage by giving them a sense of possession and pride. This new form of slavery still contains the same basic notions as the old form of slavery, for white still manages to make a profit from black work. The Sharecropper purchased seeds, tools and fertilizers, as well as food and clothing on credit from a local merchant or sometimes at a plantation store. At the time of the harvest, the harvester harvested the entire crop and sold it to the merchant who had extended the credits. The purchases and the owner`s share were deducted, and the harvester kept the difference – or added his debt.
Although Sharecropper`s provision protected against the negative effects of a poor harvest, many sharecroppers (black and white) remained quite poor. Arrangements have generally left a third of the crop to the sharecropper. There was also a sharecroppers of selfish interest in the country, which prompted hard work and attention. However, U.S. plantations were cautious about this interest because they believed it would lead African Americans to claim partnership rights. Many black workers denied the unilateral authority that landowners hoped to achieve, making relations between landowners and shareholders even more difficult. [10] The sharing agreement is unfair to john dawson because he has to work in the field under the supervision of the whites. It`s totally like slavery. it says: “The Dawson in question must cultivate this country appropriately under the general supervision of this Solid South,” this should be part 2 of slavery, but not in a sensitive way for some people.