PT101.S4.P4.Q24

PrepTest 101 - Section 4 - Passage 4 - Question 24

Hide analysis
P1

Two impressive studies have reexamined Eric Williams' conclusion that Britain's abolition of the slave trade in 1807 and its emancipation of slaves in its colonies in 1834 were driven primarily by economic rather than humanitarian motives. ████████ ██ ████████ █████ █████████████ ███ ███ ████████████ ██ ███████ ██████ █████ █████████ █████████ ██ █████████ ███ ██ ████ ██████ ██ ██████████ ██ ███████ ████████ █████████

Two Challenges to Williams' Conclusion · That British abolitionist movement was primarily driven by economics.
Williams argues that the slave colonies were becoming a drag on the British economy. That's why Britain abolished slavery, not because they thought it was wrong. But two studies question that conclusion.
P2

███████ ████████ ████████ █ ████ ████████ █████ █████████ ███████████████ █████ ██████ ██ ████████ ████████ ██ ███ █████ ██████ ██ ██████████████ ████████ ███ █████████████ ███ ████████ ███████████████ ██ ███████ █████████████ █████ ███████ ██ ████ ███ ██████ █████ ██ ██████ ██████ ███ █████████ ██████ ████ ███████ ████ ███ ████ ███████████ █████████ ███████████ █████ ██ ███ █████ ██████ █████████ █████████████ ███████ ████████ █████████ ████ ████ ███████ ██████ ██ █████████ ██ ████████ ████████ ██████ ██████████ ████ ████ ██ ██ ████ ████ ███ ██████████████ ███████ ███

1. Drescher's View · Populism drove abolition
Drescher downplays economics and morality. Instead argues that it was populist political activism that drove abolition.
████ █████ ████ █████████████ ████ ████ ███████ ████ ████ ████████ ██ █████ ██ ████ ████ ██████████ ████████ ███ █ █████████ ██ █████████ █████████ ████████ ████ ███ ███████ ███████ ███ ████████ █ ██████ ██████ ███████ ██ █████ ██████████ █████ ████████ ███████ ███████ ███ ███████████ ████████ ████████ ██ █████████ ████████████ ███████████ ██ ███ █████ ██ █████ ███ ████████ █████ ████ ██████ ████████

Author Concession / Skepticism · Drescher's explanation incomplete
Author thinks that Drescher doesn't explain how England could have mobilized such popular support.
P3

█████ ██████ ██████ ██ ████ ████████ ████████ ████████ ████ ██ █████████ █████████ ███

2. Eltis' View · Partially supportive of Williams' conclusion
Apparently Eltis does answer the question that the author faults Drescher for not answering...
█████████ ██████████ ████████████ ██ ███████ ██████████ ██ ████████ █████ ██████ ██ ██████████ ███ ██ ███ █████ ███ █████████ ████████ ████ ██ ███ ███████████ ███ ██████████ █████████ ██ ██████ ███ ███████████████ ██ ███████ ████████ ███████ ███████ ████████ ████ ██████ ███ ███ ███████████ ██ ██████████ ████████ ███ ██████ ███ ███████ ████████████████ ██████████ ██ ███████ █████ ████ █████ ██████████ ██ █ █████████████ ██████ ██ ████ █████ █████ ███ ███ ███████ ████████████ ███
2. Eltis' View · Disagrees with Drescher
Eltis disagrees with Drescher's view that the British traditions of liberty powered abolition.
██ ███ ████ ██████████ ████████ ████████ █ ███████ ████ ██████ █████ ██ █████ ███████████ ██ ███ ██████████ ██ █████ █████████ ███ ██ ██████████ ████ ██ ██████ █████ ██ █ █████ ██ ██████████ ████ ██████ ████████████ ███ ███ ██████ ██ ██████████ ██████████████ ██ ███ ████████ █████ ██ ███████ ████ ██ ██████ ███████ ███ ████████ ████ ██████████ ███ █████ ██ ███ ██████ ██ ███████ ███████ ███ ████ ███ ███████████ ██ ████████ ████████ ██ ██████ ██████████ █████████ ██ ███████ ████ █████ █████████ ██ ███████████████ ██ █████████████ ███████ █████ █████████ ████ ██ ██ ███████ ████ ███ █████ ██ ████ ██ █████████ █████ ██ ███████ ████ ██████ ██████ █████ ███████████ █████ ██ ██████ ████ █████████████ ███ █████████████████ ██ ██████████ ███
2. Eltis' View · Economics drove abolition
Eltis thinks that "want creation" made slave labor inappropriate and counterproductive.
█████ ████ █████████ █████ █████ ████████ ███ ████ ████ ██████████████ ███ ████████ █████████ ██ ███ ███████ ████████ █████████ ██████ █████ ██ ███ █████ ██████ ███ ███████ ████ ███ ████████ ███████ ███ █████████ ███ ██████ █████████ ███████ ███████ ██████ █████████ ██ ████████ █████ ██████ ████ ████ ████ ██████ ██████████ ███ ███████ █████ ████ █████ █████ ██ █████████ ████ ████ █████ ███ ████ ██████████ ██ ███ ████████ ████████

2. Eltis' conclusion · Williams was partly right, partly wrong
It is economics that drove abolition; just not what Williams thought. The slave colonies' economies were fine. But slave labor wasn't good for the broader economy of the British empire.
Passage Style
Critique or debate
Phenomenon-hypothesis (RC)
Show answer
24.

According to Eltis, low wages ███ █████████ ████████ ████ ██ ███████ ██ ███ ███████████ ███ ██████████ █████████ ████ ████████ ██

a

protect laborers against ████████████ ██████████ █████████

Eltis doesn’t mention any measures intended to protect laborers. Rather, he states that low wages and Draconian vagrancy laws were motivated by a desire to “ensure the industriousness of British workers” and “keep labor costs low and exports competitive.”

3%
b

counter the move ██ ███████ ██████████ ████████

Draconian vagrancy laws weren’t meant to counter this move. To the contrary, the call to enslave unemployed, homeless laborers is an example Eltis gives to highlight the kind of attitude that motivated those Draconian vagrancy laws: a desire to “ensure the industriousness of British workers” and “keep labor costs low and exports competitive.”

5%
c

ensure a cheap ███ ██████████ ████ █████

Stated. According to Eltis, low wages and Draconian vagrancy laws were motivated by a desire to “ensure the industriousness of British workers” and “keep labor costs low and exports competitive.”

75%
d

ensure that the ████ █████ ███████████ ██ ████████████

Eltis says that low wanges and Draconian vagrancy laws were motivated by a desire to “ensure the industriousness of British workers” and “keep labor costs low and exports competitive.” He does mention a proposal to enslave unemployed workers, but though that proposal might have had the side effect of reducing unemployment, its purpose was to keep workers productive and cheap.

6%
e

ensure that products ████████ ██ ███████ ████████ █████████ ██████ █████ █████ ███████ ███████████ ████ █████ ████████ ██ ███████

The purpose wasn’t to help slave colony exports compete with domestic British goods. The low wages and Draconian vagrancy laws we’re talking about were targeting domestic British workers and were meant to make domestic labor cheaper and to help domestic British exports.

10%

Confirm action

Are you sure?