I hope the title makes everyone think a little bit. In fact, I think Darwin and Marx would be pleased for anyone to include in a discussion “the role that racial identity and racial attitudes played.” Jim Carrey (as Ace Ventura) once said, “Fiction can be fun!” But not realistic. Because it is reality that our core presuppositions allow for the direct and indirect observations of any physical ethnic identity, including ethnic behavioral attitudes. Because we are all one human race, right? Well I guess it depends on whether or not you believe we are created by God, or come from a series of moon-dust, random planetary explosions, and fish-frogs...
I think that right there just might be the key to this whole discussion.
I have mentioned previously that the famous inventor of the cotton gin Mr. Eli Whitney made his contraption well-renowned in 1783. This machine would end up making slavery much, much, much more profitable. The resulting effects of this new profit would rise a new generation of Americans with much less conviction on the matters of slavery than their fathers. The rest of the nation, instead of dealing with the issue head-on, attempted to compromise.
In the case of the conception of citizenship, power, and authority, the American people were “tied and bound” to the political obligations and contracts set up by those in authority before them. Thus even prior to the founding of the New Nation, slavery was well entrenched in England and the rest of the world really. Indentured servitude (or “sugar-coated” slavery) was well in place too. Even those national and regional leaders who had the best of intentions were bound to their cultural limitations at the time of their passing eras. Besides this even the American Indians were practicing slavery well before Europeans arrived.
Look at Christopher Columbus for example. The rest of Spain was in the “New World” for gold. Mr. Columbus was there for God. It is those who don’t take the time to study history that Columbus irrationally becomes a predator meant to enslave and entrap the “poor and helpless” indigenous of North America.
David Barton writes: “Slavery in the America’s began well before 1619—to ignore this fact is to overlook all the enslaved people who lived in America before Columbus came. It is to dishonestly let an agenda’s narrative rewrite history.
Ironically, the man now blamed for America’s slavery was the first to shed light upon the institutions of oppression among the native Americans. In fact, the pre-existent native slave trade was so prolific that, ‘wherever European conquistadors set foot in American tropics, they found evidence of indigenous warfare, war captives, and captive slaves.’[vi] The journals, letters, and reports documents first-hand how the various tribes were already practicing slavery prior to the arrival of the Europeans.
Take briefly for instance, the Carib tribes who had widespread institutions of perpetual slavery, captive mutilation, and even villages dedicated to the sexual exploitation of captured Taino women forced to produced children which their masters then ate. Facts stand in stark contrast to the “more egalitarian” fabrication of Zinn. Such horrors do not show a “more beautifully worked out” society in the slightest—in fact, it does quite the opposite.” 
Historian Sharon Murphy writes: “Most northern states ended slavery during the late eighteenth century, while Congress legally banned the importation of new slaves in 1808. Yet with the emergence of cotton as a viable southern staple, the demand for slave labor both significantly increased and shifted geographically. The invention and rapid spread of the cotton gin after 1793 made possible the large-scale production of cotton, while increasing demand from the British textile industry rendered this production highly profitable.” 
Congress in 1787 and 1789 would pass the Northwest Ordinance, which outlawed slavery in any newly created state of the Union. The federal government would also ban the exportation of slaves from any state within the Union in 1794. All intentions show of that generation the eventual abolishment of slavery was their main intention. I think that God wanted to show the world how a Christian nation would attempt to deal with such a heavy-laden social problem.
The trend of abolition came to a screeching halt in the South. And even churches began to (for the first-time ever) justify slavery by 1810. By then however, all slave trading had been banned, yet slave owning, became much more ingrained. England outlawed slavery in 1834 (primarily due to the efforts of evangelical Christians). But the United States failed to address the issue of slavery just as God had intended. Slavery is our national sin and one reason for our enabled failure (political fracture) is material and social greed. 
In the end, it was the continued downward spiral into a materialistic and cultural American greed that enabled the traditional and (at one time) fully-intact fabric of our nation to start unraveling—thread by thread—one count at a time. It snowballed from our institutions, churches, government, and finally, inside of the family home. As time would go on, plantation-style ideology would permeate the Southern states and certain people would find themselves attaching to this method of cultural aristocracy. Much like the neo-feudalistic economic slavery we see today in our own nation that is post-modern America.
How did they (white leaders) rationalize creating and perpetuating a republic committed to democracy, with the wholesale denial of rights to non-white Americans? Simple. Our nation fractured politically, and slipped into a trifecta of extreme industrialization, poor educational leadership, and a lack of public and private morals and principles.
Daniel L. Smith,
 Fernando Santos-Granero, Vital Enemies: Slavery, Predation, and the Amerindian Political Economy of Life (Austin: University of Texas Press, 2009), 1.
 Barton, David. "Before the West Was Won: Pre-Columbian Morality." WallBuilders. Last modified June 22, 2020. https://wallbuilders.com/before-the-west-was-won-pre-columbian-morality/.
 Murphy, Sharon Ann. 2005. "Securing Human Property: Slavery, Life Insurance, and Industrialization in the Upper South." Journal of the Early Republic 25 (4) (Winter): 615-652. https://ezproxy.snhu.edu/login?qurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.proquest.com%2Fdocview%2F220935457%3Faccountid%3D3783.
 Dr. Beliles, Mark A., and Stephen K. Dr. McDowell. America's Providential History, 3rd ed., 250-251. 2010.