As far as slavery goes, I've read where only about 6% of the population in the slave states actually owned and worked them. For a slave owner to work a farm, etc. with virtually free labor competing against non slave holding farmers, I'd imagine that would have developed some deep seeded animosity within the South.
The truth? Well, you'd have to have lived in that era to be sure, I'd think. I only know how history is written by the victors and the press at large. My one anchor point in this is having lived during Kennedy's administration and then to see the last 50 years of pure lying BS put out about the media's darling Camelot.
For a slave owner to work a farm, etc. with virtually free labor competing against non slave holding farmers...
I certainly don't claim to be an authority on slavery, Gaffer, but would be very surprised to learn slave labor was anywhere near "virtually free." I'd guess is was either trivially less expensive than paid labor, or even somewhat more expensive. Why do I say such a thing? Because if slave labor had actually conferred a significant advantage, it surely would have been considerably more extensively used than it was.
I'm reminded of an old Russian saying: "Slaves work only has hard as necessary to avoid beatings."
Actually I think the only a few owned slaves is a canard
Only a few owned a lot of slaves....but I think at least 30-40 percent of white families had at least one slave
One of my great great granfathers only owned one family of slaves....who worked alongside them
A smallish cattle operation in Smith county MS
and again another canard....small slave owners tended to treat them better
They were a bigger investment to them