Pro-Slavery Argument: George Fitzhugh Speech

     Hello, I George Fitzhugh advocate slavery. I was born in Prince William County, Virginia on November 4th, 1806. My family decided to move to Alexandria, Virginia when I was only 6 years old. I attended public school however I am mostly self-educated because of the career path I have chosen to build.

George Fitzhugh's Pro-Slavery Argument Was Probably The Most Bizarre One Of All

     In 1829 I married Mary Metcalf Brockenbrough and moved to Port Royal, Virginia. It was there where I had started my law business. My wife and I inherited a “rickety old mansion” from her family.

    I did not spend much time out of my residence, I rather spent time engaged in guided readings from my immense library of books and pamphlets. My beliefs were heavily influenced by Thomas Carlyle, a writer in my library. I read his books most frequently.

    This may be abnormal knowing I am an advocate for slavery, but I also regularly read “The Liberator.” This was a weekly abolitionist newspaper written by William Lloyd Garrison and Isaac Knapp. This reading was mostly known for immediatism, which is urging to immediately demand the freeing of the slaves.

    I am a Virginia Lawyer and have practiced law for years. I was also a painter for years but I rose to fame by advocating for slavery. I believe that Slavery is better than liberty and equality. The feudal system that supplanted institutions changed the form of slavery but brought with it neither liberty nor equality. We have proof that liberty and equality have not conduced to enhance the comfort or happiness of the people. Crime and pauperism have increased. Riots, trades unions, strikes for higher wages, discontent breaking out into revolution, are things of daily occurrence, and show that the poor see and feel quite as clearly as the philosophers, that their condition is far worse under the new than under the old order of things.

     Now, I have written 2 books and numerous articles advocating and supporting slavery. In 1849, I tried my hand at a pamphlet called “Slavery Justified.” It was not until 1854 when I had come out with my first book called, “Sociology for the South.”

    As mentioned in “Sociology for the South”, I believe that free labor and free markets improved the strong while compressing the weak. This idea is associated with socialism and I am for Socialism. This is for advocating that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be regulated by a community as a whole therefore, I believe that slavery is for all men. Men are not born entitled to equal rights!

     My second book, “Cannibals All,” gained much more traction when compared to “Sociology of the South.” This book was heavily influenced by Thomas Carlyle. I wanted to show that the unrestricted exploitation of so-called free society is more oppressive to the laborer then domestic slavery. It is the duty of society to protect the weak; but protection cannot be efficient without the power of control; therefore, it is the duty of society to enslave the weak. Thank you for your time.


https://docsouth.unc.edu/southlit/fitzhughcan/bio.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Fitzhugh

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aia/part4/4h3141.html

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

State V. Mann

Image
 The State V. Mann's case was about an individual named John Mann, who had hired Lydia, who was a slave of Elizabeth Jones. After he had chastised her, she ran off. Mann ended up shooting Lydia and wounded her, however, she was still alive after the attack.  The state of North Carolina ended up charging Mann with assault.  The trial judge charged the Jury, that if they believed the punishment inflicted by Mann was cruel and uncalled for, that in the law the Defendant was guilty, as he only had a special property in the slave. The jury convicted the Defendant, and Mann appealed the conviction.   My group and I looked at all aspects of this case. This included religion, ethics, emotions, history, law, and economics.  My viewpoints however were solely based on the religious aspect of this case.  Religion does not support slavery by any means. In fact, It has been opposed on religious grounds. Throughout most religions slavery was accepted as an institutio...
Read more

EOTO

Image
In the Reconstruction Era, the Freedmen's Bureau was beneficial for the time being.  It was a lso known as the Bureau of Refugees. It was a U.S. government agency from 1865 to 1872. The Bureau was placed under the authority of the War Department and the majority of its original employees were soldiers from the Civil War.  It was established on March 3rd, 1865 by Congress to help millions of former black slaves and poor whites in the South as a result of the Civil War.  With the Freedmen's Bureau came food, housing, medical aid, established schools, and offered legal assistance. The Freedmen's Bureau was organized into districts covering the 11 former rebel states, the border states of Kentucky, Maryland, and West Virginia, and Washington, D.C. Each district was headed by an assistant commissioner.  While the Bureau was active, it was underfunded and understaffed. With only 900 agents at its peak, some were corrupt or incompetent and others were brave and hardworking ...
Read more

Plessy V. Ferguson

Image
 In the Plessy V. Ferguson case,  Louisiana has a law adopted in 1892 requiring all private railroad companies to have separate accommodations for black and white passengers. Homer Plessy, who is 1/8ths black, got a first-class ticket. Apparently doing this broke the law. He ended up suing under the 14th amendment. There were two sides to this case. It was the state (Ferguson) against Homer Plessy. According to Homer Plessy's side, it e stablished the constitutionality of racial segregation. Plessy should not have been required to give up his right or access his train car. The Constitution should be colorblind so they don’t have to view color as a reason for treating other people differently.  Plessy had every right to not move because his rights were violated. The equal protection clause was violated and P lessy did nothing wrong. On the state's side (Ferguson), s ince slavery ended the state has tried to include blacks into society without violence, fear, or hate....
Read more