Fitzhugh's and Christy's Pro-Slavery Arguments
Throughout our country's two-hundred years of freedom, there have been many politicians, orators, and writers who have interpreted the Declaration of Independence in different ways. George Fitzhugh and David Christy were both mid-nineteenth century writers who believed the constitution was misunderstood. Both Fitzhugh and Christy argue the popular belief that the constitution statement "all men are created equal" (Fitzhugh 240) does not apply to African Slaves and Freed Slaves. However, they differ on their views of what society would be like if blacks were allowed to integrate. Both Fitzhugh and Christy make valid points in their writing, but Fitzhugh is more reasonable in his views on the nation's condition if blacks were to be freed.
Fitzhugh and Christy had many of the same beliefs concerning blacks, but they use different strategies to persuade the reader. Fitzhugh argues that the constitution was written without consideration of abolition, and that blacks having equal rights was not even considered. His general feelings are that the Declaration of Independence was not a problem until abolition arose, during which time it became a tool blacks could inappropriately quote from out of context (240).
Christy's view on the American situation is that no matter what laws are put into place, blacks are too savage to be an equal to the average white American (245). In the view of natural superiority, no matter what skills, education or abilities a slave has, he deserves nothing more than to either be enslaved or deported. Christy believed that if abolition was successful, and slaves were free to migrate into commerce, they would feel a need to dominate and destroy those who had imprisoned them. In Christy's view, freeing a savage would also be useless because they would never become sophisticated.
Both Fitzhugh and Christy would agree that a black person could never be an equal to an average white American. In his writing, Fitzhugh states that "Their natural inequalities beget inequalities of rights" (241), implying that the rights given in the constitution do not apply to blacks because they are naturally born unfit for equality. In this quote he uses the same word twice to compare two types of inequalities, one being an inequality given by God, and the other being an inequality that must thoughtlessly follow the first; hence, human given inequalities. Fitzhugh, however, does not see a connection between the two and believes that God's choice is more powerful than the say of man; therefore, the laws of the church dominate those of the state.
Fitzhugh is more persuasive because he takes a more realistic view of his surroundings. Even today, readers can look back at the differences that Fitzhugh and Christy had and would be able to compare the writer's prophecies to how society actually evolved. Christy's view that humans came quickly to power and could lose it just as fast, was not as strong of an argument as Fitzhugh's belief that if the rights of blacks were not regulated by the government, they would dominate the country's commerce. Although Fitzhugh's foretelling was not completely correct, it holds a logical thought process that was uncommon at that time.
Christy believed that slaves were doing the best to their ability. He states that "The savage, liberated from bondage, is a savage still" (245), implying that no matter what rights you give to blacks, they can't be worthy and will still want to be enslaved. But how could it be suggested that blacks want to be enslaved when they attempt whatever is necessary to live free in the north? Christy himself must have known this having lived in Cincinnati, Ohio, and being aware of the new-found freedom of the slaves that were escaping up the Ohio River.
Both Christy's and Fitzhugh's arguments are congruent because they believe the Declaration of Independence has neither the right nor the ability to change a slave into a civilized human. Although within the Declaration it states that "All men are created equal" (240), it was believed that this equality was not an equality between whites and blacks. Fitzhugh believed that some people were weaker than others and needed to be guided, and that slavery was an example of guidance (241), while Christy states that blacks were a "barbarous" people not fit for the words in the Declaration.
Fitzhugh says that, "Men are not 'born entitled to equal rights'!" and goes on to say that "no two men by nature are exactly equal" (241), suggesting that one is constantly looking for someone to be dominated by. Both Fitzhugh and Christy feel that by nature blacks are benefiting from the authority of others and would be lacking otherwise. Christy says that "nature... and many other circumstances, will divide us into parties... which will probably never end," entertaining the belief that a person's "party" is decided by the color of their parents. Because heredity always follows race, "party" must always follow "party"; this was obviously thought of by someone that was (at the time) in the higher party.
Fitzhugh says that "Nature has made
[the blacks into]
slaves" (241), but this is not a fair accusation. "Nature" was used as an excuse for the cause of inequalities, but in reality, excuses were used to take advantage of those who could be exploited. Uneducated slaves did not have the ability to reason with the whites and educated former slaves did not have the voice to reason concerning the unwanted primitive lifestyle they were oppressed into living. Excuses can effortlessly be created to avoid having to reason and rationalize with others, but excuses do not solve problems, they only postpone a solution and allow agony to continue.
Because of his beliefs that the constitution was not meant for blacks, Christy says, "there is no act warranting the conclusion that the negroes were to be admitted to a position of equality with the whites" (249). It was believed that allowing blacks to live among whites "would be suicidal" (245). The act of allowing the common slave to be a respected equal would cause commerce to no longer be driven only by whites; furthermore this gave fear to whites for no more of a logical reason than because it would be a change to their society.
Fitzhugh however, did not believe that a civilized society could even be built without the inequalities of the time (242). In his opinion, the only way to create a working society would be with the help of slaves, and because of this, he differs from Christy in his views on what society would be like if slavery were abolished. How could anyone have known what profits freed slaves could have brought to former slave holders? Instead of thinking of the rich outcome of generations to come, greed caused plantation owners to keep their small business running only for short-term profit.
In summary, both Fitzhugh and Christy believed in many of the same principles concerning the declaration and its implications of the Black population. Keeping in mind that their writings were influenced by their belief that the only type of successful society is one that stands on the back of enslaved people, the Declaration of Independence had little hope of convincing Fitzhugh and Christy's closed minds.
Bibliography
- Fitzhugh, George. "Sociology for the South, or the Failure of Free Society." Negotiating Difference: Cultural Case Studies for Composition. Ed. Patricia Bizzell and Bruce Herzberg. Boston: Bedford Books of St. Martin's Press, 1996. 239-243.
- Christy, David. "Cotton Is King." Negotiating Difference: Cultural Case Studies for Composition. Ed. Patricia Bizzell and Bruce Herzberg. Boston: Bedford Books of St. Martin's Press, 1996. 244-250.
