HW for April 9 - Frederick Douglass (anthology, pp. 208-222) and some Henry David Thoreau (pp. 201-205)
Answer either, or both:
- How does Douglass denouncement refute the claims of the pro-slavery defenders (refer to your class documents about "The South and the Slavery Controversy".
- To what extent could some of his arguments have as their corollary an attitude of civil disobedience, as propounded by H. D. Thoreau's "Resistance to Civil Government"?
As a revolutionary, Frederick Douglass had arrived by 1852 at a point where he is willing to address the very foundation of American power – its political and judicial institutions and its religious institutions. With the fourth of July Oration, Frederick Douglass shows that he is not as much interested in the slaveholder, but interested in the legislator, those who have continued to work hard to retain the infrastructure and economic possibilities of American Slavery, as he calls it. Douglass stated, “The feeling of the nation must be quickened; the conscience of the nation must be roused; the propriety of the nation must be startled; the hypocrisy of the nation must be exposed; and its crimes against God and man be proclaimed and denounced.”
ReplyDeleteThe hypocrisy of the American nation is the central and most developed case that he makes and it resets the “Internal Slave Trade” supported and sustained, as he says, by “American politics and American religion” and viewed by these institutions as an honorable economic practice. On occasion, George Fitzhugh, reacted to the wage slavery suggested by northern industrialists, by saying “white workers would actually be better off in bondage,” as his vision of the south was preferable to him “But our Southern slavery has become a benign and protective institution, and our negroes are confessedly better off than any free laboring population.”
In Douglass’ famous fourth of July Oration he had accused America for having abandoned the true teachings of both the Bible and the Constitution: “On this occasion, I will, in the name of Humanity, which is outraged, in the name of Liberty, which is fettered (and in chains), in the name of the Constitution and of the Bible, which are disregarded and trampled upon, (I will) dare to call in question and to denounce, with all the emphasis I can command, every thing that serves to perpetuate slavery – the great sin and shame of America!”
Douglass fiercely exposes the religious hypocrisy and the political laws that were established. Since the 1850 Compromise, The Fugitive Slave act had then been implemented. It promulgated that citizens would be rewarded for getting back fugitive slaves. This law was created to fight the underground railroad, the clandestine system created by abolitionists that helped people, hiding them in houses until they reached the north. Obviously, political and religious institutions were involved in this “But the church of this country is not only indifferent to the wrongs of the slave, it actually takes sides with the oppressors. It has made itself the bulwark of American slavery, and the shield of American slave-hunter. Many of its most eloquent Divines who stand as the very lights of the church, have shamelessly given the sanction of religion and the Bible the whole slave system. They have taught that man may, properly, be a slave; that the relation of master and slave is ordained of God; that to send back an escaped bondman to his master is clearly the duty of all followers of the Lord Jesus Christ; and this horrible blasphemy is palmed off upon the world for Christianity.”
Douglass’ efforts in abolishing slavery through his words was a work in progress of a lifetime. His eloquent public speeches shed enlightenment to his audiences. He made use of the country’s, bible, declaration of independence and constitution as weapons and self-evident defense of natural rights, equality, and freedom.
Pro-slavery defenders often used biblical justifications, racial superiority, economic necessity, and legal and constitutional arguments for their claims. William A. Smith and George Fitzhugh are pro-slavery defenders using several ways to examine the positive influences of slavery on society against the abolitionist critiques. William A. Smith’s claims on pro-slavery are centered around racial superiority. He says “A government, then, should be provided for the African, as a distinct and separate race, existing in the bosom of another and superior race”. He says a government must be adapted to them but it should be inferior to that of the whites among whom they dwell. George Fitzhugh like Smith also believed in the superiority of the white race. Fitzhugh praised Southern paternalism where slaveholders saw themselves as benevolent caretakers of their slaves. Frederick Douglas, a prominent African American abolitionist, rejected the superiority of one race and appealed to the principles of humanity and justice. He thought all individuals regardless of their race were equal and challenged the beliefs that dehumanized and discriminated African American people. He states that “while we are writing and cyphering, acting as clerks, merchants, and secretaries, having among us lawyers…We are engaged in all manner of enterprises common to other men”. He asserts that enslaved people are engaged in professions similar to free people, focusing on their humanity and refuting the notions of racial inferiority. He says they are living in families like them and worshipping the Christian God like them, centering his argument on their similarity. Douglas also states “Your celebration is a sham; your boasted liberty, an unholy license; your national greatness, swelling vanity; your sounds of rejoicing are empty and heartless.” which exposes the hypocrisy of the United States. Celebrating freedom and independence while African American people are enslaved is pure hypocrisy to him.
ReplyDeleteFrederick Douglass, a former black slave of the United States of America, delivered a speech on July 5, 1852, on the occasion of the 76th anniversary of America's independence. In this speech, he recounted what the 4th of July truly meant to him and to all black slaves. After praising the founding fathers of America and all the brave men who made it all happen, he began his refutation against the system that favored slavery, recounting his own experiences firsthand. His speech is truly moving, rich in empathy, and one can perceive both anger and sadness for the situation in which thousands (I would venture to say millions) of black slaves were forced to live. These individuals were treated differently from white citizens, did not enjoy the same rights, and above all, lacked freedom, instead being subject to their master.
ReplyDeleteA poignant point in his speech is when he mentions America's inconsistency, a nation that fought fiercely to gain its freedom from England but at the same time deprived a large number of its inhabitants of it.
At one point in his speech, Douglass addresses the issue of the Christian Church, stating that instead of opposing this situation of slavery, it actually supports and allies with the oppressors, professing it as right and being convinced that all of this followed the word of God. This is what William A. Smith and George Fitzhugh, a clergyman and a theorist who supported slavery, affirmed. They even considered it justifiable not only for black men but for everyone, claiming that once the slaves chose their master, they lived a life that surpassed even that of a free white man. In short, they justified it as the will of God.
This dispute over slavery would later lead to the American Civil War between the North and the South.
- To what extent could some of his arguments have as their corollary an attitude of civil disobedience, as propounded by H. D. Thoreau's "Resistance to Civil Government"?
ReplyDeleteThe views of Henry David Thoreau on civil disobedience as presented in "Resistance to Civil Government" are clearly present in Frederick Douglass's speech "What to the Slave is the Fourth of July?" Both Douglass and Thoreau shared a commitment to justice and the moral duty to oppose unfair laws and systems.
In his speech, Douglass condemns the hypocrisy of celebrating independence and freedom while millions of African Americans were still held in slavery. He draws attention to the contrast that exists between the Declaration of Independence's declaration of liberty and the cruel reality of slavery that many African Americans had to go through. Douglass gives a challenge to his listeners to acknowledge this inconsistency and make the necessary corrections.
In "Civil Disobedience," Thoreau makes the case that moral virtue and personal conscience are preferable to slavish compliance with unfair rules. He supports the use of nonviolent resistance to confront unjust systems and potentially bring about their transformation. Thoreau declared "That government is best which governs least," emphasizing the importance of individual liberty and opposition to repressive regimes.
Douglass and Thoreau agree that it is morally required to oppose injustice and fight for the rights of all people. While Thoreau's arguments included a broader critique of government authority and the importance of individual conscience in promoting a more just society, Douglass focuses specifically on abolishing slavery and recognizing African American personality. Thus, it could be argued that some of Frederick Douglass’s arguments made in "What to the Slave is the Fourth of July?" may, in fact, arise from a mindset of civil disobedience, as espoused by Henry David Thoreau in "Resistance to Civil Government." Both passages call for expressing individual moral conscience by opposing repressive laws or systems, as well as actively opposing injustice.
1. Frederick Douglass was a prominent abolitionist and a former slave who became a powerful voice against slavery in the United States. In his denouncements, Douglass refuted the claims of pro-slavery defenders by providing firsthand accounts and logical arguments against the institution of slavery.
ReplyDeleteDouglass's denouncement further refuted pro-slavery claims by highlighting the economic, social, and political consequences of slavery. He argued that slavery impeded the progress and prosperity of both enslaved individuals and society as a whole. By depriving enslaved people of education, freedom, and basic human rights, slavery perpetuated a system of inequality and exploitation. Moreover, Douglass emphasized that the profitability of slavery relied on the exploitation and suffering of human beings, undermining any purported benefits or justifications put forth by pro-slavery advocates. Through his powerful rhetoric and firsthand accounts, Douglass effectively dismantled the arguments of pro-slavery defenders, exposing the moral bankruptcy and cruelty of the institution.
In "The South and the Slavery Controversy," Douglass likely draws from historical documents, speeches, and personal narratives to refute pro-slavery claims. He cites legal documents such as the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850, which forced free states to return escaped slaves to their owners, as evidence of the oppressive nature of slavery. Douglass effectively undermines the legitimacy of pro-slavery ideology and advocates for the abolition of slavery based on moral, economic, and humanitarian grounds.
“Thoreau's concept of civil disobedience emphasizes the moral obligation of individuals to resist unjust laws and government policies through nonviolent means. By refusing to comply with laws that go against one's conscience or principles, individuals can challenge the legitimacy of oppressive systems and advocate for positive change. Thoreau's emphasis on individual conscience and personal responsibility underscores the idea that each person has the power to effect change through their actions, even in the face of overwhelming societal pressures.
ReplyDeleteMoreover, Thoreau's call for civil disobedience encourages individuals to engage in acts of peaceful resistance as a way to bring attention to social injustices and spark dialogue and debate within society. By taking a principled stand against injustice, individuals can inspire others to question the status quo and work towards creating a more just and equitable society. Thoreau's ideas continue to inspire activists and advocates around the world to use civil disobedience as a tool for social change and to uphold the values of justice, equality, and human rights.”
By Bárbara Soares
Frederick Douglass and Henry David Thoreau were contemporaries who contributed significantly to American thought on civil rights and justice. While they approached these issues from different angles, there is a point of convergence between Douglass's arguments against slavery and Thoreau's doctrine of civil disobedience, especially as expressed in his essay "Resistance to Civil Government."
ReplyDeleteOne of the areas where their ideas intersect is the moral opposition to injustice. Both Douglass and Thoreau emphasized the importance of moral principles in opposing unjust systems. Douglass's condemnation of slavery and Thoreau's refusal to support a government that upheld slavery highlight a shared belief in individual responsibility to confront injustice.
Another area where they intersect is their resistance to unjust laws. Douglass argued that slavery was an inherently unjust system that contradicted the core values of freedom and equality. This stance aligns with Thoreau's argument that individuals should resist unjust laws, suggesting that Douglass's advocacy for abolition could extend to an attitude of civil disobedience when laws support or perpetuate injustice.
In conclusion, while Douglass did not explicitly call for civil disobedience in the same manner as Thoreau, the underlying principles of moral opposition to injustice, resistance to unjust laws, and action over compliance suggest a corollary between Douglass's arguments and the concept of civil disobedience. Both thinkers advocated for a moral duty to challenge oppressive systems, even if it meant resisting laws that uphold those systems.