Proslavery Analysis

Proslavery would be easy to support if you weren’t a slave. Out of the “Proslavery” authors none were in the slightest slaves themselves. The spoke as if they were a representative of the slave and this was accepted by the slave(s). The justification of slavery is written as though they are “protected” and in their own rights free to do as they please, given they work “no less than nine hours a day.” (Fitzhugh) They are referred to as insolent members of society incapable of being business owners or model citizens. They are viewed as “inferior to the white race and would be outwitted in the chaos of free competition.”(Fitzhugh) Basically saying that if they didn’t live within the slavery structure they wouldn’t know how to function in modern society. Without slaves the masters can ‘lounge about town, and have no other trouble” (Fitzhugh) Being referred to as children, it’s viewed that the “master labors for the slave, while the slave labors for industrial …show more content…
Walker even speaks of the bible and its equality derivatives and how can people worship the lord and not see the equality of people. Abolishing slavery is simply stated by Walker that “by telling them they were not of the human family” (Walker). How is this even possible? It isn’t, any and all people of this world are a part of the human family and should be treated as equals no matter what. Tying the relation to Jesus Christ himself as the one true King how Walker views abolishment. “Are we MEN?!” (Walker) states, “Did our creator make us to be slaves?”(Walker). Walker sees the view that men are created equal even in the eyes of