The founding documents of the United States were created to ensure independence, freedom, and equality for all. While the Founding Fathers were remarkable in their efforts to obtain colonial independence, they did not live up to their desired ideals of equality. Thomas Jefferson wrote, “all men are created equal.” His very own model of the nation did not match his actions while he enslaved many people, and the Declaration of Independence did not guarantee liberty to African Americans. While Jefferson claimed slavery deprived Africans of freedom, his inability to address their autonomy showed us that equality for all was not a pressing issue to resolve. In Colonial America, institutional slavery was common. It wasn’t until the nineteenth century that there was a minimal progression of social reform. Writers, particularly in the 1800s, did spread awareness to try and solidify the country’s ideals of equality. They focused on individual character and principles. Their words allowed people to recognize the indecency of slavery but did not imply that the people’s discriminatory actions ended because they didn’t. This essay will explore systemic racism in colonial America based on writings from colonial authors and those that fought to reform institutionalized slavery in the nineteenth century. I will explain how nineteenth-century transcendentalist philosophy motivated people to recognize society's minimal progression in opposing slavery and advocating for its abolition.
Colonists at the beginning of the seventeenth century came over from England with immense uncertainty, as their ships surrounded the Chesapeake Bay (Wilkinson 594). The English Crown did consent to colonial settlement in the areas that were occupied by people of Indigenous descent, but the Natives had not yet given them the approval to claim the land for their homesteads. Interracial relationships and business dealings between Indigenous and colonial Americans were common. At the beginning of the seventeenth century, people of all races learned to cooperate with one another regardless of their descent, and England had not yet enforced an end to interracial relationships (594). The Colonization of European and Indigenous people around the Chesapeake sparked a time of interracial compliance during the first half of the seventeenth century. It wasn’t until the second half of the seventeenth century that Chesapeake officials and wealthy English legislators began outlawing cooperative dealings. Wilkinson wrote, “Chesapeake authorities believed that maintaining control over the mixed-heritage population was essential to creating a well-ordered society, while people of mixed backgrounds insisted on maintaining their autonomy, often basing claims to freedom on their connection to European lineage and Christian faith” (594). If the laws weren’t obeyed, people of mixed backgrounds were subjected to harsh punishments, slavery, and an extension of indentured servitude. This decision sparked the beginning of colonial institutionalized slavery.
The mid-seventeenth century became the essence of the enforcement of multicultural relations, especially affecting those in Maryland and Virginia. Those of different descent tried fighting for their freedom in hopes of deterring the Virginia General Assembly from enslaving people of mixed ancestry.
The Virginia legislature responded to such complaints by passing a law declaring that anyone of mixed descent would be enslaved in colonial America. Wilkinson writes that Virginia justified their reasoning as it was “preventing abominable mixtures and spurious issues” (595). Similarly, Maryland instituted a slave code for punishing the rapidly growing number of multicultural children. Interracial marriages and their children created a fearful society for the English administrators, hence their legal restrictions on Natives and Europeans. Those who held the power in Virginia and Maryland formed a negative ideology of multicultural relationships. It is evident that seventeenth century colonial laws formed the basis for a racist society all throughout the colonies and for years to come.
During the late eighteenth century, colonial writer Equiano condemned institutionalized slavery by informing others of his experiences as a part of the slave trade. The West Indies had one of the most brutally enforced legislations. Equiano refers to the whole system of slavery when he writes,
repeated cruelties are the wretched first urged to despair, and then murdered, because they still retain so much of human nature about them as to wish to put an end to their misery, and retaliate on their tyrants! These overseers are indeed for the most part persons of the worst character of any denomination of men in the West Indies.
His narrative helps us understand systemic racism and his efforts of abolishing the institution of slavery with the trans-Atlantic slave trade. The Barbados Assembly passed a law in their 329th act saying that all slaves who ran away or caused any other crime against their master would be fined heavily by a fifteen-pounds sterling. This same law was enforced all throughout the West Indies, making it one of the most systemically racist places. Equiano witnessed slaves being put on scales and weighed and then sold to different masters, which contributed to the brutal slave trade in the West Indies. However, he also contributed to the slave trade himself by working on a slave ship. Even though he writes that slavery was morally wrong, his participation in the institution did not support his narrative when he condemned slavery. He wrote, “the treatment of the slaves was nearly the same; so nearly indeed, that the history of an island, or even a plantation, with a few such exceptions as I have mentioned, might serve for a history of the whole.” Every slave master contributed to the flawed society of institutionalized slavery.
Phillis Wheatley, an eighteenth-century colonial author born in Gambia, Africa, was kidnapped and sold to the Wheatley family in Boston by slave traders. Wheatley did not explicitly condemn slavery but rather acknowledged its existence and attempted to appreciate the good in her life despite being kidnapped and sold. In her poem, “Thoughts on the Works of Providence,” she writes, “This most is heard in Nature’s constant voice, / This makes the morn, and this the eve rejoice” (124-25). In other words, we all can choose to live in accordance with the nature of light rather than choose to live in the world's evilness. She chose to live in the light of the world by trusting God to guide her through her journey while enslaved. A religious conversion demonstrated to her that light is attainable despite the evilness of those who participated in the slave trade and perpetuated the system of immoral institutional slavery.
The nineteenth century saw only minor progress in the fight to abolish slavery. William Lloyd Garrison, a prominent American and Christian abolitionist, was frequently referred to as “an American radical” (Osborn 65). Garrison saw the Constitution as “unjust,” and he encouraged the North to secede from the South, as well as other abolitionists not to vote in national elections. His reasoning was that voting in elections amounted to participating in the immoral institution of slavery and actively supporting a pro-slavery Constitution. He saw the Constitution as a document that did not uphold the ideals of liberty, which led to his radical political beliefs. During a speech, Garrison stated that America was founded on morality but was “rotten to the core” (66). He contended that the states that claimed to be “free” engaged in unjust acts of slavery. Garrison addressed Congress with three propositions that would ensure a truly free America: “a man is a man, not a chattel; hence, he cannot be the property of another; and hence, that which makes him a chattel is unnatural, monstrous, and unholy, and ought to be immediately destroyed” (72). He believed that the Bible contained all the necessary and moral ideas for ruling the people. They saw God's government as the only true ideal of liberty. “Abolitionists reworked the definition of a Christian,” wrote Wyatt-Brown (162). Garrison's fight to end slavery changed the way many Americans saw Christianity and demonstrated the ideals of Christian values.
Throughout the majority of the nineteenth century, William Lloyd Garrison was a powerful abolitionist. He inspired others to speak out against slavery and fight for equality. William Apess, a Methodist abolitionist, asked a white audience how a different skin color could cause one to develop prejudiced beliefs. He also agreed with Garrison that God was the focal point of a truly moral society. Apess also stated that God makes no distinctions between people of different ethnic backgrounds in the Bible. In fact, Apess reminded his listeners that Jesus was a Jew rather than a white man by saying, “Jesus Christ being a Jew, and those of his Apostles certainly were not whites.” He delivered this speech in hopes of persuading white people to reconsider their behavior and change their negative stereotypes of people from other cultures. Society had ingrained the notion that whites were superior to blacks, thus passing this belief down generations and making it an inherently racist society. It wasn't until the nineteenth century that there was a progression of abolitionists who did more than just speak out against slavery; they also fought Congress and other leaders in power to confront their stated ideals that did not correspond with their prejudiced actions.
When Frederick Douglass attended William Lloyd Garrison's anti-slavery conference in 1841, he felt optimistic. Throughout his life, he endured a great deal of hardship while being transferred to various masters. Douglass took advantage of every opportunity to educate himself, despite his masters' fears that educating a slave would cause them to rebel. Douglass demonstrated that an educated man cannot be successfully enslaved, and the more he understood his master's actions, the less justifiable they became. His masters were well aware that educating Douglass would only expose their atrocities and instill guilt in him. Douglass' introduction to learning demonstrated to his masters that blacks have the full potential to excel at anything they desire, a reality that white slaveholders wanted to deny. Covey, one of Douglass' cruel masters, lived with a view of the Chesapeake Bay. To Douglass, the ships that surrounded the Chesapeake represented freedom and individuality. Douglass saw fighting Covey as the only way to put an end to the repeated brutality. He gained a lot of self-confidence and realized the importance of self-defense. Douglass was never whipped again after his fight because Covey feared him. Covey displayed his physical insecurities. Douglass was denied equal legal treatment due to institutional racism. His masters used manipulation to justify ignorant behavior by convincing Douglass that it was the standard treatment. As a slave, Douglass discovered that speaking the truth could result in his death. He successfully escaped his previous master in chapter eleven of his slave narrative, and he was extremely clever in doing so. He didn't reveal how he did it because he was afraid that telling the truth would endanger the people who helped him escape and make it more difficult for other slaves to break free. New Bedford, Massachusetts, drastically changed his life. Douglass was shocked by the North's progress in improving blacks' living conditions. It made him realize that the South was not progressing toward equality. Douglass was inspired by Garrison to dedicate himself to the fight against slavery and to become an advocate for change.
Abraham Lincoln was a key contributor in reshaping America’s former principles written in our founding documents. His primary objective was to protect the Union instead of abiding by the written ideals of freedom for everyone. Lincoln addressed the public by saying, “the world has never had a good definition of the word liberty” (Morel 213). People in the north had a different meaning of freedom than people in the South. Liberty in the South was considered a right for slave masters to continue depriving blacks of their freedoms. Lincoln did admit that the Declaration of Independence was contradictory in the way racism shaped society’s morals (214). He opposed the slaveholder’s definition of freedom and shaped his opinion around what was best for the morality of the Union. While Lincoln’s primary concern was maintaining a well-functioning Union, he believed many abolitionists were too radical in their approach to end slavery. For instance, Morel mentioned that William Lloyd Garrison viewed every individual as equal, despite their descent. Lincoln was pleased with his idea but saw it as an unattainable outcome due to Garrison’s strong opposition to the Constitution. Garrison remained contemptuous of the Constitution by claiming it was “the most bloody and heaven-daring arrangement ever made by men,” hence his reasoning for opposing the government formed by men (Morel 214).
Lincoln believed that self- government based on principles was a path to instilling individual freedom. Morel brilliantly stated that Lincoln’s most effective way to ingrain justice in the minds of Americans was to “inform their opinions while he accommodated their prejudices” (218). It was challenging for Lincoln to persuade the public that it would be in their favor to not hold prejudiced beliefs. Lincoln knew that people would have a hard time contradicting their own beliefs because they were brought up with the notion that blacks were inferior to whites. Overall, Lincoln saw greater importance of preserving the Union despite its injustices that went against “the original idea” of freedom for all (222).
The nineteenth-century writers' opposition to systemic racism did improve in America. Institutional slavery did remain an evident issue, but more activists and abolitionists involved in the nineteenth century philosophical movements did spread awareness of the immoral institutions. It sparked a time for intellectual reasoning and looked to solidify the country’s ideals that “all men are created equal.” Most saw the only way to try and change people’s beliefs on slavery was to make them feel guilty about their behavior. Transcendentalism sparked a new age for highly educated people leading up to the Civil War. It also encouraged people to explore different solutions to the problem of institutions while encouraging individuality to help reform society’s character. This idea led to the transcendentalist movement.
Transcendentalism was one of the first philosophical movements of the early nineteenth century, led by author Ralph Waldo Emerson. The movement focused on individual potential and the inherent good morals of people, even though society was corrupt in participating in the institution of slavery. Wyatt-Brown writes, “Transcendentalism and abolitionism were emphatically moving in the same direction” (161). Transcendentalists and abolitionists were similar in their beliefs because they believed the immoral institutions of slavery encouraged people to express their impure nature while disregarding the concept of individuality or “self-reliance.” They were less concerned about status or superiority and instead focused on the ideals of America by writing, “Transcendentalists were concerned with matters of principle, not of power” (169). Both denounced the prejudices held by their generation primarily because of their individual guilt. Much like Garrison and other Christian abolitionists and transcendentalists, they viewed religion as a way to encourage their protest of slavery institutions. They felt an obligation to obey the moral values and uphold a good definition of a Christian (160). Wyatt-Brown stresses the point that Elkins concluded, in that Americans were incapable of feeling comfortable speaking out and rejecting slavery. He claims they “lacked the proper intellectual frame of mind for reasonable action on any pressing social question” (155). The transcendentalists and abolitionists demanded change and strictly criticized slavery institutions. They felt a moral obligation to remind individuals of their core values.
This essay enables us to recognize societal flaws that failed to live up to America's founding ideals, resulting in the Civil War. It explored the commonality of interracial relationships in the seventeenth century colonial era, prompting the English crown to make multi-cultural relationships illegal. This essay investigated the experiences of colonial writers Equiano and Phillis Wheatley in the institution of the slave trade. Following that, it discovered William Lloyd Garrison’s views opposing a hypocritical Constitution, claiming it was “pro-slavery.” This paper also looked at Garrison’s influence on William Apess, as both men were Christian abolitionists who questioned society’s principles. It examined Abraham Lincoln's concerns with the founding documents' ideals of defining liberty and his particular interest in preserving the union. Finally, this essay explored the progression of nineteenth-century social reform that led to the Transcendentalist and Abolitionist movements, which were distinguished by their emphasis on morality rather than superiority. Even with the best efforts of historical figures and nineteenth-century philosophical movements, America’s progress in adhering to its ideals of equality were minimal.
Works Cited
Apess, William. “An Indian’s Looking-Glass for the White Man.” 1833. American Literature I: An Anthology of Texts From Early America Through the Civil War, edited by Jennifer Kurtz, Virtual Library of Virginia.
Morel, Lucas E. “Lincoln and the Constitution: A Unionist for the Sake of Liberty.” Journal of Supreme Court History, vol. 35, no. 3, Nov. 2010, pp. 213-24. EBSCOhost.
Douglass, Frederick. Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass. 1845. Project Gutenberg, 2006.
Osborn, Ronald. “William Lloyd Garrison and the United States Constitution: The Political Evolution of
an American Radical.” Journal of Law and Religion, vol. 24, no. 1, Jan. 2008, pp. 65-88. EBSCOhost.
Equiano, Olaudah. The Interesting Narrative of the Life of Olaudah Equiano, or Gustavus Vassa, The African. 1789. Project Gutenberg, 2005.
Wheatley, Phillis. Poems on Various Subjects, Religious and Moral. 1773. Project Gutenberg, 1996.
Wilkinson, A. B. “People of Mixed Ancestry in the Seventeenth-Century Chesapeake: Freedom, Bondage, and the Rise of Hypodescent Ideology.” Journal of Social History, vol. 52, no. 3, Spring 2019, pp. 593-618. EBSCOhost.
Wyatt-Brown, Bertram. “Stanley Elkins’ Slavery: The Antislavery Interpretation Reexamined.” American Quarterly, vol. 25, no. 2, May 1973, pp. 154-76. EBSCOhost.