The Abolition Of Slavery Rhetorical Analysis

When slavery was finally abolished in the United States, a mix of emotions and opinions stirred within the country. Issues arose over what rights the freedmen would receive and how the millions of suddenly free people would integrate into society or leave the country. Many southern plantation owners were filled with rage because they still believed that slaves were their property and emancipation was a direct violation of the Constitution. On the other hand, many slaves rejoiced over the fact that they were finally free after years of harsh labor. However, as time passed, some slaves realized what a terrible position they had been put in and questioned if the abolition of slavery was actually beneficial to everyone as a whole. The idea of a

He backs up his statements with believable outcomes while Heyward seems to only be complaining. While both of the plantation owners arguments are racist to different degrees, Heyward’s is blatant racism, expressing his feelings about blacks being naturally inferior and like animals that needed to be herded, while Ravenel’s arguments have more of a subtle racism to them. Both of their letters express some sort of bitterness and are strategically written to make people question whether abolition slavery was actually the right thing to do. Even some slaves questioned abolition.
Isabella Soustan, a former slave, wrote a letter to her former master asking for help and describing her terrible conditions. She says that no one cares for her in her present situation and she was “free” with her master (Litwack 332). She almost pleads to come back into service of her master again. This letter is extremely disturbing to read because it demonstrates how the institutionalization of slavery manifested itself into not only the minds of the white men, but into the slaves as

The plantation owners were very wealthy during slavery and knew that they would not be after all of their workers suddenly no longer had to work for them. Of course they would write about how the freedmen were not suited for life outside slavery. The freedmen and freedwomen argued their points based on their standing after the abolition of slavery. Some were lucky enough to find opportunities, but others were left with nothing since everything was taken from them from the start. The white men took people from Africa, stripped them of their home, culture, identities, and families and fundamentally destroyed a group of people. Then when they were enslaved, the African progression was pushed to an all time low. Obviously when the slaves would come out of slavery they would be in a terrible situation, but that doesn’t mean that slavery was good in that it gave the slaves decent lives. That is the true irony of all of the men writing about how abolition was unfavorable for freedmen. Remnants of the set back progress are still prevalent today and will probably carry on for a long time. The racist Ravenel was correct that “time will show,” but time did not show that the non- white people would not have a chance in the United States, time showed how non-white people could integrate into the United States and be just as successful as any white