Library Catalog
Amazon cover image
Image from Amazon.com

The Debate Over Slavery : Antislavery and Proslavery Liberalism in Antebellum America / David F. Ericson.

By: Material type: TextTextPublisher: New York, NY : New York University Press, [2000]Copyright date: ©2000Description: 1 online resourceContent type:
Media type:
Carrier type:
ISBN:
  • 9780814722121
  • 9780814722909
Subject(s): DDC classification:
  • 306.3620973 21/eng/20230216
LOC classification:
  • E449 .E73 2000
Other classification:
  • online - DeGruyter
Online resources:
Contents:
Frontmatter -- Contents -- Acknowledgments -- Part I -- 1. The Liberal Consensus Thesis and Slavery -- 2. The Antislavery and Proslavery Arguments -- Part II -- 3. Child, Douglass, and Antislavery Liberalism -- 4. Wendell Phillips -- Part III -- 5. Dew, Fitzhugh, and Proslavery Liberalism -- 6. James H. Hammond -- Part IV -- 7. The “House Divided” and Civil-War Causation -- Notes -- Index -- About the Author
Summary: Frederick Douglass and George Fitzhugh disagreed on virtually every major issue of the day. On slavery, women's rights, and the preservation of the Union their opinions were diametrically opposed. Where Douglass thundered against the evils of slavery, Fitzhugh counted its many alleged blessings in ways that would make modern readers cringe. What then could the leading abolitionist of the day and the most prominent southern proslavery intellectual possibly have in common? According to David F. Ericson, the answer is as surprising as it is simple; liberalism. In The Debate Over Slavery David F. Ericson makes the controversial argument that despite their many ostensible differences, most Northern abolitionists and Southern defenders of slavery shared many common commitments: to liberal principles; to the nation; to the nation's special mission in history; and to secular progress. He analyzes, side-by-side, pro and antislavery thinkers such as Lydia Marie Child, Frederick Douglass, Wendell Phillips, Thomas R. Dew, and James Fitzhugh to demonstrate the links between their very different ideas and to show how, operating from liberal principles, they came to such radically different conclusions. His raises disturbing questions about liberalism that historians, philosophers, and political scientists cannot afford to ignore.
Holdings
Item type Current library Call number URL Status Notes Barcode
eBook eBook Biblioteca "Angelicum" Pont. Univ. S.Tommaso d'Aquino Nuvola online online - DeGruyter (Browse shelf(Opens below)) Online access Not for loan (Accesso limitato) Accesso per gli utenti autorizzati / Access for authorized users (dgr)9780814722909

Frontmatter -- Contents -- Acknowledgments -- Part I -- 1. The Liberal Consensus Thesis and Slavery -- 2. The Antislavery and Proslavery Arguments -- Part II -- 3. Child, Douglass, and Antislavery Liberalism -- 4. Wendell Phillips -- Part III -- 5. Dew, Fitzhugh, and Proslavery Liberalism -- 6. James H. Hammond -- Part IV -- 7. The “House Divided” and Civil-War Causation -- Notes -- Index -- About the Author

restricted access online access with authorization star

http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_16ec

Frederick Douglass and George Fitzhugh disagreed on virtually every major issue of the day. On slavery, women's rights, and the preservation of the Union their opinions were diametrically opposed. Where Douglass thundered against the evils of slavery, Fitzhugh counted its many alleged blessings in ways that would make modern readers cringe. What then could the leading abolitionist of the day and the most prominent southern proslavery intellectual possibly have in common? According to David F. Ericson, the answer is as surprising as it is simple; liberalism. In The Debate Over Slavery David F. Ericson makes the controversial argument that despite their many ostensible differences, most Northern abolitionists and Southern defenders of slavery shared many common commitments: to liberal principles; to the nation; to the nation's special mission in history; and to secular progress. He analyzes, side-by-side, pro and antislavery thinkers such as Lydia Marie Child, Frederick Douglass, Wendell Phillips, Thomas R. Dew, and James Fitzhugh to demonstrate the links between their very different ideas and to show how, operating from liberal principles, they came to such radically different conclusions. His raises disturbing questions about liberalism that historians, philosophers, and political scientists cannot afford to ignore.

Mode of access: Internet via World Wide Web.

In English.

Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page (publisher's Web site, viewed 06. Mrz 2024)