Cannibal All was published and was received with a lot of contempt from the North. Its publication was at a time when the abolitionist theory on slavery was at full roll. The conflict between conservatives and the abolitionist was at its peak.
George Fitzhugh was true radical crusader of the continuation of slavery. His attack on abolition of slavery was fierce and stinging in many respects. He particularly hated the concept of a free society, leisser-faire economy and the organized wage slavery.
The first classical conservatism argument placed by George Fitzhugh was the idea that no man is ever free. That slavery is the only constant. That we are always a slave to some degree and all that we may do is simply to be able to choose which type of slavery.
In his opinion the slavery of the South provided the best alternative. At least the slavery as practiced by the South, encouraged the care and love of the slaves by their masters. The masters provided for their protection safety and family wellbeing.
On the other hand according to George Fitzhugh, the Free State being advocated by the North was tantamount to a form of slavery in which the slave owners have no moral obligation for their slaves (Dolbeare & Cummings, 2009).
They simply owned them and worked them from their young age, only to let them go to die when they were old and exhausted. He also argued that because the focus of the capitalist societies was the maximization of profit, it was unfortunate that this drove them to screw the very wages from the workers.
In his defense he treated socialism as the better and more advanced term of describing slavery. He believed that at least the socialist system was more human and treated slaves more responsibly (Dolbeare & Cummings, 2009).
His second classical conservative theory was that of failure of the Free State. In his discrediting of the so esteemed values of the Free State, he was emphatic after reading the works of the many proponents of the system and realized the divergence of their views.
His only response to such divergence in the view of persons, who supported capitalism, was to point out to a failure of the system itself. In the new system he envisaged an embodiment of slaves without masters. In his definition of slavery he envisions a definition that goes beyond the simple circumstances of the slave and the master but rather, any system in which one renders his services for wages.
Such a person was a slave to the master whether he did so voluntarily or otherwise. The abolitionists mostly focused on one disadvantage of slavery as the lack of voluntarism. According to George Fitzhugh, it did not matter that people were volunteering their labor for wages (Dolbeare & Cummings, 2009).
As long as they depended on the master to feed them, clothe them and get their basic needs they still remained slaves. Unfortunately, the free society that the North were so happy about, encouraged this kind of existence (Dolbeare & Cummings, 2009).
George Fitzhugh does not argue simply for the propagation of slavery, his argument is centered on creating a well-balanced system of slavery in which the master and the slave share responsibility. He argues that much as the capitalist society advocated for slave trade, in his opinion, was the cruelest and the commonest.
He observed that even though the slaves of the South were looked down upon, yet they served in the same positions as those of paid laborers of the North. The only difference was that in the South at least, they cared for, protected and loved their slaves as well as their families.
Reference
Dolbeare, K.M., & Cummings, M.S. (2009). American Political Thought (6th ed.). Washington, D.C.: CQ Press.