Final answer:
Proslavery advocates in the 1830s shifted from apologizing for slavery to actively promoting it as a positive good, arguing it brought wealth, civilization, and proper care to the enslaved while allowing White men to excel. Arguments against these proslavery statements emphasize the immorality of depriving individuals of freedom and the broad societal harm caused by slavery.
Step-by-step explanation:
During the 1830s, proslavery rhetoric shifted from an apologetic stance to a more aggressive defense of slavery as a positive good. Proslavery propaganda began to argue that slavery was beneficial both to enslaved people and to the nation. They justified slavery by stating it brought wealth and civilization through Christianity to those enslaved and allowed White men to pursue higher endeavors beyond manual labor. The argument also held that slavery was an integral part of achieving America's destiny as an empire and was defended as a fundamental property right.
Furthermore, this propaganda suggested that the care provided to enslaved people was superior to the conditions they would encounter as free individuals in Africa. The shift in rhetoric aligned with an increased focus on preventing the expansion of slavery to expose and undermine the perceived threats to American freedoms and economic opportunities by the institution of slavery.
Key arguments against these statements include the moral and ethical implications of denying freedom and autonomy to enslaved individuals, as well as the detrimental effects of slavery on society as a whole, including the perpetuation of racial inequality and the devaluation of free labor.