Final answer:
The claim that 'Knowledge didn't agree with slavery' refers to the idea that education and literacy among enslaved individuals fostered critical thinking and empowerment, which threatened the institution of slavery. Slaveholders like Mr. Auld feared that literacy would lead to rebellion and loss of control. Literacy offered enslaved people like Frederick Douglass a path to freedom and an intellectual awakening.
Step-by-step explanation:
The speaker's statement that 'Knowledge didn't agree with slavery—'Twould make us all too wise' encapsulates the threat that education posed to the institution of slavery. Slaveholders, like Mr. Auld in Frederick Douglass's autobiography, were acutely aware that literacy would empower enslaved people with critical thinking skills and the means to question and ultimately challenge their oppression. Mr. Auld's reaction to his wife teaching Douglass to read—'if you give a ni gger an inch, he will take an ell...Learning would spoil the best ni gger in the world'
—illustrates the intentional strategy to maintain control and prevent rebellion by keeping slaves illiterate. Douglass describes how this very prohibition ignited his determination to learn to read, as it was clear to him that literacy was a path from slavery to freedom.
Literacy represents more than the ability to read; it is the ability to understand one's circumstances and seek change. Douglass's hunger for reading led to a revelation about the power dynamics of slavery, triggering his intellectual awakening and emotional turmoil.
In contrast, Henry Allen Bullock describes a 'hidden passage' where some slaves gained literacy through interactions with children in the 'Big House' or through informal learning sessions. Education was a double-edged sword—while it brought immense anguish as it made Douglass aware of his 'wretched condition,' it also offered the only glimmer of hope for emancipation and a better future.
Ultimately, the fear of slaveholders was that literacy would lead to educated, critical thinkers who would not only question but actively resist their bondage and the ideologies underpinning slavery.