Final answer:
George Fitzhugh portrayed enslaved workers as well-cared-for and secure under the care of slaveholders, unlike Northern free laborers who were at the mercy of capitalist exploitation. Fitzhugh's ideas were based on a paternalistic view of society where slavery was seen as a protective and stable institution. Modern parallels are sometimes drawn to criticize unregulated capitalism, although these do not equate to the historical realities of slavery.
Step-by-step explanation:
George Fitzhugh's portrayal of enslaved workers in contrast to free laborers centers on the paternalistic beliefs held by many proponents of slavery. Fitzhugh's Sociology for the South, or the Failure of Free Society (1854) puts forth the argument that slavery provided a stable and secure life for enslaved individuals, who did not have to worry about food, clothing, or shelter as these were provided by their masters. Conversely, he described free laborers, particularly those in the North, as being subjected to the cruelties of laissez-faire capitalism and 'wage slavery,' where workers were often exploited and abandoned by an impersonal economy.
Fitzhugh's basic premise underlies the idea that slavery is a form of social welfare that protects and cares for those who are unable to compete in a cutthroat capitalist society. He contended slaveholders were, in essence, benefactors who took responsibility for the well-being of the enslaved from birth to death, unlike northern employers who exploited their workers with little to no regard for their well-being. This view was shared by others, such as Edmond Ruffin and James Henry Hammond, who reiterated the 'mudsill theory' and the benefits of slavery to southern white society.
The modern parallel to Fitzhugh's argument could potentially be seen in critiques of unregulated capitalism where the leaders of modern corporations are compared unfavorably to slaveholders due to the perceived exploitation of their workers. However, it's important to note that equating modern economic criticisms with the historic institution of slavery would be both inaccurate and insufficient in capturing the full human suffering and ethical violations inherent in the practice of slavery.