Ottobah Cugoano, also known as John Stuart is now known as an abolitionist, political activist, and a natural rights philosopher. He was also a former slave who was caputred from the West Indies. He argued for the complete abolition of slavery which was incredibly revolutionary for his time. Though he lived a little over half a century before John Stuart Mill, I believe that these two philosophers share a unique connection that begins with Mill’s utilitarianism. As a refresher, utilitarianism, commonly known as the greatest happiness principle, is a doctrine which holds that whatever is morally right will provide the greatest quality of pleasure for the greatest amount of people. Utilitarianism fueled Mill’s radical support for abolition, when put to the utilitarian test slavery does not pass as morally right. It is especially significant that Mill was a white male who was in power yet he continued to support the cause for abolition. In this write up I will introduce Cugoano’s and Mill’s views on slavery as well as the similarties and differences og the origin of their beliefs. I will also show how I think that Cugoano and Mill would feed off of each other’s views and why I think that Cugoano would be a utilitarian or have utilitarian sympathies. It is really interesting to explore the time period in which there was a lot of philosophical debate over whether slavery is ever justified especially while working with a British philosopher.
To no one’s surprise, Mill believed that “each and every individual should have the latitude and liberty to live his life as he chooses, in any way he considers desirable and advantageous, as long as it does not bring harm to another individual’s equal right to do the same.” This provides insight into the foundation of his beliefs about slavery. Enslaving someone goes directly against the right to live life as one chooses and not have their liberty infringed upon by others. Mill “demanded an end to human slavery and its accompanying attitudes concerning associative relationships.” This relates to his view on gender equality and marriage, he believed that womens’ lives should not be ruled by their husbands and they should be allowed to exercise free will. His foundational reasoning behind his views on slavery is clearly utilitarianism, this is just another reason why this doctrine is Mill’s most important and influential one. Mill strongly believed in everyone’s ability to exercise their free will, no matter one’s race or gender. Many people who were in a similar position to Mill believed that slavery was a “necessary evil.” In essence, they recognized that it was wrong but did nothing to advocate for abolition. Mill constantly rejected the idea that brutal inequality was “necessary.” Mill rightly believed that humans have no right oppressing other humans or curtailing their free will.
As previously mentioned, Cugoano was himself a former slave. He had personally experienced the trauma and immense hardships associated with being enslaved. He was forcefully kidnapped from his home in West Africa and taken to England where he was an unpaid servant (slave) to a wealthy family. They renamed him and christened him as John Stuart. So by this point he has been kidnapped and anglicized and is forced to do manual labor with no compensation. One positive, though, was that he was a skillful writer and his writngs are some of the most valuable pieces of writing from that time period. It is very valuable to have philosophical writings from the perspective of an enslaved person expressing their views and opinions about slavery. Cugoano was very smart in the way he wrote, he appealed to others’ emotions, personal experiences, scriptural authority, historical precedent, and empirical evidence, reason. I believe he wrote like this so that others might take him and his point of view seriously. Cugoano argued for the abolition of slavery when many Britons only argued for the abolition of the slave trade, not actual slavery. So slavery wouls still exist but without the human trafficking. He also argued that everyday Britons were responsible for slavery and must actto help stop all of it: the slave trade and slavery. Cugoano beleived that all slaves were entitled to reparations following abolition, even though it would not fully make up for the trauma and injustice that these individuals experienced. Cugoano is coming from the point of view of an enslaved person with a passion to speak up for those who are enslaved as well as human rights in general.
Mill and Cugoano’s lives did not overlap and I could not find any evidence that Mill read Cugoano’s writings. However, I think it is very interesting that they share many similar views on the issue of slavery as well as their reasonsings behind their beliefs. I think cugoano would have sympathized with utilitarianism as a reason behind advocating for abolition. If Mill had lived during the same time as Cugoano, I think he would have sympathized with his beliefs as well as potentially beginning some of his writings before parliament as evidence during debates over slavery. Although they lived many years apart, I believe they would have been great philosphical buddies.
John Sturart Mill is considered a progressive and liberal icon in the world of political philosophy. Ottobah Cugoano is considered a hero for advocating for abolition and promoting and supporting human rights and equality for all. These two philosophical figureheads shared one view in common, a high regard for human rights and equality. They were both advocating for an end to slavery and a start of racial equality during a time in which both of these things were a topic of philosophical debate. Having both Cugoano’s and Mill’s writings regarding these topics is very valuable because not many philosophers of the time were writing about abolition or condemning slavery. Although utilitarianism was not popularized at the time that Cugoano was writing, one can see a lot of utilitarian ideas in his writing. This is why I think utilitarianism is such an interesting doctrine. You can apply it to many moral debates and I believe the argument holds for determining whether something is morally right. It makes perfect sense to apply to slavery. Slaves made up a significant part of the population in England and America back then. They were certainly not experiencing the highest quality of pleasure but were rather providing that pleasure to elite white people at the expense of their physical and mental capabilities. Therefore if you put slavery to the utilitarian test, it will not pass. After reading and researching their works, I believe Mill and Cugoano wrote some of the most important pieces of abolitionist philosophy we have today.