Douglass And Rousseau Summary

Thoreau painstakingly reminds the individual of the universal principle that is all people, regardless of race, color or beliefs, deserve to live lives free from the tyranny of oppression and he who does not help grant this freedom to those oppressed, is equally as damned as he who enforced it. Thoreau expanded on this idea, “There are thousands who are in opinion opposed to slavery and to the war, who yet in effect do nothing to put an end to them…they hesitate, and they regret, and sometimes they petition; but they do nothing in earnest, and with effect.” Clearly, Thoreau’s insistence is that rebuking evil is a much a moral obligation as is praising the good. In fact, he insisted, “If one honest man, ceasing to hold slaves, were actually to withdraw from this copartnership, and be locked up in the country jail therefore, it would be the abolition of slavery in America.” Such a drastic and frank statement from Thoreau only proves how steadfast he was in his beliefs that the individual could bring forth great change. Every functioning member of society deserves the chance to make a compelling difference in the lives of those around them, regardless of factors such as race. For it is those who do not protest who aid in the condemnation.

Even the men who are in the Northern States who are black are not free. Douglass points out that “blacks are easily likely to face the death penalty for one crime, where white people would face punishment if they did the crime twice,” This, according to Douglass is slavery. This can be seen even today in our news and society. Many blacks are targeted and attacked solely based on their appearance, and experience many micro-aggressions. Douglass also says, “Do not need to argue about what is wrong with robbing these Negros from their liberty keep them ignorant from their relations to other men?” This speech truly emphasizes the inhumane, cruelty, and injustice associated with the treatment of blacks in America. While the whites look at the 4th of July as a celebratory to their lives and freedom, not everyone is truly free. It is important for Douglass to show that while many associate this holiday with prosperity and positive attributes, the blacks face slavery, prejudices, and unequal treatments day-to-day. “What is inhumane cannot be divine”, says Douglass. Later on in the speech, he talks

Douglass also in his speeches liberated what Americans in this economy would have done with blacks. In his speech “what the blacks want” he states, “I have had but one answer from the beginning. Do nothing with us! Your doing with us has already played the mischief.” (Douglass). Society’s “America” has already put us in a category. Race we are not superior or equal to no other. Economically we don’t have the means to live out what we strive for. Education wise we have none, we are not sufficient enough to read or write for us to have a better life. Douglass in this speech stresses to leave us alone we are cable of doing bad or good on our own. His would view principle of self-ownership, which he understood to include both the racial and equality.

According Thoreau’s Civil Disobedience, he mentions that to require civil disobedience, the circumstances must be like America’s. Circumstances like practicing war, deriving power from the people, having unjust laws, and supporting slavery. Thoreau writes, “must the citizen ever for a moment, or in the least degree, resign his conscience to the legislation?” (Thoreau ). He mentions how no man should be subdued to any government or institution, especially if it portrays unjust. Therefore he also implies that if a law exhibits unjust, the population should not follow the law with the knowledge of the consequence. Similarly, Thoreau establishes, “when . . . a whole country is unjustly overrun and conquered by a foreign army, and subjected to military law, I think that it is not too soon for honest men to rebel and revolutionize,” (Thoreau ). He explains how it expresses the duty of Americans to rebel and use civil disobedience, it is not just a right, but it drives Americans to be aware of and completely use for the advantage of society. Thoreau further explains the unlawful government by stating, “I cannot for an instant recognize that political organization as my government which the slave's government also,” (Thoreau ). He describes the circumstance of America as a prejudiced institution, which rightfully allows citizens to use their duty of civil disobedience. A government should require unjust laws, slavery, aggressive law, and strength over intelligence to cause civil disobedience. However, civil disobedience a citizen’s duty and they must maintain it.

According to Douglass, “They went so far in their excitement as to pronounce the measures of government unjust, unreasonable, and oppressive, and altogether such as ought not to be quietly submitted to” (Douglass, 150). Douglass saw similarities between the struggles of the forefathers and black slaves, and he compelled his audience to recognize these similarities and follow the example of the forefathers.

In a Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass: An American Slave written by himself, the author argues that no one can be enslaved if he or she has the ability to read, write, and think. Douglass supports his claim by first providing details of his attempts to earn an education, and secondly by explaining the conversion of a single slaveholder. The author’s purpose is to reveal the evils of slavery to the wider public in order to gain support for the abolition of his terrifying practice. Based on the purpose of writing the book and the graphic detail of his stories, Douglass is writing to influence people of higher power, such as abolitionists, to abolish the appalling reality of slavery; developing a sympathetic relationship with the

Frederick Douglass was a gifted speaker. He wanted to convince a crowd of hundreds that were gathered together to celebrate Independence Day not only about the hypocrisy of slavery, but also to essentially “sting the conscience of America (Braswell).” When Douglass was asked to speak on Independence Day, there were still more than 3.5 million African Americans enslaved (Braswell). Throughout his life, Douglass advocated equal justice and rights for African Americans. That brings us to the first theme, which is inequality. In our past readings, this has been a prevalent theme. For example, in A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur’s Court, we saw slavery with the peasants and the inequality within the aristocracy. In Benito Cereno, we were able to see slavery with African Americans. In this reading, however, we get to see first hand someone calling out the American people and voicing that slavery should be eliminated. In our past readings we have seen many forms of “heroes.” My question for the

Rousseau wanted the state to be a legitimate democracy, a society that united together the people in freedom, equality and civic devotion. Rousseau believed that an individual fulfils his moral potential not in isolation but as part of a community where all members are committed to helping each other. This belief led Rousseau to ancient Greek society for which he felt a great admiration. He believed the Greeks lived in 'organic communities', cities where the citizens set aside personal interests in order to attain the common good. Rousseau's ideal state was one of a smaller size but one where the citizens were welded together in the spirit of 'fraternity'. People would therefore have the opportunity to get know each other, resulting in an enthusiastic contribution to all public affairs. Such a political environment produces free and committed citizens. In contrast, the large modern day states are ruled by an absolute monarch, creating 'servile subjects', which Rousseau despised.8

“For the present, it is enough to affirm the equal manhood of the Negro race. Is it not astonishing that, while we are ploughing, planting and reaping, using all kinds of mechanical tools, erecting houses, constructing bridges, building ships, working in metals of brass, iron, copper, silver and gold…that, while we are engaged in all manner of enterprises common to other men…we are called upon to prove that we are men!” (Douglass) During his speech, Douglass elaborated on the different aspects of why blacks have a natural right to freedom as any other human being He argued it is wrong to turn a man into a “brute” and proceeded to argue that slavery is not divine in its origin. Douglass’s speech was a calling for equality, for change. He accomplished his goal and proved the fourth of July was a revolting reminder to him and those like him of the continual inhumane cruelty American attempted to conceal through its mockery.

Rousseau thought that man was born weak and ignorant, but virtuous. It is only when man became sociable that they became wicked. (Cress, 80) Since civil society makes men corrupt, Rousseau advocated “general will”, more precisely the combined wills of each person, to decide public affairs. General will would become the sovereign and thus it would be impossible for its interests to conflict with the priorities of the citizens, since this would be doing harm to itself. Virtue came from the freedom of men to make decisions for the good of the

Have you ever felt a rule you had to follow was unjust? Have you ever felt your moral instinct tell you not to follow it? Prominent figures in American history, Martin Luther King Jr. and Henry David Thoreau, felt this way and decided to not follow the rules imposed on them by indulging in “civil disobedience”. Civil disobedience is the act of peacefully disobeying laws or customs with the purpose of combating moral injustice. This form of protest has proven to be quite effective in making change in history. In “Civil Disobedience” and the “Letter from a Birmingham Jail”, both Thoreau and King Jr. write their justification for their actions as well as their feelings regarding the particular disputed

Douglass offers a historical parallel to support his abolitionist ideology to demonstrate how the ignorance of the past does not have to pervade the present, thus encouraging Plato’s ideal Good within American society. Especially since the fourth of July celebrates America’s liberation from England’s tyrannical rule, a once radical and seemingly unattainable goal, African American’s search for liberty is emphasized. The colonists had good intentions and, “They loved their country better than their own private interests…though this is not the highest form of human excellence (Douglass 5), Douglass’s claim that their intentions were still misplaced shows how he wished for a better, more equal society. This society, would be characterized by a majority of abolitionists, essentially citizens who seek out justice and equality for all, rather than just the white majority currently in power. Douglass’s claims coincide with Plato’s view that “as for persuading and coercing fellow citizens to the point of self-improvement…this alone is the task of a truly good citizen.” (Plato 95) This quote serves as justification for a society comprised of Good citizens that strive to attain compromise and fairness. His want for an inclusive America, calls citizens to action, to truly uphold their constitution which claims it establishes equality. Douglass embodies the Good by attempting to inform his fellow citizens of what justice for all looks like. It’s important to lead virtuous lives, lead by example, and demonstrate the highest form of Good one can possibly attain, and Douglass exemplifies

Locke and Rousseau present themselves as two very distinct thinkers. They both use similar terms, but conceptualize them differently to fulfill very different purposes. As such, one ought not be surprised that the two theorists do not understand liberty in the same way. Locke discusses liberty on an individual scale, with personal freedom being guaranteed by laws and institutions created in civil society. By comparison, Rousseau’s conception portrays liberty as an affair of the entire political community, and is best captured by the notion of self-rule. The distinctions, but also the similarities between Locke and Rousseau’s conceptions can be clarified by examining the role of liberty in each theorist’s proposed state of nature and

This is then where the idea for social contracts gets introduced and established into the picture. It was introduced because of the idea of the majority rules when it comes to government and you can’t harm and or kill another individual because they don’t follow and or agree with the consensus of the majority. This is then where you see Rousseau wanting to form a government in which there is no slavery and where individuals are giving up their natural rights and putting it all into the community itself. This is done by every individual coming together to form this community and each of those individuals then putting their freedom to act on their own (their natural rights) into a higher power like the leviathan who will basically control and make sure that everyone is held accountable for not follow

In essence, the Rousseauist state member gives up the freedom to do as he likes in exchange for the freedom to do as is best for that state. Moreover, “whoever refuses to obey the general will shall be compelled to do so by the whole body”; that is, “he will be forced to be free” (ll. 60–62). However, since this angle assumes that a single course of action, that dictated by the general will, is always the correct one, it sits uncomfortably with more recent conceptions of what it means to be free. To give