Slavery has sadly been in America from the start. Many have different opinions about slavery whether it should stay or be abandoned and forgotten. Although one person has written to Thomas Jefferson about one of history’s most important subject. Banneker starts it off by writing his strong views on how wrong slavery is not just listing all the problems, but in a letter that he uses strategies to make his view convincing. Benjamin Banneker uses rhetorical strategies such as ethos, logos, and various style elements to argue against slavery.
This gave the wrong impression to the people of the fifteenth century by objectifying this mass group of people. He explains that people viewed the slaves as “beast’s” and that they are treated as such but he believes that they should still be given salvation. In the third chapter Knox made it clear that he believes slaves should be taught Christianity. One of the biggest arguments that he makes is, what is the “Divine and Human Laws”? This meaning, what constitutes as something morally right or morally wrong.
The convincing and commanding speech, “Give me Liberty Or Give Me Death” by Patrick Henry emphasizes religious reference to help him makes his argument. For example, he says "Suffer not yourselves to be betrayed with a kiss" which is a reference to Judas betrayal of Christ. In conclusion though he is talking about how Parliament is pretending to be nice but will only turn on the colonists as soon as they get a chance. He’s comparing the Parliament with Judas and the colonists with Christ to advert to a time where one of the most famous betrayals went on.
The repetitive use of pronouns and satire are utilized in order to question the credibility and motives behind Jefferson’s actions, thus creating a demanding tone. In order to appeal to Jefferson’s emotions, personification and allusions are utilized to establish guilt for not adhering to his statements. Through Banneker’s letter, not only was his efforts successful in attracting attention to slavery, but it urged other advocates to fight for equality as
In the same fashion, he uses another slavery comparison, and finishes strong with his iconic line, “give me liberty or give me death!” Patrick Henry is a brave soul whose revolutionary ideas helped shape the country we know today. His speech used rhetoric as a way to spread his message which will live in
Thomas Paine's most effective rhetorical strategy has to be his incessant allusions to different Biblical elements in order to arouse the idea of independence. One of the best examples of this comes as early as the first paragraph, where he discusses the absurdity of Britain's claim that they have the right to bind all of their citizens in every matter or case. However, Paine retorts with a response of his own, saying, "for so unlimited a power can belong only to God. . . ." (1). Here Paine, knowing that most of his readers are devout, Protestant churchgoers, briefly introduces the notion that Britain is overstepping its authority in such a way that it's almost as if they are trying to play God.
Although the Bible was the same and both prayed to a God, the interpretation they gave of the teachings and the readings of the Bible were different. The curse of Canaan and his descendants was related to the issue of servility and slavery, the whites used this relationship as a justification that God was in accordance with slavery. As Callahan mentioned in The Poison Book, “Jefferson Davis defended chattel slavery and the foreign slave trade as the “importation of the race of Ham,” fulfillment of Africans’ destiny to be “servants of servants.” They used this text to defend slavery and that blacks had been destined to be slaves. The most important teaching of whites to Christianize blacks was the importance of obedience.
His actions leads the audience to change their ways, “[…] by your fathers, is shared by you, not by me” (3) conveys the audience to end slavery because even though their fathers have passed slavery down doesn’t mean they have to keep it in their family. Also, Douglass was a spiritual man, who believed in god and believed he was “[…] called upon to bring humble offerings to the national altar, and to confess the benefits and express devout gratitude for the blessings resulting from your independence to us?” (1). This interrogative sentence evokes an aware feeling because they consider the fact he is speaking to better the people and nation, not just to talk or upset anyone. With this in mind, Douglass cared more for the people than himself, although he did side with the slaves
Foley argues that if rhetoric is persuasive, it also contains elements of violence in her scholarly paper “Of Violence And Rhetoric: An Ethical Aporia.” She believes that rhetoric plays a crucial role in persuasion. For example, she explains that persuasion is like an involuntary force that can compel people against their desires, which acts same as violence in the field of ethical action. In King’s speech, he tried to give his audiences a sense that all African American who are oppressed are victims of American imperial society. “ One hundred years later; the Negro is still languished in the corners of American society and finds himself an exile in his own land,” King tells his audiences that African Americans are not treated equally in the land they are currently living.
Douglass makes sure to remind his audience that their “fathers were wise men”, and so their decision to engage in violent resistance was just as well a wise decision (Douglass 111). Perhaps the most compelling argument Douglass makes throughout the entirety of the speech is that The United State’s fathers “were peace men; but they preferred revolution to peaceful submission to bondage. You may well cherish the memory of such men” (Douglass 113). Including this points out how America’s founding fathers are cherished for the change they brought about through the means of violent resistance. If they could be celebrated for such actions, how can the enslaved be so reprimanded for taking part in the same determined fight?
In other words, slavery was justified by the use of the Christian bible to have support from others before the Civil War period. However, it was still seen as an unpleasant enterprise. Non-slave owners that went against slavery even saw it as the most unmoral act humans ever did. It was seen this way “because it obliterates an individual 's self-governance or sovereignty,” (Machan, 1).
Abolitionism and the Civil War Abolitionists, both black and white, had different philosophies and tactics in trying to end slavery. Frederick Douglass was one that believed in sparking revolution through the media and political platforms. Through these platforms, he spread messages of awareness and rebellion, believing that the end of slavery had to be done by force (Zinn 167). In 1857, Douglass spoke to the masses stating that “if there is no struggle, there is no progress… Power concedes nothing without demand” (Zinn 167).
Boucher had many unpersuasive arguments. He believed the king’s power came from God. He would tell colonist they were disobedient to God, and rebelling against him. Boucher had to move back to England because of the amount of death threats he was receiving for opposing the revolution.
Race supremacy have been one of the central themes in American political thought, throughout the colonial era and even today, Race supremacy is something that needs to be discussed seriously and change has to occur effectively. I believe if the authors appeared at Mohawk Mountain this would be huge debate. Some of the authors were Christian and I believe many of them even own slaves and was racist in certain extent. White supremacy have been known to use people of color for labor and feed of their hard-work, emancipation proclamation is a good example of that, it was just a way for the white supremacy in the north to control color people and used them for the war against the south, it was not really about freedom, white supremacy was willing