Hey, it's Amy again.
In the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson combines the forces of history, philosophy, and religion to justify the revolutionary actions of the colonies against Great Britain. Many of his ideas came from Locke, who believed that man was born good and with natural rights that no one had the power to take away. Locke also believed in the idea that the purpose of government was to protect these rights, and the people had the responsibility to abolish or reform the government if their inalienable rights were not protected, as with the colonies.
Thomas Jefferson uses the influence of this historical philosopher to communicate ideas already known to many and create a sense of familiarity and validity with the revolution through his use of Locke's concepts in numerous areas of his writing. Jefferson states that "all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with inherent and inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness;"
He later uses the ideas of Hobbes, another well-known philosopher: "And accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed." This statement illustrates the main ideas of Hobbes, that mankind are more disposed to suffer and show evil characteristics, but at the same time Jefferson says that although we all suffer, we have a duty to right the tyrannical government, an evil of mankind, if we ever wish to decrease our evil tendencies, an idea that does not comply with Hobbes, who views government as an establishment to control and protect those who do not know how to protect themselves. Instead, he refers back to the ideas of Locke.
The ideas of English Whigs are also incorporated into the Declaration of Independence. In some ways there are similarities between the WHigs and the Colonists, as both were anti-Royalist and attacked the moral corruption in English political behavior and decisions and connected this criticism to civil liberties. According to our bio on Jefferson, "The Whigs constantly warned the lulledd citizens of the threats to their liberties and proposed all sorts of liberal reforms..." Jefferson included a list of "unremitting injuries and usurpations" of Britain and afterwards wrote about the deprivation of basic rights and emphasized how the colonies had petitioned for redress, only to be repeatedly denied.
Jefferson also illustrated Britain's cruelty as Britain sends over foreign mercenaries and British soldiers to kill the colonists. Jefferson describes the situation as beyond reconciliation as the colonies have no chance to reach agreement with Britain, and the only other option is to fight for freedom and what it right.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Geez Amy! You certainly have been frequenting the blog! But I'm glad someone posted about Jefferson. We will probably discuss his writing in class on Tuesday 1/15, but I just wanted to bring up a few points.
Yes, the influences of Locke and Hobbes are evident. But Jefferson doesn't borrow so much from them that it detracts from the brilliancy of his own writing - this document is the zenith of neoclassic documents.
The first sentence, "When in the course of human events..." sets the Revolution within the context of history as a defining, critical moment in order to effect support for the cause. The document's syntax enables Jefferson to enunciate with great clarity the delegates' fundamental beliefs. The parallel structure and repetition of "that" within the document("that all men are created equal...that among theses are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness....that to secure these rights") speaks to reason.
The list of grievances read as forcefully as physical blows. The anaphora ("he has..he has..he has..") is interrupted with "he is" - this sudden switch to the present tense expresses the urgency and necessity of revolution, otherwise "death, desolation, and tyranny" are inevitable. Finally, in the last paragraph, Jefferson brilliantly compares the signers of the Declaration to heroes; they are men who will risk everything to support the fundamental rights of man. The work is packed with effective rhetorical devices!
Zenith! Good word Ash! It's Amy again.
"When in the course of human events," does illustrate the importance of the revolution, I agree. However, it also adds historical influence to Jefferson's words, defining it as a duty that humanity has had since creation and sometimes it is necessary to step up. The phrase gives a sense of responsibility to the revolution and provides a familiar background in a time when everything is changing, from government to colonial life.
And the last thing that you brought up, that Jefferson compares the signers to heroes, is mirrored in Thomas Paine's writing as in the beginning he mentions how some people such as the summer soldiers and flimsy colonists will leave while the strong, dedicated, and true heroes remain behind to fight in the name of liberty.
It's an excellent propaganda technique like what was used during the World Wars to make people want to join the army, because the propaganda gives them this sense of duty to fight for freedom and links glory with military service and service to the revolution.
The interesting thing about the Declaration is that at the time of publishing it did not mean anything in a legal sense. Unlike the Constitution, which created a governement (as you all know), the Declaration of Independence did not legally do anything. It wasnt until after the entire Revolutionary War and only after the Treaty of Paris in 1783 was it it accepted as true. However, the power of the document was not directly that it declared independence. In fact the Second Continental Congress had already drafted a short declaration by July 2. However the founders realized that a simple declaration would not be enough. An indictment of the king for his (heavily exaggerated) crimes would be required in order to involve the European powers as well as stir up the American people. In short, it worked. Not only did it convince the American public (of whom historians estimate that less thatn 1/3 actually supported revolution) go to war, but also persuaded the ailing French monarchy to provide aid. Although France had had mutual enimity with England for centuries, they would not have entered the war had Jefferson not written so eloquently.
The document in short incorporates the values of Locke to such an extent, but tempers them with the Hobbes' absolutism, adding Voltaire, Montesquieu and other philosophes of the Enlightenment, that it not only appeals to the opressed-feeling people of the colonies but also to the monarchs of Europe.
Though we'll probably bring this up in some way in class tomorrow, I re-read this document and discovered that he is very effective in his rhetoric. To bring Hayakawa into this, I believe that it is so effective in that it drifts between high and low levels of abstraction. While on the first, second, and third pages he is very specific, the third page is very general in terms of ideas and concepts. In his list of grievances against King George III, we can sense his indignation at the wrongs committed. Jefferson is very specific in these cases (low-level abstraction). However, on the third page, using words like "liberty," "peace," and "justice," which certainly intensify the emotions displayed. I won't go into too much other analysis- the list is exhausting and I'm sure much of it will be discussed!
I think it's interesting how Arka brought up that the Declaration was intended for the French as well, not just the colonists. This document pushed both nations into fighting against Britain and it symbolizes the unity of the colonies and of France.
However, it's interesting that this should propel France into battle, since the revolution was supported by a minority of citizens. It appears as though the document gives a false sense of unity so that when colonists read it, they felt that they too should believe in the revolution. I feel that the Declaration was a bandwagon technique, that everyone was against Britain, so you should be too. Even France got caught up in this propaganda cycle.
-Amy Z
Hey, it's Erin.
The Declaration of Independence aside from being a Neoclassic document, is also a great study for rhetoric and propaganda. I think that the audience for this document could consist of many groups, from nationalists (with all the propaganda he uses, such as the bandwagon technique that Amy mentioned, and rhetorical devices and the fact that he points his finger at the king and gives his audience something to do), to allies (by affirming how right the colonists are in revolting), to neutrals (because he specifically lists all these grievances that the colonists have suffered, which would probably cause feelings of anger or outrage. When you can point to something and say, look at that, how evil, then people can see and agree with you. It gives a rallying cry, a cause. I don't think that the audience could also be enemies, because it doesn't threaten them or try to demoralize them in any way.
Post a Comment