The Theory Of The General Will

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

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

Douglass began his speech to the audience by asking a series of rhetorical questions in addition to the use of sarcasm. He referred to the Declaration of Independence as “that” instead of “the” Declaration stressing a separation between African-Americans and the freemen of the United States. He extended the use of his rhetoric by asking, “What have I or those, I represent, to do with your national independence?” Slaves, whose freedom is denied, do not share other Americans’ patriotic feelings regarding the Fourth of July. His use of these rhetorical questions was valid because it separated Douglass as a different man than the rest of his white audience. Furthermore, Douglass asked, "Would you have me argue that man is entitled to liberty?" He indicated that people knew in their hearts that all were entitled to freedom. Douglass demonstrated sarcasm in this principle of freedom, almost as if the aforementioned rhetorical question shouldn’t need to be stated. He further declared that the stigma separating free whites and enslaved African-Americans was blatantly foolish.

By supporting the Revolutionaries actions to break free from British Rule, Douglass alluded to the similar fight that the American population faced to attain the same liberty that white citizens had. With the same courage the Founding Fathers had to create a free country, the American generation of 1852 faced a similar test to uphold the values of the Declaration of Independence, and liberate American slaves.7 After applauding the Founding Fathers, Douglass acknowledges that the emphasis of his speech is not to give praise, but to call on America to act on it’s own failures and begin to faithfully fulfill the nations oath.8 He asks his audience, “Are the great principles of political freedom and of natural justice, embodied in that Declaration of Independence, extended to us [African Americans]?”9 This rhetorical question Douglass presents, challenges America to reevaluate what they are truly celebrating on the Fourth of July, for it is surely not the freedom in which they claim to have achieved. Douglass asserts that asking black people to rejoice in the “shouts of liberty and equality, hollow mockery”10 and do not respect the courage, and steps the Founding Fathers took to create a free, liberated nation.11

“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.

Buccola, Nicholas. "Each for All and All for Each: The Liberal Statesmanship of Frederick Douglass." Review of Politics 70.3 (2008): 400-419. Print. The author talks about how Frederick Douglass slavery led him to appreciate human interdependence and reject liberalism. Douglass’s aim was undoubtedly liberal but he thought these aims could only be realized in a community of individuals who felt strongly about one another. The author’s idea is to explore how Douglass faced these challenges and liberal statesmanship.

He greets them with a reserved yet cheerful, “Mr. President, Friends, and Fellow Citizens…” (117). He remains respectful of those in authority, while simultaneously conveying to his audience that he, a black man and freed slave, shares in their celebrated citizenship. Douglass, however, does not limit his correlation with the audience there; he then goes so far as to address them as “friends”. This greeting and introduction perfectly prefaces the righteous ridicule that is to come. These men, products of the free town of Rochester, are oblivious to the absurd juxtaposition that is present before

Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, An American Slave, brings to light many of the social injustices that colored men, women, and children all were forced to endure throughout the nineteenth century under Southern slavery laws. Douglass's life-story is presented in a way that creates a compelling argument against the justification of slavery. His argument is reinforced though a variety of anecdotes, many of which detailed strikingly bloody, horrific scenes and inhumane cruelty on the part of the slaveholders. Yet, while Douglas’s narrative describes in vivid detail his experiences of life as a slave, what Douglass intends for his readers to grasp after reading his narrative is something much more profound. Aside from all the

The Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, An American Slave details the progression of a slave to a man, and thus, the formation of his identity. The narrative functions as a persuasive essay, written in the hopes that it would successfully lead to “hastening the glad day of deliverance to the millions of [his] brethren in bonds” (Douglass 331). As an institution, slavery endeavored to reduce the men, women, and children “in bonds” to a state less than human. The slave identity, according to the institution of slavery, was not to be that of a rational, self forming, equal human being, but rather, a human animal whose purpose is to work and obey the whims of their “master.” For these reasons, Douglass articulates a distinction

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

At some point they cannot survive by themselves and everyone needs to come together for the common good In giving everything to the community the individual receives everything he or she has lost plus "more power to preserve what he has" (189). Lives must be lived in and for the group; the life as an individual must be merged into the life of the state, and the people must be involved in all aspects of government. There can be no clubs, separate churches, power groups, or political parties, because these would create separate rights for individuals, and give some individuals more power than others. By creating this, Rousseau annihilates power struggles between the rights of a group and individual rights. In this system, there is no one ruler of the community. A citizen who puts his or her community first is ruler, and ruled. The political government is one united system, it does what the community wants it to do.

Jean-Jacques Rousseau is one of the most influential intellectuals in political philosophy of the 18th century. His writings have influenced generations of intellectuals. His political writings originate from his philosophical essay “the social contract”. Therefore it must be viewed as being the culmination and summary of his most profound theories on key political concepts. One of his central concepts in the social contract is the “general will”. From book 2 of chapter 3 Rousseau states “our will is always for our own good, but we do not always see what that is; the people is never corrupted, but it is often deceived and on such occasions only does it seem to what is bad”. In this passage Rousseau outlines two very important differences between the “general will” as well as between the people. In that each of us

Rousseau’s thinking centers around will, individual and general. His idea of will means that all associations are voluntary and he equates it with freedom. For an act to be moral, it must have been of one’s own free will. General will is what is beneficial for the common good. In his state of nature, people are asocial, lazy, and harmless to each other but Rousseau believes that it is better for man to belong to something greater than himself or a community and work for general will. He puts stress on the importance of education as the way humans adapt to work towards the general will.

Since the people as a whole agreed on a general will, they all have a sense of acceptance of that will. Therefore, this will protect the people against each other and more importantly, it will protect the minority against the majority. The minorities will have a voice in the general will. This means that the general will not oppose there overall needs. Also, Rousseau believes that these laws will give the individuals a “civil freedom” instead of a “natural freedom” and I like Rousseau believe that the “civil freedom” is more important. The natural freedom is not overseen by any laws and this will result in conflict and violence. The right for people to own everything and anything will be determined by their physical power and fights over the scarce resources will result. Thus, the civil freedom that people gain when becoming the sovereign will put matters into order. The laws established by the people themselves will enforce more equality among the members. The government’s role will be limited to monitoring these laws and will only interfere when needed explains