Final Draft of The Declaration of Independence
This is the second time I’ve read the Declaration of Independence in its entirety and the first time analytically. The phrase “separate and equal station” stood out at first because, like all things, everything is subjective and reading along further, history has shown that patriarchy has been the ruling power in most societies since Ancient Greece, and to which the “Laws of Nature” and “Nature’s God” has entitled men by divine right. The Declaration of Independence follows John Locke’s Second Treatise of Government and coincidently, “divine right” that was first bestowed upon men before woman, established by a story in the holy bible, declaring women second to men as the first women was procured from the first man by God’s supernatural hand. Throughout the Declaration, the authors have created a separation of people, by first establishing since the first sentence, a collective “one” and “we” from “they”, “their” and “them.” These terms are subjective but taken in the hands by a collective unit, power in the hands of a few is dangerous, especially if the authors capitalize Men and not mankind, which is a term that means to includes and by extension, separations still made present day by color pigmentation, gender, class and religion. Personally, one example is establishing men as rights to power over women, as this point is bolstered by the phrase “mankind are more disposed to suffer” that could be read as, women are more disposed to suffering because they are situated in fragility by their biological functions. Also, because everything is subjective, and words were made to be malleable this document is the foundation of this nation’s most established and celebrated common law. However, the language shown would dispel notions of equality otherwise, especially in the hands of those that read this Declaration and self-identities as “Man” over the collective phrase “mankind”, equal to all represented people and not the lucky few responsible for delineating power and rights. These principles are supposed to be applied to all equally, not particular for certain classes, ethnicities or religious beliefs.
The rest of the Declaration outlines the grievances that Great Britain has imposed upon the colonies but in present day, some of these grievances have played out over the course since independence was declared in 1776. Our government is responsible for plundering our seas, ravaging our coasts, and destroyed the lives of everyday Americans. In their pursuit to continue along the avenues of commerce for multinational corporations, our government has forsaken its responsibility to all people by only serving the same class that wrote the Declaration of independence, most of whom were rich plantation owners who didn’t want to pay their taxes. It would seem that the founding fathers have included all people (mankind) in their quest for mutual freedom. By providing “new Guards for their future security”, they have insured that a only certain type of people would be responsible for levying war and contracting global alliances, that would enrich their own pockets instead of upholding public good, excluding all those who do not fall under the category of wealthy, white men.
William Apress (Pequot), “An Indian’s Looking-Glass for the White Man” (1833)
When Apess uses the term “looking-glass”, he is referring to the reflection in the mirror. In this case, when he looks at himself, he is looking at the metaphorical white man starring back at him that wields power over his life. Moreover, Apess is referring to an Indian’s mirror that is supposed to reflect “beloved images of God” but in his own metaphorical mirror, he is somewhat at odds with the reflection of the white man (14). Throughout the article, he keeps referring to God’s principles because he “[shows] no favor to outward appearances” but the white man favors his own skin above all others and discards principles outlined in the bible (13). The white man has used divine right to exploit not only the Indian nation and all their rightfully owned territory but has also used their status to perpetuate another nation, African Americans for profit gain. Apess is outlining his anger and confusion towards the white men who are completely inconsistent with their words and actions because their principles are corrupted. The white race “[professes] to have pure principles” yet disregards the unalienable and lawful rights guaranteed to Indian and African Americans based on righteousness alone (15).
If we are supposed to be instruments of pure love, then why have the white men treated those who don’t have the same skin completion as an inferior race? Being a reflection of God’s image, we are supposed to love and love our neighbors as our own. Apess takes these principles into account, namely the principle of “pure love” because Jesus Christ spoke to all people and treated all those who crossed his path with grace and without indifference to their skin or nation of origin. Human follies of lust, greed, pride and hate seem to have taken the wheel in Christian societies, going against the words and actions of God for personal by oppressing persons and property that belong to those who are not white-skinned. He suggests that the white men should take the Indian and African American into their churches, educate them and pass legislation that would “correspond to [their] sayings” (16). Apess is accusing the white men of inconsistency, as their actions would prove their principles are only skin deep and used to perpetuate a biased agenda, leaving them without their rights, their land and an undignified race of people.
Site Title 