Thomas Jefferson’s first draft of the declaration of independence
Thomas Jefferson’s first draft of the declaration of independence differs in the second version, particularly about language use. The second draft has a more precise and easy to understand language that is being used to build a logical case for American independence from Britain. In the first draft of the introduction part, Jefferson writes, ‘’…….it becomes necessary for a people to advance from that subordination in which they have hitherto remained, & to assume among the powers of the earth the equal & independent station….” This statement is changed in the second version, where words like ‘a people’ are changed to ‘one people’ to refer to the American people. Jefferson changed the language used to show a critical difference between them the American people who he refers to as one people and the British. The distinction was important because Jefferson felt that the Americans needed to be referred to as equals, not subjects or second class citizens. Another critical change in the language noted in the introduction is that the highlighted sentence above was scrapped in the second version to ”…. it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another….’’. Changes from ‘subordination’ to ‘breaking political bands’ meant that America and England had to separate and become two different independent entities politically.
Jefferson makes changes in the language used in the second version, mainly to convey a precise meaning throughout the document. In the second version, in most sentences, there is a notable change in the choice of diction. For instance, in the third part of both versions, ‘’The History of his present Majesty, is a History of unremitting Injuries and Usurpations…’’. The word ‘unremitting’ is changed in the second version to a simpler, more natural to understand concept ‘repeated.’ Moreover, Jefferson altered the language in the British indictment for the second version, where he arranged the grievances chronologically and skillfully. He does this by slowing down the text’s movement compared to the first version, where the grievances were arranged in endless sentences with minimal punctuation. There’s less ambiguity in the language being used in the second draft compared to the previous version. The emotional intensity in the used language is also significant, mainly when Jefferson addresses the war grievances. He further uses language that magnifies the evil British have committed against his people. Jefferson has craftily used language to arouse the passion and feelings of his readers.
Thoreau’s ideas have been embraced by many anarchists and various famous figures at the forefront of protests across the world. Thoreau believed governments that had become inefficient and unendurable people had the right to rebel and revolutionize against them. His idea to prioritize one’s conscience over the dictates of laws inspired many leaders and war protesters. Thoreau argued and believed that every man had a fair chance to create the kind of society they lived in. Thoreau argues that the government’s use of physical force to enforce civil law was ineffective, mainly because it was not morally right. In his opinion, the government was overstepping its authority by being involved in moral issues. Martin Luther King, who fought endlessly for equal rights and fair treatment of black people by whites and, in particular, the government, embraced Thoreau’s ideas on many levels. Martin, as an activist, used civil disobedience to change public opinion on issues that were morally wrong regarding how black people were treated. Like Thoreau, who believed in action without violence, Martin Luther King used civil disobedience to effectuate government change. He participated in protests in non-violent ways by refusing to obey the government commands that did not resonate with his conscience and morals. Luther King, through his speeches and rallies, he was able to spearhead conversations against discrimination and instead preached more about love and truth.
Another argument from Thoreau’s narrative that inspired civil activists was his belief that individuals had a citizen’s duty to choose the ideal governments they want and the societies they choose to live in. According to Thoreau, instead of waiting for elected representatives to make the needed reforms, citizens should make the changes themselves. Taking an active role in leadership and governance without being violent was Thoreau’s principal idea. It is for this reason Emma Goldman employed Thoreau’s work in her writings and protests. Emma’s insistence on freedom of speech, her role in world war two through the essays she wrote with other Vietnam War protesters significantly borrowed from henrys work on civil disobedience.
Moreover, when Gandhi was working on his concept of non-violent resistance, he was inspired and impressed by Henry Thoreau’s advice to resist things that were not morally right. Mahatma Gandhi adopted many significant ideas from Thoreau when developing his concept of non-cooperation, which he commonly referred to as truth force. Since then, many civil rights leaders have borrowed and used Thoreau’s thoughts in their fights against government injustice and brutality.