A few reminders for you before you jump into this blog:
1. Please remember to write a thesis statement for the DBQ we went over today. This is due Monday the beginning of class.
2. Do everything you can to TRY and log onto the blog with your log-in information. Please use the "anonymous" feature only as a very last resort.
Click here to access the document.
While this documents looks lengthy, keep in mind that many, many people signed the Declaration (including one of my ancestors! Can you guess which one?). Please CAREFULLY read this document. Given our discussion Thursday in class, what points of the Declaration particuarly stand out to you? Do the colonists make justifiable arguments? Please make sure to comment on your classmates' responses too.
Due: MIDNIGHT, Sunday, Sept. 16
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
57 comments:
The Declaration of Independence was composed by Thomas Jefferson under the approval of the Second Continental Congress, which was elected to represent, more or less, the interests of all the colonies. The document conveys the Americans' right to dissolve ties with Britain, and lists the reasons for separation (mainly concerning the intolerable tyranny of the king). The document's main idea is that the Americans declare Britain an unfit government and believe that it is their innate right to therefore create their own. I can think of many documents that this one does NOT remind me of, namely the petition written by the Stamp Act Congress that we read recently. The tone of these two are extremely different: in the Stamp Act petition, the colonists still remain loyal to the Crown, looking to the king not as an enemy but as a soverign ruler, asking for his protection from such acts. The Declaration of Independence, however, contains strongly connotative descriptions of the king: "He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burned our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people," for one. This is pretty harsh. I can see through the tone that this is when the Americans are really rallying for independence (then again, it IS called the Declaration of Independence. . .very subtle).
This document contains three very important American-driven frames of thought: one, John Locke's contract theory of government, which states that a group of people elect a government to protect the rights of those people, and when the gov't fails to do its job, the people have the right to either change it or create a new gov't. This is evident in the first section: "That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that, to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness." The definition of "All men," of course, is highly debatable.
Two, the Declaration is deeply rooted in actual vs. virtual representation: "He has refused to pass other laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of representation in the legislature, a right inestimable to them, and formidable to tyrants only."
Three, that the "Real Whig" or Country ideology, which is based on a strong mistrust/suspicion of a highly centralized government, is also a large part of the Declaration. Again, the king is characterized (well--more like blantantly labelled) as a tyrant, and all the grievances of the Americans (which, they assure you, are quite unbearable grievances, otherwise "governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; 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." So the Americans are complaining over no light matter) center on the overbearing government. I found one thing confusing: why does the Declaration only address the king? Do they look at him as an embodiment of Parliament and the Prime Minister as well? In any case, it is a definite departure from the saccharine, sort of sycophantic tone of the Stamp Act petition. "Abuses" and "ursurptions" and "opressions," oh my!
P.S. Wild guess--your ancestor was Carter Braxton? I mean, he doesn't HAVE to be from Georgia, right?
P.P.S. It's a little ironic that the Americans base their declaration of separation from Britain mainly on an Englishman's philosophy, namely John Locke's contract theory of government.
I really find this to be a great document, which actually gives me an unfortunately rare boost of national feeling. The preamble is really a wonderful piece of political writing. Not that the rest is bad, it's just not so universal and timeless. Sorry for the long copy-paste, but I like the section "Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; 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 is an important statement to me, with the statement saying that a government tends toward conservatism in its ways, not being sufficiently open to change for the betterment of its own peoples. That's likely my favorite section. I certainly think that the colonists make justifiable arguments. There a few in the grievances against the King section that really only have to do with how war is fought more than tyranny, but their objective was not to rationalize the King's army's motives. I would say to Tina Bu that I really don't think it's ironic that an Englishman's philosophy is basic to our ideas of independence, firstly because ideas shouldn't have a nationality, and secondly because we were still technically English.
Touché, Nate.
The Declaration of Independence was written by Thomas Jefferson. The document was written to show the rights of Americans, and that Americans wanted to be seperated politically from Britain. Colonists no longer wanted to be tied with Britain, and the Declaration of Independence shows their reasons why. I agree with Tina that the Declaration of Independence is a lot different than the Stamp Act, because in the Stamp Act the colonists still said they were loyal to the king, but in the Declaration of Independence they are showing that they only want the king for some protection, but not as a full time ruler. The colonists truly wanted their independence, and in some of the ways they described the king you can see how they do not want to be under his rule. They have many different reasons to be seperated from the king and Britain, and have plenty of reasons to "dissolve all political connection" with Britain. Although the Declaration of Independence is showing that the colonists wanted freedom, it is mainly directed towards men, leaving out women: "That all men are created equal.." I think the document would have appealed more to everyone had they added women into the document.
This document is written by the Americans and is declaring their separation from Britain. They basically describe the multiple ways the King has been unfair, such as placing taxes on the colonists without their consent. It stood out to me that the writers repeatedly, in various forms, pointed out that unwelcomed armies were ever present. Seems to sort of give the King a hint that "dude, get your people out of our way!". Also I noticed they emphasized the fact that laws couldn’t be made without approval of the King. The Americans justfied everything they said by giving specific examples. Well done. I agree with Tina in that the Americans are accusing the King of being a straight up tyrant.
This is Brian.
The Declaration of Independence was written by Thomas Jefferson to declare the colonies free of all English laws. After reading the long list of grievences of the king, I am suprised that the colonies didn't break away sooner. I noticed that for each intrusion on their freedom, they provided an example for each wrongdoing. Some points that stood out to me is the complaints of the king obstructing justice or for offenses done in the colonies many were tried in England. If the colonists were tried in England the most likely sentence was guilty. The king wanted to have control over them, thus proving the colonists right when they accused him of being a tyrant. I think the colonists were justified in every way to declare their independence.
Mrs. Stone this is Nick Foister
The main idea of the Declaration of Independence, was to let Britain know why they were declaring independence. The Declaration of Independence was written by Thomas Jefferson because they wanted to be free from Britain. This document doesnt really link others to what I have read. I learned that the colonists really didn't like the king controlling every thing they did. The two points that stuck out to me: He has made judges dependent on his will alone for tenure of their offices and amount and payment of salaries.
He kept amoung us in times of peace standing armies without the consent of our legislatures. These two points stuck out to me because he had to pay judges more money to get them to lie, and he had to keep an army in America just to keep the peace.
This is Jared in 7th period.
The main idea of the Declaration of Independence is to give the colonists a clear idea what to come together and fight for. Even though Jefferson wrote this document, he had to summarize and think about all the colonies have faced after the French and Indian War. Thomas Jefferson wrote this document to give the Contiential Congress and the people figting the British something to fight for. The purpose of this is to lay out the reasons the colonists are rebelling against Parilament and the crown of England. The document links to Jefferson's biography and other important writings he did during his life. I have learned that Jefferson put a lot of thought and care into this document that has become the symbol of the United States of America. There are nothing that confuses me because I have read and seen this document in Washington D.C. many times in my life. The points that stand out to me is the word "He" and the unapproved taxes that the colonies should have debated in their assemblies. The colonies do have some jusifiation arguments but most are done by the Parilament beacuse they are British citizens that are across the ocean in the New World.
This is Jared from 7th.
Lyman Hall.
The Declaration of Independence, composed by Thomas Jefferson, was a way of saying to Great Britain that we are tired of your mess and we are completely separating from you. They were treated unfairly but it was mainly they fact that they had no say in the government. If they weren't being considered true Englishmen and women then they should go ahead and separate. I believe that they're arguments were justified because they were true. But one of the main parts that stood out to me where the mock trials put on for the murders committed by the soldiers, i didn't know that the colonists had a hard time with that, i actually didn't know there where even incidents.
The Declaration of Independence was written by Thomas Jefferson. He wrote this to represent the colonists and what they beleived in. The main idea of the document is to declare independence from Great Britain. I agree with Brian, if the king was doing all of this why didnt they break away sooner??? I learned how bad the king was to the colonists with all these laws. It doesnt remind me of any other document i've read. "He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burned our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people." This really stuck out to me like it did to Tina, because this is harsh and just mean. This in itself is a good enough reason to me to declare independence. The colonists do make justifiable arguments with everything they say.
A Ramblin' Wreck's perspective, brought forth by the kind invitation of Elizabeth.
I leave the anaylsis of the document to persons actuallly enrolled in the class- I prefer to spend my leisure time analyzing ideas- drafting a response to certain perspectives which I find somewhat difficult to agree with. Good times, eh Nate?
Now then, on one hand, I quite agree with you Nate- ideas should not be nationalized. However, "if men were angels (as they SHOULD be) no government would be necessary." If morality and good will permuated as they should, there would be no war, no economic turmoil, and no really meaty documents to pick apart on a beautiful Sunday afternoon. My point is that from a historical perspective ideas are attatched to a nation as surely as is that nation's culture, government, or preferred make of clothing. In America, the ideals of democracy and individual freedoms are embedded so deeply in our culture and selves that they have truly reached the status of becoming, within our borders, inalienable rights. And a truly wonderful state that is. But outside our borders, democracy doesn't always have a home. Why is the United States struggling so much in its efforts to stablize a democratic government in Iraq? Because the Iraqi people have their own national ideas of government and humanity that have existed for far longer than the United States. In Barbara Kingsolver's "The Poisonwood Bible," the narrator's father struggles to reap a harvest of vegetables in Africa. He plants and tends them the same way he did in Georgia- in long trenches. He sneers at the African method of growing the vegetables in mounds- until repeated rainfalls wash out his trenches and leave the mounds in tact.
Now, I am not arguing for a dictatorship, nor I am suggesting anything controversial about the Iraqi War. I am merely stating the ideas and philosophies indeed have borders. I personally agree with our American values, and I feel the world would greatly improve if countries accepted democracy, opened their borders, and promoted peace. But reality has a way of shattering rose-colored lenses.
Another brief point and I am done. The line "all men are created equal" is oft quoted and used in our society. But I strongly caution against taking it at face value. If by "all men are created equal" you mean that " all persons living in post-civil rights movement America are born with the same inherenet political power and individual rights" then I would say that you are correct. But unfortunately there is a tendency to associate this line (and most unfortunately to thus associate democracy) with the idea that all men should be equal in strengths- or perhaps in another wording, it permuates the philosophy "I'm as good as you." (By the way, much of the following was inspired by "Screwtape Proposes a Toast", which may be found in the back of C.S. Lewis' "The Screwtape Letters.") Now the interesting thing about "I'm as good as you" is who invariably is the one who utters it. This is a proclamation born out of insecurity. As Mr. Lewis says, "The St. Bernard never says it to the toy dog, nor the scholar to the dunce, nor the employed to the bum, nor the pretty woman to the plain." This comes from an idea that everyone ought to be equal in goodness, kindness, chastity, and patience to everyone else. But this is absurd- one may as well demand that everyone be the same height, weight, and hat size. We are who we are- and hiding this particular vice of envy inside the word "democracy" does not change its face or nature. Rejoice in your good qualities- rejoice in those qualities of goodness which you see in others, particularly if they outstrip your own. But don't resent the goodness of others' and for goodness sake don't try to dress up your resentment as democracy.
Though Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence, it portrays the thoughts and wishes of many colonists at that time. It states the colonist desire to "cut ties" with Britain and their justification for it. It discusses the many ways that the king has treated them unjustly, and gives an example of to each wrongdoing. I believe that the colonist have every right to want to break away. They were given no choice. Even when they tried to make peace with things such as the Olive Branch Petition, the King ignored it. I agree with Brian when he said, "The colonists were justified in every way to declare their independence."
The colonists make many great points in the Declaration of Independence. They cite nearly all of the acts enforced on them by the king and stack up a very good defense for their cause. One point in particular that stands out to me is �He has plundered out seas, ravaged our coasts, burned our towns and destroyed the lives of our people.� The language of this is very poetic and the words are forceful. These words stand our in my mind and are not easy to forget. Another quote that stood out to me was, �In every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress in the most humble terms; our repeated petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.� This undoubtedly is their strongest argument for their actions. They are correct in this statement as well because, with every petition for a rule to be changed, they have pledged loyalty to the crown. The colonists make their argument the most effective by citing all of the acts made against them and showing their stupidity. Gah lee Tina wrote a book!
Thomas Jefferson composed the Declaration of Independence to separate from all the laws and ties they had with the king and Parliament. They wanted to be thier own independent country who create their own laws. This document reminds me somewhat of the Stamp Act petition because of the list of grievances to the king however the very significant difference is that at the time the colonists were not yet wanting independence. From this document I have learned how angry the colonists really were with the king. I know he did a lot of horrible things but this list shows that there is a lot of anger built up with the colonists after so many years. The colonists are very justified in thier wanting of independence. I agree with Brian that I don't understand why they didn't want to break away long before they did.
Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence, but he wrote on behalf of the delegates of the Second Continental Congresss. The main idea of this document is that the taxes and other lelegislation imposed on the colonists were unfair. They have a very long list of grivences against the king. These serve to reinforce their idea that that are not being treated fairly. One point that stands out to me is "For depriving us, in many cases, of the benefits of trial by jury." This is a huge issue and I believe the colonists are right in believing that they should at least have a trial. The colonists do make valid arguments and back up their arguments with facts.
Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence to show that the Colonists deserve rights, and have the right to break away from Britain. I believe they were justified in this, because Britain did not really pay them any mind for a while there. This was written mainly from Thomas Jefferson’s point of view, who in turn, wrote for the colonists as a whole. His purpose was to show Britain their rights. This document reminds me of so many other government documents I have read, but it is also different from what the colonists had wrote to Britain before this, before they wanted independence.
The Declaration of Independence was passed on July 4th 1776 and has been the most important document in my opinion to be drafted and accepted in American History. The main idea of this document was to break completely free from Britain and from all it’s obligations and regulations. The Second Continental Congress stresses to the British government that through [“a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states”] The colonists want to make clear to the British parliament and the king that the they have had enough and they only way they would prosper was to break free. The author is Thomas Jefferson but he is expressing the opinions of the representatives in the Second Continental Congress who were elect by the colonists. The purpose of this document is to make it official that the colonists were creating their own nation. This document reminds me of the Stamp Act of Congress because it addresses the issues with Britain directly and lists them. I didn’t realize how patient the colonists were before they decide to break free; they gave the British a lot of chances to clean things up which they ignored. ”That all men are created equal” One thing I would change would that I would have put mankind instead on men because this leaves a lot of gray area. I agree with Tina Bu that it is a little ironic that the colonists based their new government on an Englishman’s philosophy. However I guess it doesn’t matter because it worked.!!
SORRY SOORY Thats my post up top - Mackenzie Wilder
And it would be gooood for me to learn how to spell SORRY!!!!
Thomas Jefferson severs the umbilical chord between the American colonies and Great Britain in "The Declaration of Independence." This document is of large significance for many reasons; here are just a few: the colonists now have officially stated that any differences they had with England are now irreconcilable-they no longer want to try to work things out, they want independence from Great Britain. Secondly, the document attacks the King. Until this point the colonists had remained loyal subjects to the crown, meaning that they upheld the authority of the King. After King George III rejected their Olive Branch Petition, the colonists began to see that it wasn't just Parliament that was evil, but it was also the "Royal Brute" that Thomas Paine refers to in "Common Sense" (a document that is similar to the "Declaration of Independence" in its denunciation of the King and the government). Third, this document represents a lot of Lockean ideas-social contract, the "life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness" clause (minus the "happiness" bit and add some property), and the idea that should the government grow corrupt, that the people have the right to abolish or overthrow it. Jefferson does a good job in stating that the colonists have been abused and denied their basic rights and then goes on to describe the many ways in which "He" (the King) has succeeded in undermining their liberty. It's a clear, logical, and profound document that doesn't need a lot of explanation to show what an important document it is in United States history and also in the history of the world.
The Second Continental Congress had allowed Thomas Jefferson to make the Declaration of Independence to represent the colonists. Thomas Jefferson pretty much sums up what most colonists thought about the unfair taxing that all men are created equal and that the people of a nation should run the government. The Declaration also talks about that the King was also being a tyrant to the colonies. Thomas Jefferson wrote this document but was written from the colonists point of view. The Declaration of Independence was written to tell England to be fair. King George also would not let the colonists govern themselves which was unfair. I love this document because is is straight up in your face Britain.
First of all, the Declaration of Independance was wrote by Thomas Jefferson to enlist and define the rights that the colonies are demanding. This document's purpose was to break away from Britain and create a new government that was more efficient for the colonist's needs and respecting their rights. The American's believed that the King unjustly tried to control them and as time began to play out the colonists went from wanting to just abolish taxes to demanding freedom and seperation from Britain. The first thing that stands out to me is the very first sentence and the very first words, "all men are created equal." The second thing that stands out to me is the accusations that he makes and how he points out all of the examples where the king basically screwed up. The third thing that stands out to me is obviously the last paragraph describing the new law and rights of the American Government is the bolded print saying, "-FREE AND INDEPENDANT STATES-" this statement explains the frustration the colonists have dealt with, having to abide by the king's law and now stating their seperation from that government. They also try to create their new government in alignment with the opposite of parliament. With that the Declaration of Independance is strongly influenced by John Locke's Social Contract Theory in that everyone has the right to the natural law, Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Another strong influence is Common Sense by Thomas Paine and his strong thoughts about the King. I truly believe the colonists made justifiable arguments because after nearly 150 years of self-governing the King decides to lay a smackdown on the the colonists and the idea that I can say that would relate to this situation the most is, "why fix something if it is not broken?" Personally I believe the colonists have every right to demand a seperation from the Britian and the King's law, and their arguement in the Declaration of Independence is more than enough to prove their point in an arguement over viability. I agree with Chelsea because the colonists really did cite their sources with accusations that make clear evidence that represents the abuse of the law that the British and the King has pressed on the colonists.
Ummm Mrs. Stone I'm not really sure who your relative may be... but lets see how about...
Thos. Stone from Maryland? haha
what a guess for ya...
The Declaration was carefully planned out to renounce the colonies' loyalty to the British government. Thomas Jefferson was appointed to write the document, but the ideas came from various colonists' ideas that witnessed the unfairness of the British King. These ideas were put together in the Declaration of Independence to establish a government that would give the colonies their natural rights and to explain the colonies' rejection of the king because of all of his wrong-doings. The colonists do make justifiable arguments because they are all based on legitimate facts. Like Tina, the Declaration of Independence reminds me of the Stamp Act Petition because they both are addressed towards Britain, explaining the colonists' dissatisfaction towards the king's behavior. The only difference between the two is that they were still loyal to the king in the Stamp Act Petition, whereas they are not during the Declaration of Independence. I also agree with Daniel, that the Declaration of Independence is like "Common Sense" , by Thomas Pain, because both pieces state the king's faults. Through reading this document, I have realized that the colonists were still pretty religious at the time because they rely on "Divine Providence" to "support this declaration". I must agree with Nate, that I do not think that it is ironic that the declaration includes the philosophy of an English man because, at the time, they were all technically still considered English. Points that stood out to me while reading this document,were the points attacking the king's actions and the use of Locke's philosophy. I still do not understand, however, why the colonists waited that long to create a Declaration of Independence.
Okay, first things first: Thbptb! and Blpth!! And for all of you other bloggers who didn't understand that, it was simply the sound of me sticking my tongue out at a certain Ramblin' Wreck. That's about the only comeback I could think of, because who can go against a C. S. Lewis quoter?
The Declaration of Independence differs from all of the other letters and petitions drawn together by the colonists. This paper is addressed to the world, not the king. It doesn't directly inform their homeland that, hey now we're the United States of America! (Ha- beat that title, George.) Instead it gives the proper feeling that the colonists don't care about formally addressing the king- or asking his permission, which would completely cancel out the whole independence idea. Good thing Thomas Jefferson wrote it, and not the author of Declaration of Rights of Grievances...
The document itself is extremely well written, especially for mostly being a list of complaints. This particular section really gave the image of the straw breaking the camel’s back. From the way it was composed, I’m surprised the rest of the world didn’t start to hate Britain, too. I mean, aside from those who already did, oui oui? Their listings covered everything wrong in the colonies and noted all of their attempts to peacefully change Britain’s rule. It’s a good thing the colonists held long grudges.
The last paragraph is by far the best and most emotional in the declaration. You can practically hear the dramatic music in the background. It’s a pity nobody talks like that anymore. (What movie did that sorta come from, huh, Wreck?) Also a pity that because of this document most other forms of government are usually seen as wrong, instead of just different by Americans. The Declaration of Independence is an excellent document that gives all the right reasons of why Britain’s rule wasn’t correct for the American colonies. And yes, it set the idea for the type of government that rules America, but it’s just a document. Rules and ideas can change-not meaning that they necessarily should for us- but meaning that the Declaration of Independence doesn’t represent everything that can be right and free.
And my (completely random) guess is...George Wythe.
The Declaration of Independence was written by Thomas Jefferson. The main idea of the document was to declare America as being independent from Britain. In the document the Americans state that because Britain has not done their part in protecting the colonies, it is the colonists' right to create their own government. I agree with Tina that the reasons for seperation mainly concern the tyranny of the King. The document was meant to "dissolve all political connection" with Britain. This document doesn't remind me of any others in particular. In All of the other petitions and statements the colonists wrote before, they still remained loyal to Britain. I think that even though the document states that all MEN are created equal, that Thomas Jefferson didn't mean that just men not women were equal. I think that Jefferson reffered to the whole of America in stating men. After all, everyone in the colonies wanted to be treated as eqauls, not just the men. It would have saved a lot of political controversy though if he had included women in there somewhere
The Declaration was written by the colonists. The purpose of the document was to show why the colonists were declaring independence.The main idea is that the colonists view the rule of King George as not protective of their righrs. I agree with all of their arguments and one which I think is extremely justified is taxation without representation One of the points that stood out to me was that the Declaration stated that all men were created equal but they only treated free white men with property with equality.
*I bet you're related to that Button Gwinnet kid from Georgia. That name just screams Mrs. Stone HAHAHA =) or there's thomas stone from Maryland??
If this doesn't make you feel patriotic, I don't know what does. The Americans basically wanted to terminate all political ties with Britain because they were tired of suffering from this "absolute despotism." The Declaration of Independence described the disrespect of the king and also his domination towards the colonists.
The colonists justify their arguments using specific examples in their long list of grievnaces about the king. But these points weren't just complaints; as a whole, the document shows that the colonists were ready for independence from Britain, whether it be politically or complete disassociation.
I really enjoyed this document and I have to say that everything made an impression on me. I never realized how many problems the colonists had with the king (considering all the "He"s as if all their troubles resulted from him). I was always taught it was just the taxation without representation that pushed the colonists to revolt. But now I know that while taxes did play a part, it was also the lack of freedom in government and in life in general.
Thomas Jefferson was the writer of the Declaration of Independence. The main point of this document is to delcare independence from Britain and independence from the king himself. The colonist were sick and tired of the way the king was treating them, and they were ready to dissolve all ties with him and Britain. The people of America felt that it was now time to form their own government. This document, as far as the wording goes, reminds me of all the other documents that the Americans wrote to Britain during this time. The only difference between those and this particular document, is that the other ones were simply petitions and not statement of indepence. This was clearly a statement of independence considering the word independence is in the title. One point of the Declaration of Indpendence that stood out to me was the line that said "all men were created equal." I really don't understand why they would choose that to be the first statement considering this is a document focusing on independence. Like Donna Lynn, I agree with the fact that when they said "all men" they were probably meaning everyone, but it would have made things a little easier if they said something about women and non-land owning men. Something else that stood out to me when reading this was the tone that it was written in compared to the tone that other past documents to the king had been written in. This document bluntly stated the wrong things the king had been doing. It also clearly stated the expectations of the people of the colonies. The other documents remained loyal to the king unlike this one. The colonist make very justifiable arguments throughout the entire document. The colonist clearly give examples as to how the king is hurting the colonies and causing many problems and how independence is the only way the Americas can prosper.
it's blair :)
The Declaration of Independence was written by Thomas Jefferson because John Adams thought he was a better writer than him. Thomas Jefferson was representing the colonies not just himself. The Declaration of Independence serves as a ticket for America to be seperated from Britain. I believe that this document was the best ever written in history, even though it actually was signed on July 2nd, not the 4th. I guess in American history we screw up sometimes (like Columbus Day.)I agree with Donna Lynn and Rachel Lee, i wish that they would have used a better phrase than "all men" because it leaves women out. And I think the colonists do make justification for leaving the British. They made like a million points and if anyone took the time to write it and it makes sense, then they should be granted what they wanted. I always learn something new about the Declaration of Independence in each history class I take and that's what I like about the document. It's so interesting.
The Declaration of Independence was written by Thomas Jefferson. It was written to give reasons why they wanted to separate from Britain and also to tell Britain what they did wrong. The colonists were very upset with England about some of the acts and restrictions that Parliament had passed just for the colonists. For example, they were giving the colonies a direct tax. I have learned that at this point they are not free from Britain but they have decided now that they want to be free. I always thought they wanted independence from the beginning but they were still loyal to their king when Parliament passed the Stamp Act. I was confused on how they didn’t understand the full of meaning of Thomas Jefferson’s words, “all men are created equal.” I thought they was pretty straight forward but I guess not.
The Declaration was the official act of the infant (or fetal...) United Colonial government to separate itself from the government of Great Britain, therby forming its own country that would rest on the foundation of John Locke's contract theory of government, and then slowly drift away from that philosophy to the opposite end of the political spectrum.... but that's another story. For now we'll revel in the glory of our independence. The colonists were justified in writing this beautiful piece (I agree with Nate's interpretation of the first part as timeless) for many reasons. The ones which stood out to me are, first off, the fact that Britain had installed a standing army in the colonies that weren't threatened by outright revolution at the time, which the colonists themselves has to fund and quarter. This really created a problem that wasn't there and definitely showed a divide between the mother country and the colonies. The colonists in charge went about handling the situation in a very calm, and civil manner, petitioning the king with their Declaration of Rights and Grievances. The next point that stood out to me was the fact that George took this as an act of rebellion, thereby declaring war himself. Of course, the semantics wre over the top in some cases, such as the very obvious "plundering...ravaging....burning...destroying" bit that everyone probably noticed. There's little doubt to the deep sincerity of those who signed the document, though, and of course, Thomas Jefferson who penned it. They were members of legislature and congress, and were immediately affected by the majority of Georges actions, especially those dictating representation and the administration of justice, as well as those acts limiting meetings between representatives. It is a relatively unbiased account of the situation, as it lists violations of colonial rights that affected not only the upper classes, but really all people of the colonies. Of course, women did not specifically count, but they would still be unburdened with the abolition of frivolous taxes and trials not by jury. Slaves, on the other hand, gained nothing, were not considered citizens and of course represented the hipocritical side of the theory of government the colonies were adopting. Native Americans were about to be threatened by the new order once the Proclamation Line was disregarded en masse, giving colonists free reign in the wilderness over the Appalacians. If the Declaration of Independence had really been holistic and considered the rights of everybody in America, it obviously would have been absolutely justifiable, but there still remains that bit of hipocracy that dulls the otherwise brilliant document. I would guess Thos. Stone, by the way, as your ancestor. Watch it be some crazy last name though, like Paca or Wythe....
The Declaration of Independence was written, and still is written by Mr. Thomas Jefferson himself. He, with the consent of others, wrote this document to tell Britain they were going to be free from them and then went on saying why they wanted there freedom. One thing that i saw very interesting was the fact that one of the first rights given to the people of the colonies was to change or abolish the government if they felt change was needed. I interpreted this as a slap in the face to Britain by practically saying that the colonies can't thrive and succeed to their potential if under the British rule. Britain is holding them back. I also thought that the fact that majority of the problems with the British government was directly pointed at the king was interesting. The "He" that is repeatedly refered to is obviously the king and Thomas practically dropped the hammer on him and his actions. I think it is kind of crazy that only a few years ago, in the Stamp Act, the colonists said that they were still loyal to the crown and then not too much later they say they want their freedom from them. That means that Britain messed up pretty bad in a short amount of time. Britain asked for it because the colonies said they would be loyal to them if a few changes were made. The changes were simple and if Britain would have obeyed them, then they could still be ruling the U.S for all we know. The king's stubborness is what hurt Britain the most.
The part of the Declaration that stands out most for me are the beginning, and the end, oddly enough. Even though ol' Thomas Jefferson didn't really mean that all people were equal, his intentions were good. Also, in way too many words that were necessary, he basically says "Hey Britain, this is what you've done to tick us off: ....etc". Which instills a great feeling of "Go America" in us all. The end also stands out for me, because it says that they wish to be free and independent, and state the rights that go along with that. All of the points that I could dissect what they meant seemed justifiable to me.
As far as your ancestor, I'm gonna be predictable and pick someone from Georgia. Button Gwinnett, because Button is probably the best first name ever. Second choice: Francis Lightfoot(Ha.) Lee.
The D.O.I. ultimately states everything that Britain has been doing that ticks off the colonists and as daniel said severs the umbilical cord between them. The was written and by Thomas Jefferson and revised and approved by delegates in the Second Continental Congress. This document is similar to Stamp Act Congress Declaration of Rights and greivances but with the added independence from Britain part. John Locke's theories are used but property was changed to pursuit of happiness in the unalienable rights. I agree with Greg that it is straight up in Britain's face. The colonist's have some undeniable points: "cutting off our trade with all parts of the world", "imposing taxes on us without our consent", and some exagerrated points: "destroying the lives of our people". Im going to have to guess George Walton is your ancestor.
-josh hammond
The Declaration of Independence was officially written by Thomas Jefferson but was composed of many american colonists in the Second Continental Congress. Their main idea was to list their complaints or grievances against the British Parliament and King. This was America's first official push for independence. The British did a good job of defending themselves because of the list of official complaints that listed the many ridiculous acts that Britain enforced upon them. Alice and Tina are right because this is similar to the stamp act but the stamp act was more of a settlement because they still declared a sense of loyalty to the king but the Declaration of Independence was their split from Britain and wanting full independence. The point of view is obviously from the colonists and is easy to be bias towards them because they present Britain as evil because of the horrible laws they have put the colonists under. I like how the colonists just come out and plainly say we want to be "free and independent states." They wanted to become free politically and economically as well, to get rid of the many taxes the British put on them. Overall I think the colonists did a good job because they gave many complaints or points, and all of them were defended by an example of what the tyrannical king did to them. I think this was a good plea for freedom.
The Declaration of Independence was officially written by Thomas Jefferson but was composed of many american colonists in the Second Continental Congress. Their main idea was to list their complaints or grievances against the British Parliament and King. This was America's first official push for independence. The British did a good job of defending themselves because of the list of official complaints that listed the many ridiculous acts that Britain enforced upon them. Alice and Tina are right because this is similar to the stamp act but the stamp act was more of a settlement because they still declared a sense of loyalty to the king but the Declaration of Independence was their split from Britain and wanting full independence. The point of view is obviously from the colonists and is easy to be bias towards them because they present Britain as evil because of the horrible laws they have put the colonists under. I like how the colonists just come out and plainly say we want to be "free and independent states." They wanted to become free politically and economically as well, to get rid of the many taxes the British put on them. Overall I think the colonists did a good job because they gave many complaints or points, and all of them were defended by an example of what the tyrannical king did to them. I think this was a good plea for freedom.
This is the comment of Warren
The Declaration of Independence was written by Thomas Jefferson with the ideas of the many delegates that were present. It stated the reasons that the colonies were declaring there freedom and the abuses the faced from the king. What mainly stuck out to me was how much it meant that the king allowed the colonists virtually no representation on taxes, and that he had so many soldiers in the colonies even during the times of peace. Many of the reasons listed by the colonists in the declaration were the same as the reasons listed in the Declaration of Rights and Grievences. I agree with Brian that the colonists were 100% justified.
the declaration of independence simply list a lot of complaints against the British empire and gives the reason for the colonist wish of independence. the part that stood out to me was the little part about the British ignoring the colonist which places blame on the entire country and not just the king. this makes independence a lot more understandable. that was really it. it was understandable that the colonist wanted independence cause the British were pricks.
i don't see how people can write that much its crazy i need a new desk. then one shakes my turn table it sucks o by the way im awesome and won won what life
The Americans, at this time had been subject to the British empire for a long time and their argument for declaration is just as valid as any other country that has ever declared independence from another country. Although the Declaration of Independece is what mark the United States of America's history, it is somewhat predictable because it is saying many of the things that have been said since the beginning of time. Such as "God created all men equal", which is something very important in the declaration because it's what seperates America from the world today. The Declaration also deals with the tyranny over the colonies by King George and his predecessors and also Parliament. With this comes a list of reasons for seperation and also the new government which will be sought after once American is established as a nation. America's Declaration of Independence completely relates to the context of the Revolution and its importance is great today because it is what holds our nation together.
Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence to represent what most of the colonists were thinknig. They were sick and tired of being treated as badly as they were by the king. They were saying that he was a tyrant and they didnt want to be under his control anymore. The Declaration lists all of the reasons why the colonists are mad at the king and why they want to be independent, and, obviously, it declares their independence. "He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burned our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people." This is what stands out to me the most because it really describes how bad the colonists were treated by their own king. The wording of this shows how mad the colonists were.
This is Beth Galloway
Pssh talk about last minute!
Ok the Declaration of Independence a document that basically stated that the colonies were tired of Great Britian's bull crap and that according to John Locke they had the right to petion to change their government and if, in extreme cases, it is needed, they have the right to get rid of the old government and start from scratch. Apparently the colonists felt that this was the case here! This document reminds me of John Locke's social contract that stood for the right to "life, liberty, and property". Although the Declaration of Independence didnt say those exact words you can tell this document was derived from John Locke's social contact theory.
A: This document is written by Thomas Jefferson.
P: July 4, 1776
P: This is the reason we do fireworks on the forth of july
A: the king and parliament in Great Britian
R: Cause the British government was not representing the opinions of the colonies
T: The colonies have the right to remove themselves from the government of Great Britian if they feel they are not being represented by the British government
The Declaration of Independance was written by Thomas Jefferson.It was written to tell the British that they had no rule on them anymore. The colonist were furious with the king and parliment. I understand to a point why the colonist didn't break away from the crown before because they had been connected to the crown for so long, they had never been seperated or been own their own before. The declaration had alot of infasis on what the king gad done wrong and the tyranny that he caused.
The Decleration of Independence was written by Thomas Jefferson. The main idea was to state the natural rights and interests of the colonists in America. The Point of View is one of no longer wanting to have any relation to Britain or their rule. This document relates to America today, if it weren't for this document, we, as Americans would not have the same rights and liberties that we do. We would be living in a totally different country. I agree with Alice when she said that they do have plenty of reasons to dissolve all political connection with Britain, and this document states it so justly. I learned that tone does mean a lot when writing a document, because as we learned in class there was a bunch of confusion about the line "all men are created equal", so, giving it a kind of bias tone. The line about "...destorying our towns" particularly stood out to me because it gave a very vivid description of Britain's affect on the colonies. It gave me an idea of how violated the Americans felt. Nothing much confused me about the document and I do believe America was justified in all of it's opinions.
Can you say "procrastination"?
This Declaration of Independence was written by the Thomas Jefferson representing the colonists in America to state and justify their need for independence from Britain and its king. The theme of the reading was that the king was distinctly uncool in his various measures to repress the colonists (or at least, they saw it as repressing) and that the colonists were fed up with it. I like how the Jefferson firmly establishes the logical reasons for the colonists' viewpoint before turning to the more emotional elements of their explanation, because it makes it easier for me to relate to them.
I find it difficult to choose specific points of the Declaration that stand out to me, because I'm with Nate in that I really like the document as a whole.
If I have to pick, though, I like the statement that "Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes... But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security." By making these statements, together, Jefferson makes it clear that the colonists' decision for independence is not a whim.
I also think the statement that "He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burned our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people." is valuable. If the whole document were emotional like that, it wouldn't have a lot of a effect, but the fact that a few key parts where it's as if the emotions couldn't be repressed any more are included really furthers the power of this document.
I agree with everything Kayla said because Kayla rocks. But really, her saying that "he basically says "Hey Britain, this is what you've done to tick us off: ....etc". Which instills a great feeling of "Go America" in us all." is very true.
in case i don't get done typing this again, my computer froze during the process of adding my comment so i have to re-type it and its 11:58..this is hannah mauldin.
comment by: Hannah Mauldin
*is your ancestor thos. stone?*
The Declaration of Independence was written by Thomas Jefferson and declares the colonists' desire for freedom from Britain. The purpose of this document is to show the world how the colonists feel about being controlled by Britain. The points Jefferson makes throughout the DOI remind me of the Mayflower Compact. After reading this document, I have a better understanding of exactly what the British did to make the colionists so angry. The only thing i still find confusing is who exactly your ancestor is and if I am correct, then why don't you live in Maryland?! ;)
I also believe that the colonists are correct in wanting exactly what they said because the British were too controlling and did too little too late to try and help the colonists. The British never had what was best for the colonists in their heads.
Although not everyone took a stab at guessing my ancestor, Josh was right - I'm related (somehow...on my mother's mother's side, I think) to George Walton from Georgia... Way to be!
The Declaration of Independance, written by Thomas Jefferson, is written from the point of view of the colonists who were tired of the King and Parliament's refusal to be fair in taxation. It lists why they are fighting and why the British government is wrong by taxing and sending soldiers to American for no apparent reason. One point that stood out to me is that they almost went exactly by the contract theory of government by saying that they have the right to choose the government, the government should protect them, and if they don't then the colonists have the right to change the government or to overthrow it.
Harris Jones
Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence with the signatures beneath it, approving its legitimacy. The document is informing Great Britain of its separation from the "mother country" and stating the reasons for their leave. (**cough cough**, note the title "Declaration of Independence").....
As I read the others, I agree with Tina on the fact that the ideology at the time of this document was independence, whereas in other documents that we have read the colonists are not even in the mindset of independence.
There is nothing too confusing about this document, considering that we know the story and what happens next.
One thing that stands out to me in this document is the part where it says that Parliament fatigues our representatives into agreeing with what they have to say. It just really makes me laugh. And yes, the colonists make justifiable arguments. It would be different if the declaration was just out of the blue, but because they had already tried many other documents hoping for protection, peace, and sympathy that had been rejected I can understand where they are coming from.
shazam.
None of the declaration really stands out to me. I believe the colonists were justified because they got what they wanted but even though they had to fight for it it was worth it.
Note- This is late because I was absent.
The Declaration of Independence was written to (haha) declare indepence. It appears to be justifying the actions taken by the colonists towards severance with the English crown by listing the various greivances and violations concerning the contract of government idea the British government has made. This is in stark constrast to previous, more subtle pleas to the English Parliament. Whereas previously efforts had been made to respectfully tell the British (the non-colonial variety) they were arrogant tryants, the Declaration of Independence makes no such pains. I believe the colonists were entitled to much of their feelings toward England.
Hey this is Brian T.
This lovely document known as the Declaration of Independence was written by Thomas Jefferson. It was written to explain to the world and mainly Britain why the colonists broke away from England and created America. This document was written by Jefferson but was from the point of view of all the former colonists. They all had stated what grievances the king had caused for them.
Hey,
When ever I surf on web I come to this website[url=http://www.weightrapidloss.com/lose-10-pounds-in-2-weeks-quick-weight-loss-tips].[/url]Lots of good information here trhsapush.blogspot.com. Let me tell you one thing guys, some time we really forget to pay attention towards our health. Let me present you with one fact here. Research indicates that about 60% of all United States grownups are either fat or weighty[url=http://www.weightrapidloss.com/lose-10-pounds-in-2-weeks-quick-weight-loss-tips].[/url] Hence if you're one of these citizens, you're not alone. In fact, most of us need to lose a few pounds once in a while to get sexy and perfect six pack abs. Now the question is how you are planning to have quick weight loss? [url=http://www.weightrapidloss.com/lose-10-pounds-in-2-weeks-quick-weight-loss-tips]Quick weight loss[/url] is not like piece of cake. You need to improve some of you daily habbits to achive weight loss in short span of time.
About me: I am writer of [url=http://www.weightrapidloss.com/lose-10-pounds-in-2-weeks-quick-weight-loss-tips]Quick weight loss tips[/url]. I am also mentor who can help you lose weight quickly. If you do not want to go under painful training program than you may also try [url=http://www.weightrapidloss.com/acai-berry-for-quick-weight-loss]Acai Berry[/url] or [url=http://www.weightrapidloss.com/colon-cleanse-for-weight-loss]Colon Cleansing[/url] for quick weight loss.
Post a Comment