Introduction
William Lloyd Garrison and Frederick Douglass were two of the most important figures in the American abolition movement. In “To the Public,” Garrison calls for an immediate end to slavery, while in “What to the Slave is the Fourth of July?” Douglass criticizes the way American freedom is celebrated while slavery is tolerated (7). Both Garrison and Douglass are highly critical of the institution of slavery and its impact on American society. However, Douglass takes a more personal approach in his essay, sharing his experiences as an enslaved person and highlighting the hypocrisy of celebrating independence while condoning slavery. In contrast, Garrison takes a more general approach, calling for an immediate end to slavery without exception. Both authors offer a powerful critique of slavery, but their approach is quite different. Garrison’s call for immediate action is based on his belief that slavery is an evil that cannot be tolerated, while Douglass argues that slaveholders are betraying the ideals of America, thus providing a better argument.
Discussion
In “To the Public,” William Lloyd Garrison lays out his main points regarding slavery and its abolition. He believes that slavery is a moral issue, and thus it should be abolished immediately. He expounds upon this idea by discussing the inhumane treatment of enslaved people, the broken families caused by slavery, and the immorality of owning another human being. Garrison’s main points are clear and well-supported, making “To the Public” an effective call for immediate action to end slavery. In “To the Public,” William Lloyd Garrison makes a strong case against slavery, arguing that it is both unconstitutional and a violation of the natural rights of man. He begins by stating that enslaved people are “intrinsically as valuable as we are” and that they are entitled to the same “natural right to liberty” (Garrison 3). He goes on to say that slavery directly violates the Constitution, as it violates the principles of equality and justice (Garrison 4). Garrison’s main point is that slavery is morally wrong and must be abolished. He concludes by calling on Americans to do what is right and “to return to the bright path of liberty and equal justice” (Garrison 6). Overall, Garrison makes a convincing argument against slavery and its many injustices.
Additionally, William Lloyd Garrison condemns the hypocrisy of Americans who claim to be champions of liberty while supporting slavery. He argues that such hypocrisy is incompatible with the principles of liberty and justice (52). Garrison also condemns those who justify slavery based on tradition or economic necessity (53). He argues that there can be no justification for slavery, which he describes as a “cruel, inhuman, and unjustifiable system” (54). Garrison’s letter is a powerful condemnation of the institution of slavery and those who support it.
In his work, Douglass argues that slavery is a national sin. He states that Americans should be ashamed of themselves for celebrating Independence Day while enslaved people live in bondage (Douglass 20). Douglass makes several strong points throughout his speech, using logic and emotion to appeal to his audience. One of the most striking aspects of the speech is Douglass’ repetition of the phrase “Your country!” (495). This serves to remind listeners that, despite their personal feelings on the issue, slavery is a national problem and one that all Americans are responsible for. In addition, by emphasizing that enslaved people are human beings with feelings and aspirations just like their own, Douglass encourages Americans to see them as fellow citizens rather than property. The speech is a powerful reminder of the importance of fighting for liberty and justice.
Frederick Douglass argues that slavery violates the principles on which America was founded. He states that America cannot truly celebrate its independence as long as enslaved people are still within its borders. Douglass contends that slavery must be abolished if the country is to live up to its ideals. This essay is an important piece of literature because it challenges America to confront the contradiction between its founding principles and the reality of slavery. By bringing this issue to light, Douglass ultimately helped to pave the way for the abolition of slavery.
Nonetheless, he condemns the hypocrisy of white Americans who claim to love liberty while supporting slavery. He argues that the Declaration of Independence is meaningless to enslaved people, who are denied the freedoms it proclaims. Douglass’ powerful words helped to propel the anti-slavery movement forward, and his speech is still relevant today. As people continue to struggle with issues of racism and inequality, Douglass’ words remind us that true liberty must be for all people, not just some.
In his work, Frederick Douglass takes a different approach. Rather than focusing on what is not mentioned in the Constitution, Douglass focuses on what is contained within it. He argues that the Constitution contains two clauses directly related to slavery: the Fugitive Slave Clause and the Three-Fifths Compromise. The Fugitive Slave Clause allowed enslaved people to be returned to their owners if they escaped to another state, while the Three-Fifths Compromise allowed southern states to count each enslaved person as three-fifths of a person for purposes of representation in Congress. Douglass concludes that, far from being a pro-slavery document, the Constitution contains provisions protecting and defending slavery.
In “To the Public,” William Lloyd Garrison makes a choice to use irony as he opens with, “I am not quite sure that it is proper for me to address you on the great subject of human rights.” (Garrison 1). This choice in how he starts his text sets the tone for the rest of his letter. He talks about how he knows some might not want to hear him talk about how all humans deserve the same rights, but he continues anyway. He wants people to see that even though some might not want to listen, it does not mean that the issue should not be addressed.
In contrast, Frederick Douglass starts his text with a powerful statement: “What, to the American slave, is your 4th of July? I answer a day that reveals to him, more than all other days of the year, the gross injustice and cruelty to which he is the constant victim” (Douglass 1). Unlike Garrison, Douglass does not hold back any punches. He directly addresses how terrible slavery is and how it destroys any chance of happiness for those forced into it. While both authors make choices that affect how their stories are told, I find Garrison’s story more effective because it gradually leads to its climax, whereas Douglass’ story hits its peak at the beginning. As a result, I am more engaged in Garrison’s story, and my interpretation is shaped by how much slower it builds up compared to Douglass’ text.
As any reader knows, the genre of a piece of writing can significantly impact how the work is experienced. In the case of “To the Public” by William Lloyd Garrison and “What to the Slave is the Fourth of July?” by Frederick Douglass, the genre affects my reading in several ways. Firstly, both pieces are written as speeches, which means they are designed to be heard rather than read. This affects how I engage with the text, as I am more likely to pay attention to the rhetorical devices and structure of the argument than if I read it silently.
Secondly, both pieces are written as political protests, aiming at persuading the reader to take action on an issue. This comes through most clearly in Garrison’s piece, which uses strong language and emotional appeals to urge the reader to join the abolitionist cause. In contrast, Douglass’s piece is more subdued in its tone, using logic and reason to argue that America cannot truly celebrate its independence while slavery remains legal. As a result, the genre of these two pieces contributes significantly to how I engage with their respective ideas.
Conclusion
Overall, Garrison’s argument is weaker than Douglass’s since it relies on an unsupported assumption. In “To the Public,” William Lloyd Garrison argues that the Fourth of July is not a celebration day for all Americans. He claims that, for enslaved Africans, the day is one of mourning and disappointment. In contrast, Frederick Douglass’s “What to the Slave is the Fourth of July?” paints a more optimistic picture. While acknowledging the history of oppression faced by black Americans, Douglass argues that the principles of liberty and equality enshrined in the Declaration of Independence can be a source of hope. In general, Douglas’s argument is stronger than Garrison’s. Garrison fails to consider that while the Fourth of July may be a day of grief for some, it can also be a day of pride and determination. For Douglass, the holiday is an opportunity to celebrate how far America has come and to reaffirm its commitment to justice. In this way, his argument is more complex and ultimately more convincing.
Works Cited
Douglass, Frederick. “What to the Slave is the Fourth of July?” Ideals and Ideologies. Routledge, 2019. 377-381.
Garrison, William Lloyd. To the Public. Pearsons, 2014.