More handpicked essays just for you.
Interpreting the constitution
Give me liberty or give me death speech abridged
An essay on representative democracy
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Interpreting the constitution
The speech of Patrick Henry really gave a sort of enlightenment throughout the colonies of that time period, but people wonder why this speech has a relevance to today’s society and people. Today in American society we as the people read Give me Liberty or Give me death a certain way, this speech represented a government where the people should be the one to decide it’s country's leader and not be a subject under a king or ruler. According to an article on American Remedy it tells us the way America interprets the way a government is supposed to be they say “We are supposed to have a Republican form of government, a government that comes from the consent of the people”(Ainsworth). People of America feel that we are at a state the the colonies
Patrick Henry’s effective diction emphasizes how much the British had suppressed the colonists and that it was time to fight for their freedom. Henry displays this through his strong use of pathos, logos, and ethos. His rhetorical questions really appeal to the logic and ethics of the colonists and leaves the no choice but to join him and rebel.
In the “Speech at the Virginia Convention” Patrick Henry tries to persuade colonists to fight a war against the English; he uses several main rhetorical strategies such as; parallelism, metaphor, and rhetorical questions.
The 1770s proved to be a time of much chaos and debate. The thirteen colonies, which soon gained their independence, were in the midst of a conflict with Great Britain. The colonies were suffering from repeated injuries and usurpations inflicted upon them by the British. As a result of these inflictions, Thomas Paine and Patrick Henry addressed these injustices, and proved to be very persuasive through providing reasoning and evidence that moved many colonists to believe that to reach contentment and peace the colonies had to rid themselves of British rule. Henry and Paine were successful in swaying their audience, not only because of the rhetorical strategies used, but also because they were passionate about the cause they were committed to.
At the Virginia convention in 1775 Patrick Henry spoke out anonymously about standing up to the British monarchy and gaining independence. His simple use of language and emotionally captivating passages inspired many to fight for a republic. Persuading the devout and loyal colonies to pull away from their mother country took courage.
Patrick Henry was known as “the Orator of Liberty” and created his name with his speeches. When colonists were divided in 1775, some were hoping to work it out but not Patrick Henry. He thought the only choice was to go to war with Great Britain. Henry uses ethos, pathos, and logos to show his clause for going to war with Britain.
He uses words like “chains” as symbols of America's ties with Great Britain in order to show the slave-like hold that Britain claims over America, which creates a sense of fear in the hearts of the members of the Congress. By saying “For my own part… a question of freedom or slavery” Patrick Henry frames the only outcome of their decision as either freedom, which would be the product by going to war against the British, or slavery and subjugation, which would be the result of reconciliation and obedience. He implores the Congress to not ignore the gravity of the situation at hand of how “war and subjugation” are Great Britain's true intentions.
He addressed the cruel taxes and policies that have been placed upon the American people. He also, speaks of the tiring efforts of the colonies to overcome the impossible British policies. Henry begins his statement with the numerous actions taken by people in response to the British approach to limit their freedom. Writing in the statement, Henry complains that many actions have been taken in an effort to achieve freedom but have failed. Henry himself writes, “In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation?”. In making this comment Henry urges the British to be prepared for them. After overcoming the stamp act , Henry urges the British to be ready for revolution if freedom is not given. This exactly, Henry points out, if basic privileges are not given to men and women, there will be a war. Henry himself writes. “give me liberty, or give me death!”. Basically, Henry is warning that if freedom is not given, he is willing to fight until it is. Patrick Henry’s statement is crucial to the American cause in the War for Independence. He led the fight against the stamp act, after being elected to the Virginia House of Burgesses in 1765. Also, he proposed his argument for going to war was in an effort to live as free men and fight. His speech inspired men to join the cause and fight for
Many speeches have shaped the nation we live in today. Patrick Henry’s “Speech in the Virginia Convention” and Benjamin Franklin’s “Speech in the Convention” are two of the most prominent speeches that have assisted in the forging of our new nation. The “Speech in the Virginia Convention” serves to encourage those that listened to take arms against the British and fight the injustice being done to them. The “Speech in the Convention” admits to the imperfections of the Constitution but supports its ultimate purpose. Both Patrick Henry and Benjamin Franklin believe leaders must do away with compromise and lead when it’s best for the people as a whole. However, Patrick discourages any future compromise, while Benjamin Franklin feels that future
In a time full of chaos, desperation, and dissenting opinions, two definitive authors, Thomas Paine and Patrick Henry, led the way toward the American Revolution. Both men demanded action of their separate audiences. Paine wrote to inspire the commoners to fight while Henry spoke extemporaneously to compel the states’ delegates to create an army. Despite the differences between the two, both had very similar arguments which relied heavily upon God, abstract language, and ethos. In the end, both men were able to inspire their audiences and capture the approval and support of the masses. If not for these two highly influential and demanding men, the America that we know today might not exist.
Patrick Henry’s Anti-Federalist argument had a big purpose when it was wrote. It was Henry’s way of talking about his objections to the new Constitution. He listed varies objection to the constitution and stated reasoning behind his objections to make others see his point. Henry was a liberal activist. He wrote his document in first person. The audience for his stated was for the general public. The general public that this would have been in interest to was the government, anti-federalists, the state, and any adult in general.
The measures made to ensure the king does not have absolute power are not enough to prevent him from ultimately getting his way no matter what that may be. On page 27 Paine tells how the king made the declaration that there will be no law unless put in place by himself. This effort to make the colonists powerless as to how they are governed is tyranny. Paine’s also argues that this event shows how Britain believes America has become too powerful and is trying to slow its growth and development (27). Those who are in parliament so far away from the tragic events that take place in America who live in such a vastly different world are too ignorant to make judgements for America (23). Paine’s statement that in America “law is king,” demonstrates the author’s argument that law developed for the people should be what runs the country not a single man (30). This coincides with the way America was running well before the war ended and Britain decided to exert more power over the colonies. This is made even more evident when Thomas Paine states Britain cannot be relied on to defend them because Britain is the entity that had been trying to take away America’s power and the people rights. Furthermore,
The Constitution took away the power from the states, ignored the South, and didn't protect the people it represented. To Patrick Henry, these were big mistakes and couldn't put his support behind them. When the power is taken away from the states, it makes the federal government very strong. He knew that there had to be a strong central government, but felt that the Constitution went too far. Henry wanted to protect the South. After all, at that time the South was more than half the country. If the country at that time was compared to a human body, the South was the heart of the country.
“Give me liberty or give me death!” This statement from Patrick Henry’s “Speech to the Virginia Convention,” delivered to the House of Burgesses, has been quoted by many, becoming almost cliché. However, the declaration is truly understood by a select few. The unjust Stamp Act passed by the British crown in 1765, brought fame and notoriety to Henry as he spoke out against the unjust taxation without representation. Ten years later on the eve of revolution, Henry calls upon the Colonial government of which he is part, to act for the betterment of the people. Patrick Henry attempts to persuade the House of Burgesses to revolt and declare war against Britain by logically convincing them that it is their natural right to be free and calling on their patriotism and pride as leaders of colonial America.
In 1774, Jefferson wrote “A Summary View of the Rights of British America”, in which he claimed that the colonies were tied to the king only by voluntary bonds of loyalty. The “Summary View of the Rights of British America” was published without Jefferson’s permission. This document was presented as a political pamphlet. It was taking Jefferson’s career to a whole another level, way further than
The start of the American Revolution, described by Edmund Morgan as, “the shot heard around the world,” was the “Americans’ search for principles” (Bender 63). Although the world’s colonies did not necessarily seek independence much like the Americans, the world’s colonies were nonetheless tired of the “administrative tyranny” being carried out by their colonizers (Bender 75). The American Revolution set a new standard in the colonies, proclaiming that the “rights of Englishmen” should and must be the “rights of man,” which established a new set foundation for the universal rights of man (Bender 63). This revolution spread new ideas of democracy for the colonized world, reshaping people’s expectations on how they should be governed. Bender emphasizes America as challenging “the old, imperial social forms and cultural values” and embracing modern individualism” (Bender 74). Bender shapes the American Revolution as a turning point for national governments. The American Revolution commenced a new trend of pushing out the old and introducing new self-reliant systems of government for the former