Brown, etc.

The first half of the twentieth century of the United States was marked by segregation.  This was not just a matter of black and white.  In 1927, in Gong Lum v. Rice, a case decided that the definition of being colored is left to states, such that it can include, for example, immigrants from Asia.  In Mendez v. Westminster (1947), it was ruled a violation of due process (14th Amendment) to have segregated education such that minority populations were systematically denied opportunities.  Plessy, however, did not apply because there was no law requiring segregation in California.

Other attempts were made to overturn Plessy.  The role of civil disobedience is well known in this country.  The strategy of the NAACP, however, was to work within the system.  They filed legal briefs and made oral arguments before judges.  They had two main strategies: equalization and anti-segregation.  The goal of the first was to remove systemic inequalities such as salary disparities.  The second goal was to overturn segregation laws.

World War II played a large role in changing attitudes about civil rights.  There was a strong disgust against Nazi racism.  Also, many northerners were stationed in the South and experienced a new level of segregation, which seemed unjust to Northerners who experienced more freedom and equality in the North.  Also, black Southerners left the South and went to more open places, such as California and the North.  Also, many black Americans served in the Army.  The Cold War rhetoric used to demonize USSR made people feel hypocritical to see such injustices in a country claiming to be morally superior to other world powers.

An important part of the NAACP's rhetoric is to show that intangible factors such as reputation of the school are important for determining if a school is truly equal to another.  How does this translate into a case about K-12 education?

In 1954, the plaintiff's claim in the case Brown v. BoE is that the schools for African American schools are unequal and thus violate the 14th Amendment.  A key issue was the intention of the original amendment (285).  Ultimately, it was decided that the intention is unclear.  As such, the judicial branch is granted the power to treat the Constitution as a living, evolving document.  The judge (Earl Warren) considered the role of public education in the current time rather than its role in the previous century (286).  The current function of education was deemed to be necessary for basic civil duties and is the foundation of good citizenship.  As such, everyone should have equal access to quality education.  Warren also noted intangible factors relevant to K-12 education include being denied access to peers (287).  Simply being treated differently is an intangible factor that effects how one perceives oneself.  Separate, ultimately, was deemed to be unequal (287).

Brown was seen to overturn Plessy not based on legal reasons but based on the evidence about the reasonableness of segregation.  New evidence was brought to light in Brown that was not considered and/or available in Plessy (290-1).  This new evidence was the psychological damage of segregation.
There are many ways to interpret the law.  In the Plessy majority decision, the structure and form of the law was the focus.  In Harlan's dissent, he focused on intention of the law.  In Brown, the consequences of the law were more important in the decision (287).      

After Brown there was the task of integrating schools.  The court called for "all deliberate speed".  In 1957, the governor of Arkansas refused to integrate schools.  Eisenhower sent federal troops to enforce the legal decision.  We have progressed significantly since then.  There is no longer any de jure segregation or legal segregation.  There is, however de facto segregation, or segregation in practice.  Affirmative action is the requirement to take race into account in order to make sure that our workplaces and schools are representative of our larger demographics.

One case relevant to this is Regents of Univ. of Calif. v. Bakke (1978).  Bakke was a white student denied admission to UC medical school.  He claimed that underrepresented minorities were granted preferential treatment, thereby unfairly denying him opportunities.  The court was very divided on this issue.  5 justices said race can be taken into consideration as one factor to determine who is granted admission but there cannot be a quota to be filled.  4 justices claimed that admissions processes should be entirely color blind.  Proposition 209 in CA imposed such a standard.  
 

Washington, Du Bois and Plessy

In 1883, the Civil Rights Act was deemed unconstitutional on the grounds that the 14th Amendment only applies to actions by state agencies and not to actions of private individuals.

Booker T. Washington was a prominent African American in.  His famous book, Up From Slavery, was a testament to hard work and becoming a useful citizen by starting at the bottom and working your way to the top.  He glorified common labor and asked for economic rather than political opportunity.  His Atlanta Exposition Address of 1895 was addressed to white Americans but also to black Americans; the latter group was encouraged to do as he had and to work hard at menial labor in order to gain prosperity, be useful and become intelligent.  Washington argues that so long as blacks are central to the economic prosperity of the nation, they will become equal members of society in other ways.

Washington entreats white Americans to hire African Americans rather than immigrants.  He promises that they will be patient, faithful and devoted (122).  He promises white landowners a prosperous "New South" and that black people ask only for economic opportunity and not for social equality (124).  Just as a hand has separate fingers, whites and blacks can remain socially separate even though they act as one appendage.

W.E.B. Bu Bois represents an alternative voice within the African American community of the time.  His book, The Souls of Black Folk, was a call for spiritual opportunity in addition to economic opportunity.  One must be able to develop intellectually.  He uses the metaphor of a veil to describe what has been keeping black people from this opportunity (142).  The veil is a perceived boundary between blacks and whites.  This veil is what provides African Americans with a double consciousness (143).  Not only does a black man see himself through his own eyes, but he always also sees himself through the point of view of dominant white culture: lower, different, other.

Plessy v. Ferguson is an important case because it allowed for institutional segregation at the state level.  Plessy was 7/8ths European heritage and could pass as a white American.  The case, from 1896, rules that it is constitutional for a state to require segregated transit.  The majority opinion claims it does not conflict with the 13th Amendment because the 13th Amendment applies only to slavery, not segregation (43).  With regard to the 14th Amendment, the court ruled that such laws were reasonable regulations used in order to preserve peace and good order and that states must have wide discretion to meet these ends.  The majority opinion also claims that the plaintiff (Plessy) wrongly assumes that segregation implies inferiority (50).

Harlan's dissent, however, disagreed on many points.  He claims that the 13th Amendment does apply to segregation, as it is a direct result of institutionalized slavery (59).  He also claims that under the 14th Amendment, all citizens are exempt from racial segregation.  He also claims that the intention of the law is to discriminate against black citizens.  He also considers not just what is "reasonable" but constitutional.  According to our Constitution, people of all colors are equal (57).  He also denies that this law is for the public good (58).  He also warns not to believe the promise of separate but equal, as it is a thing disguise for racism (59).

Civil Rights in 19th Century United States

In 1619, slavery was introduced in Virginia.  It was not abolished until 1865.  Two years later, the Reconstruction after the Civil War began, which lasted ten years.  Reconstruction included trying to ensure that freed slaves were granted their rights.  This was met with strong opposition from anti-abolitionist movements and groups. Strong legal power of white supremacist groups in the South and the serious consequences of an economic depression made the efforts of Reconstruction inefficacious.

In order to better understand Plessy v. Ferguson, let's understand the recent legal history at the time.  The 15th Amendment (1870), for example, claimed that race cannot be the basis for denying someone the right to vote.  The 13th Amendment (1865) declares that slavery shall only exist as a punishment for a crime.  The 14th Amendment (1868) declares that all persons born or naturalized in the U.S. are citizens; that the privileges and immunities of whom cannot be violated by state laws; that citizens' life, liberty and property cannot be taken away without due process and that every person under this jurisdiction is granted equal protection under the law.

Let's talk about two different kinds of rights.  Political rights are rights that the government owes citizens, such as the right to vote.  Social Rights, as understood in the 17th century, were rights that individual citizens could claim over other citizens.  For example, a business owner has the right to deny business to anyone.  Yet a black person has the right to be served by private businesses.  In the Civil Rights Act of 1875 claimed that no public transit services could deny access based on race.

"The Freedman's Case in Equity" of 1885 is an essay that appeals to a sense of justice that transcends written law.  The essay points out that although freed slaves are free in name, they are denied constitutional rights (258) because of personal prejudices.  These prejudices are that blacks were considered to be alien (254) and menial laborers (255).  The essay then claims that we must not have two classes of citizens (258).  The author, Cable, claims that we must try to fight our "race instinct" (265) and that this is a national problem and not just a regional problem.

Contra Cable, Grady argues against Cable in "In Plain Black and White" (1885).  Grady agrees that we should find an equitable solution to civil rights issues.  As a rhetorical strategy, Grady establishes his own ethos by attacking Cable's ethos.  Grady claims that Cable himself is a Northerner (269) and that the problem is a Southern problem to be solved by Southerners.  Whereas Cable is sentimental, Grady is practical and logical and provides an astute summary of his opponent (269-270).  He thinks it is practical and logical to keep people divided along racial lines.  He claims that African Americans have been allowed legal protections (270, 276) by the federal government.  Grady also claims that it is not prejudice but instinct that drives biased notions about other races (271).  His equitable solution is that things should be "separate but equal" (271, 276, 278).  It is important to note, however, that Grady never calls black Americans "citizens" and he thinks that separate but equal means the domination of whites over blacks (280).

Frederick Douglass's "What to the Slave is the Fourth of July?"

Frederick Douglass's speech was delivered on July 5th, 1852 in New York.  It was a meeting of the Rochester Ladies' Antislavery Society of Rochester.  At this meeting, he read the original Declaration before his speech, which was well received.  In 1852, there were million of slaves in the United States. Although the import of slaves was banned in 1808, internal trade was active for decades.  For additional context, in 1850 the Fugitive Slave Act was passed.  Fines and punishments for hiding slaves were made more harsh, and not only escaped slaves but also freed blacks were vulnerable to being thrown back into slavery.  Another interesting detail is that in July of 1848, Douglass was at the Seneca Falls convention.  After the speech was delivered, it was published in pamphlet form, with hundreds of pamphlets distributed.  

Now let's consider different genres of speech.  Aristotle is known for defining these three categories of speech:  epideictic (ceremonial), forensic (legal) and deliberative (political).  Epideictic speeches are commemorative of an event or entity in order to confirm group values.  They are about the present.  Forensic speeches includes issues of past crimes and wrongs.  Deliberative speeches are future-oriented and concern policy changes.  Given these categories, ask which (or which combination) best fits Douglass's speech.   

Douglass's speech seems to overturn what people might expect from a speech on the 4th of July. One might expect a celebration of the nation's "birthday" or a personal narrative of his struggle. Instead, he refuses to give Americans as much credit as they might want for the revolution.  He also refuses to identify himself as an American.  He also refuses to argue for abolition, claiming that biting admonishment is more appropriate.  

The structure of the speech is as follows.   He starts with the introduction.  Then he describes the present situation before going into detail about slave trade in America.  He also talks about the church in terms of religious liberty and the responsibility of the church for slavery.  Then he talks about his hope for the future.

An important point of contrast is that whereas other authors and rhetoricians of the time focused in principles and abstract ideals, Douglass himself focuses on discussing people and their actions.  When talking about the development of the country and its future, he uses the metaphor of flowing water, but criticizes the current state as if we are a ship out at sea during a storm.  He switches over from a epideictic speech and the speech becomes more deliberative.  He boldly claims that slaves are men (humans), believing that formal argument for such a thing is unnecessary.  He criticizes religion as an empty practice if slavery is allowed, but ends on a hopeful note.  

Rhetoric in 19th Century Women's Suffrage Movement

Social movements aim for inclusion in a political process rather than a radical change in the nature of the political process.  They argue that principles of liberty should also apply to excluded members.  Social movements challenge the notion that there is a unified public sphere with a unified interest.  Members of social movements will point out that there are people who exist outside of the majority or most influential public sphere.  Although members want inclusion in a larger social sphere, they also value safe spaces to exchange ideas, make goals and prepare arguments.

We consider now the "Declaration of Sentiments", which imitates the genre of the American Declaration of Independence.  Perhaps we read it as a parody, which need not simply imply a criticism of the original text.  A parody can also   Dr. Jarratt notes that this text implies a critique of the original text but also preserves the serious tone and thus serves to legitimate the original text.  

"Sentiment" had a particular definition at the time.  It referred to a prevailing opinion.  The word is also associated with passion, conviction and action.  In the 18th century, this word was associated with having good taste.  Dr. Jarratt proposes that 19th century writers wanted to create a particular experience in the reader in order to motivate a social change.  Indeed, this seems to be the reason for appealing to the sentiments.

In the early days of the United States, women were excluded from the public sphere of life, including from most universities and colleges.  Only a few women did venture into the public sphere, such as Fanny Wright, who spoke out against slavery and advocated for education for women and slaves.  Such women were often the subject of ridicule.  Elizabeth Cady Stanton, the main author of the Declaration of Sentiments, was another woman who ventured into the public sphere.

What is the ethos of the Women's Suffrage Movement?  The women noted that they plunged into a large task without being quite prepared for it.  Long had they been familiar with establishing social bonds, but they were new to forging new political bonds.  They felt completely unable to manage such a task and so they turned to "masculine" texts such as the Declaration of Independence.  

In general, this is part of a trend of using the language of the Enlightenment, including appeal to natural law and the law of God.  In Resolution 1, they claim that it is a law of nature that all people can pursue happiness.  Resolution 3 is the claim that women and men are equal.  The structure is also comparable. Like the original Declaration, it starts with an introduction, continues on to principles and then introduces a list of injuries before listing what methods they intend to take to have their will met.

In terms of contrasting revolution and reform, the 1776 document wanted to dissolve bonds of government, whereas the 1848 document wanted to change the position of women within the given political system.  Instead of complaining about the tyranny of a king, the women complained about the tyranny of men.  They both wanted specific changes in laws, particular expansion of equality under the law.  Specifically, women complained about the "civil death" that a woman experiences when getting married.  This means that once married, a woman's public identity became subsumed by her role as a wife.

Dr. Jarratt notes that the ethos, or emotional character, for both documents is one of righteous indignation.  Both documents list wrongs that bind a group together in opposition to another group.  There is also a use of "we" throughout the text, which binds the writer to the audience.

One criticism of the Declaration of Sentiments would be that race and class considerations are entirely excluded.  

Declarations in Dialogue: Voices of Oppressed

Today we consider two cases of people who had been excluded from the new social orders that emerged out of the Enlightenment.  Women were considered excluded from the Enlightenment because of their reproductive role and also because they were thought to lack qualities such as rationality, discipline, strength of character and intelligence.  Other obstacles to full participation in free society included the fact that women were not allowed to own property under historical British law that influenced early colonies.

Abigail Adams' letters to her husband and friend include not only plain statements about the limited opportunities for women, but also uses humor and mockery to try to persuade her husband.  In the March 31 letter, Abigail says that "all Men would be tyrants", there is no law without representation (even for women!) and that the women will rebel if they do not get representation.  She uses the language of rights ironically, which makes us question to what extent her comments about rebellion might be mere joking.  In John's response on April 14, he mocks Abigail, saying that he "cannot but laugh" at her request and those of other "tribes".  He says that men will not abandon their "Masculine systems" in the name of the "Despotism of the petticoat".  Overall, he is dismissive of her claims and eventually in the May 26 letter he writes to his friend, he says that women cannot be allowed to be part of the system because then all other excluded groups (children, men without property, etc.) will need to be included.  There are three main reasons why he thinks women should not be included: first, women are delicate because of their sex and gender; second, women are bound by domestic obligations and third, including women means including all other excluded tribes.

Dr. Jarratt claims that Abigail Adams tried to use her letters to create a public sphere for political debate.  The letters do not have have a rational rhetoric such as those of empowered men at the time, and Dr. Jarratt notes that excluded groups often use alternative styles of persuasion when they are disempowered by traditional systems.

Our second case study is the Constitution of Haiti from 1801.  Remember that slavery had been outlawed in French colonies in 1794, and at this time all men were granted citizenship.  Of course, this was only after petitions for freedom had been denied and after a violent insurrection.  Dr. Jarratt reminds us that many famous Enlightenment thinkers thought that there were essential differences between Europeans and people with African ancestry.  This led to the attempt of white French citizens to reinstitute slavery in Haiti.

The Haitian constitution declares that humans are not supposed to be legally divided by color (Article 5) and also ensures that no person can be owned by another human being (Title V).  However, Toussaint L'Overture tries to make himself governor indefinitely, establishes Catholicism as the official religion and tries to make physical labor mandatory.  In 1801, Napoleon attempted to reintroduce slavery.  In 1803, L'Overture was imprisoned.  A year later, Dessalines led the Haitians to victory against the French.  In 1804 we get the Haitian Declaration if Independence from Dessalines.  This document is addressed to all people, including women and children.  Dr. Jarratt notes that this document marks the beginning of a new stage of maturity for the government.  Dessalines wanted this declaration to mark a time of growth.  Note also the contrast between this document and the American Declaration.  In Dessalines document, the French are named as tigers and vultures, unlike the Americans who wanted to express solidarity with British soldiers (focusing on King George as the villain).  Then a second constitution came about in 1805.  Haiti is declared as a "black" nation and whites are banned from owning property.