Showing posts with label United Nations Speech. Show all posts
Showing posts with label United Nations Speech. Show all posts

Monday, August 4, 2025

Eleanor Roosevelt's Speech about the Struggle for Freedom

Eleanor Roosevelt
Eleanor Roosevelt
“We must not be confused about what freedom is.”
So said Anna Eleanor Roosevelt, widow of the United States of America’s 32nd president, one of the 20th century’s most prominent American orators, and a famed advocate of human rights. In her powerful speech of September 28, 1948, at the Sorbonne, Roosevelt pointed out how important it was never to twist important concepts like “freedom.” 

In the great battle between conservatives and liberals – the battle between the powerful haves and the impatient have-nots – between those who want to lag behind and those who wish to advance–Eleanor Roosevelt saw with searing insight–“We must not be confused about what freedom is” – that the great battle lies between competing ideas. And ideas come down to definitions: in this case, what is freedom? Who gets to be free? All of us, or only a few?

Roosevelt realized that freedom is one of our most powerful concepts. Like the visionary she was, Roosevelt saw how that word masters our political thinking. Roosevelt showed that our definitions prescribe our actions. She learned that we must never twist the word “freedom” against itself. In her view, freedom meant freedom for all, including the millions of people who suffered without basic human rights. In 1948, when much of the world still lay in ruins, she offered hope to a world that was losing hope. That is why, in this speech, she explained and defended the simple point that freedom meant freedom for everyone, not just the rich and powerful. She knew that this would mean constant struggle. That is why she worked toward a post-World War II world that would respect everyone’s rights. For example, she said:
“But we would not consider in the United States that we had gained any freedom if we were compelled to follow a dictatorial assignment to work where and when we were told. The right of choice would seem to us an important, fundamental freedom.”
That notion of “fundamental freedom” led Roosevelt to state her key value, that rights are not a gift of the government, but belong to the people:
“Certain rights can never be granted to the government, but must be kept in the hands of the people.”
Although born into fabulous wealth herself, Roosevelt reached out, not to her fellow oligarchs, but to the world’s people who struggled to be free. That is why Roosevelt spoke for universal freedom. She thus gave an expansive explanation of what freedom means:
“Basic human rights are simple and easily understood: freedom of speech and a free press; freedom of religion and worship; freedom of assembly and the right of petition; the right of men to be secure in their homes and free from unreasonable search and seizure and from arbitrary arrest and punishment.”
Roosevelt spoke in a time of crisis. In 1948, Europe and eastern Asia still largely lay in ruins, and only the most far-sighted people could look toward a visionary future. As she spoke to a war-ruined world, tens of millions of families struggled with grief and horror. The Holocaust had shaken the world’s value system.

Yet, sadly, Roosevelt’s warnings resonate to the present day. Even here in the prosperous United States, the false libertarians of 2025, inspired by Ayn Rand, protect the liberty of those who already have much against the imaginary predations of those who have nothing. We should all know that such ideologies underlaid World War II and have, indeed, long plagued humanity. Roosevelt, in contrast, warned that, as the world recovered from disaster, we must move forward to protect everyone: 
“We must not be deluded by the efforts of the forces of reaction to prostitute the great words of our free tradition and thereby to confuse the struggle.”
Prostitute the great words”–Roosevelt continued to warn the world against false definitions. The linguistic perversions against which she warned were nothing new. In Mein Kampf, Hitler, the recently deceased embodiment of evil, had called himself a “freedom loving man.” The Confederate States of America used words of liberty: indeed, confederate President Jefferson Davis spoke of “liberty”—the liberty of the southern states—oblivious to the irony that he sought the liberty to force other people into slave labor. That’s a question of definition. 

Thus, wary of the past, and concerned for the future, Roosevelt next insisted that “freedom” has a real meaning, and that meaning should, to echo her own word, never be prostituted:
“Democracy, freedom, human rights have come to have a definite meaning to the people of the world which we must not allow any nation to so change that they are made synonymous with suppression and dictatorship.”
In 1948, the world still trembled in the uneasy peace that followed the Second World War. In that calamity, the Western nations defeated the horrors of Nazi anti-Semitism and brutality, not to mention the militaristic oppression of the Japanese Empire. The forces of freedom won. Nevertheless, Roosevelt surely worried about the growing communist hegemony and domestic cruelty in Russia and China. Perhaps that is why she next warned that oppressed people will never rest until they are free:
“People who continue to be denied the respect to which they are entitled as human beings will not acquiesce forever in such denial.”
Today, in 2025, Roosevelt’s warning should still echo through our hearts. American conservatives rejoice that they are gaining freedom from immigrants. Yet the immigrants’ freedom means nothing to them. That is a matter of definition: who gets to be free? Freedom from what? Does freedom mean that the United States is free to shut off opportunities for non-white people? Or does freedom mean that we  should be free from masked secret police who smash into people’s cars? Does freedom mean that powerful oligarchs should be free to defraud working people? Internationally, does freedom mean that Russia should be free to bomb Ukraine? That Israel should be free to blow up international aid sites in Gaza ?

People who falsely shout about freedom continue to stand up against other people’s freedom. Recently, Republican leaders loudly called for lawful protestors to be arrested if they oppose the administration’s policies. Florida’s conservative (and very popular) governor, Ron DeSantis, forbids Florida universities from teaching Critical Race Theory, which is a pro-civil rights inquiry.
Children studying the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
Children studying the Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Such abuses call for protection. As Roosevelt spoke, the United Nations had just adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, whose creation Roosevelt sponsored. That Declaration states:
“Recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world.” [italics added]
Freedom is what rhetorical theorists Kenneth Burke and Richard Weaver called a “god term.” After all, “freedom” stirs our most powerful emotions. Who would dare to challenge freedom? Unless, however, freedom applies to everyone, including the least favored people, it is merely an illusion. Freedom to oppress is no freedom at all–by definition! 

Eleanor Roosevelt’s powerful speech to the United Nations praised freedom, but she warned that we must define it accurately – that we must define it fairly – that we must recognize everyone’s freedom, not just the freedom of those who wield power. That we must not yearn for a past when freedom was only an illusion. That we should not return to the abyss from which the world had just escaped, and to which it could easily return.

Eleanor Roosevelt gave a speech for the ages. I hope that we, who live in the next age, are still listening.

by William D. Harpine

__________________

Research Notes: Richard Weaver explains “god terms” in his indispensable book, The Ethics of Rhetoric. That book serves, not only as an important contribution to rhetorical theory, but also as a defining document of the intellectual conservative movement. Everyone should read it. One of Weaver’s other points was that, when we define terms, we express eternal concepts and principles. Roosevelt’s speech at the Sorbonne embodied that same great principle. In A Grammar of Motives, the essential book of modern-day rhetorical theory, Kenneth Burke describes god terms that embody universal and compelling power.

The late Professor Ruth Lewis of the University of Akron once chided me for not spending more time teaching about Eleanor Roosevelt’s speeches. Sorry, Ruth, I’m a bit late to the game, but I hope you’re reading this from above. Rest in peace, kind mentor and wise colleague. 

This blog’s readers might want to look at The American Ideology: Reflections of the Revolution in American Rhetoric, a prize-winning monograph by my University of Illinois professor Kurt Ritter. He analyzes the themes of liberty and freedom that resonate throughout United States history. It’s out of print but I found an online pdf.

Special thanks, once again, to Stephen Lucas and my classmate, the late Martin Medhurst, for creating the monumental speech bank, AmericanRhetoric.com, which published the speech transcript on which I relied today.

Looking at these notes, many good people helped me along the way. Thanks to these and many others.

Copyright ©2025 by William D. Harpine

Image of Eleanor Roosevelt: Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

Image of children studying the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, public domain, UN General Assembly, via Wikimedia Commons


Wednesday, September 22, 2021

President Joe Biden Told the United Nations the World Has a Choice

Biden Speaking at the UN
Yesterday, September 21, 2021, President Joe Biden gave a carefully-scripted speech to the United Nations General Assembly. He said that “our collective future will hinge on our ability to recognize our common humanity and to act together.” He did not just list policies or make promises; more than that, he urged the world to think about doing the right things. To work together, to do the right things, Biden assisted, was a choice: “this is the clear and urgent choice,” he said.

Biden reaffirmed the United States’ dedication to diplomacy, the nation’s recommitment to the Paris climate accords, and contributions to the fight against COVID-19. All of that is fine. In large part, he wanted to assure the anxious delegates that the United States was moving past the chaos of the Trump administration and rejoining the international community. I don’t know whether anyone was convinced. After all, the United States’ ongoing political turmoil is obvious to the entire world. Biden’s speech had a theme: and that theme was choice. Will we make the right choices? 

Indeed, Biden pulled his points into the theme of choice:
“I know this: As we look ahead, we will lead. We will lead on all the greatest challenges of our time — from COVID to climate, peace and security, human dignity and human rights. But we will not go it alone.

“We will lead together with our Allies and partners and in cooperation with all those who believe, as we do, that this is within our power to meet these challenges, to build a future that lifts all of our people and preserves this planet.

“But none of this is inevitable; it’s a choice. And I can tell you where America stands: We will choose to build a better future. We — you and I –- we have the will and capacity to make it better.”
Biden’s point was that – we all have a choice. “It is within our power,” he said, and “none of this is inevitable.” The news pundits and politicians all seem to be missing that theme. Biden promised that the United States would lead the world in making the right choices. 

Making positive decisions is a choice. At the same time, however, political turmoil is also a choice. We can choose to deal with climate change, or we can choose to ignore it. We can choose to deal with the coronavirus, or we, along with former President Donald Trump, can pretend that it is a hoax. We can choose to work together as an international community, or we can choose conflict and disaster. World history shows us that there is no guarantee that humanity will make the right choices. At the same time, however, history shows us that we can do the right things if we so desire. That is why he insisted "it is within our power." 

There will always be people who fear failure so deeply that they refuse to succeed. No one can stop change, but we can learn to control change instead of fearing it. We can recognize that humanity is stronger when we work together than when we degenerate into partisan conflict.

Even in the United States, however, it is not certain that Biden can fulfill his relatively modest agenda. Even as I write this, the Republican Party’s representatives in Congress are threatening to default on debt payments. Tens of millions of Americans, apparently still thinking that the coronavirus is no big deal, refuse to take vaccines or to follow even the most minimal public health precautions. Those are also choices. Inaction is a choice. Refusal to admit basic facts is a choice. It is a choice if, like former Trump advisor Kellyanne Conway, we choose to believe in “alternative facts” instead of truth.

Biden’s speech was sober and thoughtful. There were no John Kennedy-like flights of eloquence. His purpose seemingly was not to inspire, but to encourage us all to think about our futures. Yes, he tactfully refuted the Trump philosophy. But to reject what is bad is not enough. We must also move forward to what is good.

So, yes, the world faces choices. United States faces choices. Will we make the right choices? Or will we succumb to bitterness and fatalism? At least President Biden made the effort. Will enough voters, factions, and nations join him? Time will tell.

_________________

Further Reading: Joe Biden's Juneteenth Speech Used Values to Support Policies

_________________