Showing posts with label historical speech. Show all posts
Showing posts with label historical speech. Show all posts

Sunday, March 8, 2026

Susan B. Anthony's Famous Speech about the Right to Vote

Susan B. Anthony
In 1870, Susan B. Anthony said that women were people, too, just like men, and she accordingly voted in an election. The legal system called this a crime and had her arrested. 

Anthony then gave a speech to argue that the United States Constitution combined with simple logic to require that women had equal voting rights. Cleverly citing conservatives’ favorite arguments against them, she laid out a convincing, value-laden case for women’s right to vote. She used the nation’s deepest traditions to support her point. She insisted that the United States should live up to its noble values. Using the same legalistic strategy that Abraham Lincoln had mastered, she defined her argument in traditional terms.

Abraham Lincoln and the Definition of “Liberty:” A Lesson for Our Time

To start that process, Anthony quoted the entire preamble to the United States Constitution:
“We, the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”
Then, Anthony reminded her audience that the Constitution did not give rights only to males, but to people:
“It was we, the people; not we, the white male citizens; nor yet we, the male citizens; but we, the whole people, who formed the Union.” [italics added]
Continuing her constitutional argument, Anthony claimed that preventing women from voting (since women are defined as people!) violated the Constitution on multiple grounds:
“For any state to make sex a qualification that must ever result in the disfranchisement of one entire half of the people, is to pass a bill of attainder, or, an ex post facto law, and is therefore a violation of the supreme law of the land. By it the blessings of liberty are forever withheld from women and their female posterity.”
Here, Anthony assumed that her audience was aware that the United States Constitution specifically outlawed the bill of attainder and ex post facto laws.

Pursuing definitions further, Anthony noted that conservatives like to call our system of government a republic, not a democracy. Turning the tables against that position, Anthony argued that those who restricted women’s right to vote wanted neither a democracy nor a republic. Indeed, she denied that those people supported any part of our system of government:
“To them this government has no just powers derived from the consent of the governed. To them this government is not a democracy. It is not a republic. It is an odious aristocracy; a hateful oligarchy of sex.”
Then, reducing her opponents’ argument to absurdity, Anthony insisted that to deny the right of vote required her opponents to deny that women are persons. Surely, she noted, not even they would sink that low:
“The only question left to be settled now is: Are women persons? And I hardly believe any of our opponents will have the hardihood to say they are not. Being persons, then, women are citizens; and no state has a right to make any law, or to enforce any old law, that shall abridge their privileges or immunities.”
In this short, brilliant speech, Susan B. Anthony insisted that the United States should live up to the noble values that its founding documents stated but often ignored. Using the same legalistic strategy that Abraham Lincoln had mastered, Anthony defined her argument in traditional terms. Perhaps the most powerful persuasive technique of all is to accept your opponents’ own arguments, and then show that they actually support your side, not theirs.

Fannie Lou Hamer's Voting Rights Speech, "Sick and Tired of Being Sick and Tired"

As the United States of America celebrates Women’s History Month in March 2026, let us pause to remember, not only women’s many accomplishments, but also the endless struggle for the equality of all women and all persons. As politicians today try to adopt the so-called SAVE Act, which tries to improve voting security but imposes greater paperwork requirements on married women’s voting rights than on men’s, let us remember that the only thing separating us from freedom is a moment of tyranny.

by William D. Harpine
______________

Research Note:

First, the appeal tradition is not necessarily a fallacy; it depends on the tradition. Some traditions are good and some are bad. Although some things that used to be good have grown obsolete, other old things remain the best. Anthony’s argument was that the people who oppose women’s voting pretended to be traditional when they had, in fact, rejected United States of America’s traditional values. It is a powerful argument.

Second, the debate strategy of reductio ad absurdum uses the simple tactic of taking a seemingly reasonable argument to its logical conclusion. This classic technique can prove that things that only seem to be reasonable are in fact faulty. Anthony applied that strategy to perfection.

For more about fallacies, there is still no better source than the work of philosopher Howard Kahane, Logic and Contemporary Rhetoric, which I often used as a textbook in my debate classes.

To understand the power of arguments from definition, one must study the great conservative rhetorical theorist Richard Weaver, especially his groundbreaking work, The Ethics of Rhetoric.



Copyright © 2026 by William D. Harpine

Image of Susan B. Anthony, public domain, via Wikimedia Commons


Saturday, June 14, 2025

Abraham Lincoln Raised the Flag: A Speech of Principle. A Speech for the Ages

Lincoln at Independence Hall
Liberty and justice for all
. Those stirring words conclude the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. Today, on Flag Day, June 14, 2025, some Americans celebrated by watching President Donald Trump’s massive military parade in Washington, DC, while others participated in thousands of No King demonstrations that protested Trump’s executive orders and aggressive anti-immigrant policies. Still, Abraham Lincoln, speaking off the cuff, gave the greatest of all speeches about the American Flag. He called the nation to unite on our founding principle: the principle of liberty. He spoke at Independence Hall in Philadelphia as the new flag, with a new star for just-admitted Kansas, made its formal first appearance. 

Let us, then, look into history, not to current events. to understand our conflicts and our hopes. In his speech about the American Flag, Lincoln urged the nation toward unity in the face of impending disaster. Can we learn his wise lesson? Or are we doomed to repeat bitter history? For, while facing an oncoming struggle, Lincoln resorted, not to the nuts and bolts of picayune policy discourse, but instead to the higher principle of liberty. In Lincoln’s speech, a higher principle bound the United States. That principle created the nation, and, Lincoln hoped, that principle would hold the nation together.
Liberty Bell, Independence Hall

Conflict, indeed, is nothing new. When Lincoln, who had just been elected president but not yet inaugurated, helped raise the United States Flag on February 22, 1861, he urged unity in the face of division. 

As the United States faces conflict and hostility today between opposing factions, we stand in a hard tradition. For, less than two months after the speech, the South Carolina militia attacked Fort Sumter in Charleston Harbor, and the Civil War began. Before the war ended, more Americans would die than in World War I, World War II, Korea, Vietnam, and Desert Storm added together.

In his speech, Lincoln stood, not on factions, but on historical principle:
“I have never had a feeling politically that did not spring from the sentiments embodied in the Declaration of Independence.”
Indeed, reflecting on the United States’ long endurance as a united republic, Lincoln looked, not to the clutches of circumstance, but to a great moral principle: the principle of liberty:
“I have often inquired of myself, what great principle or idea it was that kept this Confederacy so long together. It was not the mere matter of the separation of the Colonies from the motherland; but that sentiment in the Declaration of Independence which gave liberty, not alone to the people of this country, but, I hope, to the world, for all future time.”
Liberty. Lincoln did not speak for the liberty of the fortunate, but for the liberty of all. Lincoln talked about how American liberty promised freedom and justice for everyone, for eternity. Noble words. Have we forgotten them?

“It was that which gave promise,” Lincoln asserted, that, in the passage of time, lift a great “weight,” not just from Americans, but also “from the shoulders of all.”

Lincoln again stressed the great principle of liberty. He emphasized that the Declaration of Independence, United States of America’s founding document, rested on principle, and that principle gave Lincoln hope:
“This is a sentiment embodied in the Declaration of Independence. Now, my friends, can this country be saved upon that basis? If it can, I will consider myself one of the happiest men in the world, if I can help to save it. If it cannot be saved upon that principle, it will be truly awful.”

Lincoln’s First Inaugural Address: “The Better Angels of Our Nature”

One Searing Phrase: Abraham Lincoln’s “House Divided” Speech

Yes, history does show that the consequences turned out to be awful – beyond awful. All the same, Lincoln made that principle – the principle of liberty – his guiding light above all political decisions:

“But if this country cannot be saved without giving up that principle, I was about to say I would rather be assassinated on this spot than surrender it.”

Consider the questions that Lincoln did not ask. Points of economic and political disagreement? How to improve the economy? Lincoln didn’t ask those questions. He asked no questions about political patrons, nor did he say an evil word against his opponents. His simple question was whether we could unite on the great principle of liberty. In fact, his greater question was whether all people throughout time could enjoy liberty. 

Do similar issues face us today? In Lincoln’s time, the southern states considered liberty to be a God-given right of White men, while Black men and women could be held in forced labor and cruel chattel bondage. Today, we are debating about the freedom and liberty of those who wish to immigrate to the land of the free, making their homes here. In 1861, southern leaders felt that freedom for slaves was just as absurd as a plan to make the moon stop rotating around the earth. In 2025, the very concept of freedom for immigrants strikes horror into the hearts of Trump and his supporters. So, have we really changed? Have we changed enough?

Lincoln was not our greatest president because he won a war or because he preserved the union. No, he was our greatest president because he reminded us, with wisdom and eloquence that no other leader could match, that the United States is a nation of principle. Let us never forget. Our guiding principle is neither liberalism nor conservativism, neither tradition or progress. No! That great principle, liberty, created our nation, and only liberty can preserve us.

 Liberty for everyone, liberty for all time. American liberty as a shining example to spread across the earth. A great principle. A great, idealistic, and stunningly ambitious theme. A theme so idealistic that we can hardly grasp it.

Abraham Lincoln was our greatest president. Let us never forget, however, that Abraham Lincoln was, by far, also our most contentious and divisive president. His election prompted a great civil war which, by the time it ended, had cost almost every family in the land a husband, brother, son, or dear one. Only by massive bloodshed was the horrifying injustice of slavery ended. Only after terrible bloodshed could the former slaves enjoy even any hope that they, too, might receive liberty and its blessings.  

In this great speech, Lincoln taught the only lesson we will ever need for Flag Day: Liberty and justice for all. 

by William D. Harpine

__________

Research Note: The great conservative rhetorical theorist Richard Weaver wrote brilliantly about Lincoln’s commitment to principle and enduring truths. In that sense, Weaver insists, Lincoln was a true conservative. Lincoln was a true conservative because, instead of dwelling on immediate circumstances, Lincoln always looked to the higher values. In this speech, Lincoln drew his values from the tradition of the Declaration of Independence. Weaver’s most important book, The Ethics of Rhetoric, should be required reading for anyone who wants to understand the powers of speech.


Copyright © by William D. Harpine


Image: Photo by Frederick De Bourg Richards, public domain, Library of Congress, via Wikimedia

Photo of Liberty Bell by William Harpine, copyright @ by William D. Harpine

Friday, September 17, 2021

Benjamin Franklin’s Speech about Our Fallible Constitution

Benjamin Franklin
As the United States celebrates Constitution Day today, September 17, 2021, let us remember that Benjamin Franklin, who represented Pennsylvania at the Constitutional Convention, gave the most influential speech of his long career in Independence Hall in Philadelphia. The date was September 17, 1787.  Franklin asked the delegates to be humble, to recognize their own fallibility, and to compromise for the public good. We need that lesson today. 

Noting the many controversies about the proposed Constitution, Franklin urged the Convention to adopt it and send it to the states for ratification. Franklin was too old and weak to speak in person. He instead gave the draft to his colleague James Wilson, who read it to the delegates. "I consent, Sir, to this Constitution because I expect no better," he said, "and because I am not sure, that it is not the best. The opinions I have had of its errors, I sacrifice to the public good."

So, here’s an important contrast, and a lesson to learn: many people today think that the Founders of our Republic were demigods of unearthly wisdom. Nevertheless, in reality, the Founders themselves were divided and uncertain about what they had done. We can learn from their humility.

Today, we too often think of the Constitution as a sacred document. We think of it as an unchangeable
Independence Hall

pact of immutable wisdom. At the time, however, its adoption caused much controversy. Franklin did not begin his speech by praising the Constitution to the skies. Instead, he noted its many weaknesses and urged its critics to recognize that they might sometimes be wrong. Franklin did not think that the Constitution was divinely inspired. Instead, he advised the political leaders, gathered together to form a new government, to exercise modesty and humility.

Franklin began by acknowledging that there were parts of the Constitution that he disliked. He defended it all the same. His defense was not that everything was good, but simply that he recognized his own fallibility:

"I confess that there are several parts of this constitution which I do not at present approve, but I am not sure I shall never approve them: For having lived long, I have experienced many instances of being obliged by better information, or fuller consideration, to change opinions even on important subjects, which I once thought right, but found to be otherwise. It is therefore that the older I grow, the more apt I am to doubt my own judgment, and to pay more respect to the judgment of others."

Franklin then warned the delegates not to think of the Constitution in religious terms, or to think that the delegates were infallible as churches often claim to be. He gave that argument a nice humorous twist:

"Most men indeed as well as most sects in Religion, think themselves in possession of all truth, and that wherever others differ from them it is so far error. Steele a Protestant in a Dedication tells the Pope, that the only difference between our Churches in their opinions of the certainty of their doctrines is, the Church of Rome is infallible and the Church of England is never in the wrong."

Concluding his brief speech, Franklin did not give an impassioned plea that the proposed Constitution was perfect. He knew, and specifically acknowledged, that it was not. Instead, he urged the delegates to realize that the proposed document was the best that they were likely to produce and compromise on. Instead of telling them that the Constitution had no weaknesses, he asked them to adopt it despite its weaknesses:

"On the whole, Sir, I can not help expressing a wish that every member of the Convention who may still have objections to it, would with me, on this occasion doubt a little of his own infallibility, and to make manifest our unanimity, put his name to this instrument."

A healthy dose of humility, is, indeed, sorely missing in today’s political discourse. People assert their political views with absolute conviction. The more absurd their views become, the more obstinate people become about them. We live in a world where people are as happy to believe in Kellyanne Conway’s “alternative facts” as they are in anything true. Franklin’s modesty and wisdom can teach us much.

Franklin recognized, as we all should, that anyone can be wrong. Let us, therefore, not worship Benjamin Franklin as a demigod. Let us instead recognize him as a fallible human being who did the best he felt that he could. We should think the same about the best of us in the United States today. The fact that someone lived a long time ago does not make that person perfect. Nor should we think of the United States Constitution as a religious dogma. Franklin warned us about that. The Constitution has served us for centuries; that does not mean that it is perfect. The people who wrote it did not think it was perfect. Why should we believe otherwise? So, let us learn to be humble, recognize our own fallibility, and compromise for the public good.


Historical Note: What were the delegates' biggest concerns about the Constitution? Some of the northern delegates felt that it was unacceptable that the Constitution allowed slavery. Many of the delegates felt that the Constitution did not list and guarantee enough individual rights. That latter fault was largely rectified by the adoption of the Bill of Rights, which were the first 10 amendments to the Constitution. There were many other disagreements, as well.



Image of Benjamin Franklin:  Joseph Duplessis - metmuseum.org, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=12154958

Image of Independence Hall: copyright William Harpine