Part 1.

1. In “Resistance to Civil Government”, Thoreau protests against slavery. He notes that the government, “never of itself furthered any enterprise, but by the alacrity with which it got out of its way… The character inherent in the American people has done all that has been accomplished” (830). He protests against slavery in that is is unjust and unfair. He says, “I cannot for an instant recognize that political organization as my government which is the slave’s government also,” as a way to emphasize that he refuses to be controlled by a government that also governs slaves (832). He refuses to bend to the will of the government while it so unfairly holds slaves and allows slavery to exist in its states. In one form of protest, he simply refuses to pay taxes. This had landed him in jail for one night, but he states that “I could not help being struck with the foolishness of that institution which treated me as if I were mere flesh and blood and bones, to be locked up,” as a way of saying that the government cannot lock up his mind nor his spirit, and therefore he will be free no matter where his body is (839). He does not support the government through taxes, nor does he through his writing. He uses his platform as an author and scholar to denounce the government, as he is so clearly doing in “Civil Disobedience,” the alternate name for this text. He says, “No man with a genius for legislature has appeared in America… Our legislators have not yet learned the comparative value of free-trade and of freedom, of union, and of rectitude, to a nation” (845). He denounces the American government and shows that he does not care for it. Anyone who reads his work will see what he is doing and be inspired.
2. Douglass uses double voiced discourse in a self-referential way. He refers back to himself as an author, a sort of meta authorship. He says, of Colonel Lloyd’s plantation and sleeping quarters, that his feet “have been so cracked with the frost, that the pen with which I am writing might be laid in the gashes” (977). Double-voiced discourse is used to remind the reader of Douglass being his own person. He is writing his narrative, no one else. This goes along with the first person narration- all of this serves to promote Douglass’s humanity and his exceptional nature as a black man who was enslaved and then escaped. Douglass also uses this when he speaks about learning to read and write. He says, “In learning to read, I owe almost as much to the bitter opposition of my master, as to the kindly aid of my mistress. I acknowledge both” (981). By breaking tense, and by moving to the present just for a brief moment, wherein he acknowledges the benefits that both his master and his mistress gave him in terms of determination to learn, he is using double voiced discourse.

Part 2.

1. The history of mankind is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations on the part of man toward woman, having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over her. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world.

This passage is written by Elizabeth Cady Stanton in her Declaration of Sentiments as an opening to her statements on the inequality of men and women in the world. This is the opening statement to her argument, and it almost sounds like she is presenting a case in a court of law. This makes sense, as she worked in her father’s law office as an assistant. She lays out her case cleanly and succinctly, and hardly brings in an emotional argument until the very end. This truly shows that she is letting the “facts be submitted to a candid world” (1116). Stanton is clear with her words and allows no mistake to be made. Her case is persuasive and goes line by line, with just one argument at a time, until we reach the end and she brings in her closing words to drive the sentiments home with an emotional closing. There is no extra language, there is no frills or bells and whistles to make her seem more intelligent than she already is. When she states, “The history of mankind is a history of repeated injuries and usurpation on the part of man toward woman,” she does not allow for any other argument to be made (1116). There is no ‘not all men’ argument made, there is no allowance for wiggle room. It is a solid fact, and she continues her declaration in this same detached, factual manner. This makes for a powerful argument, as leaves her unassailable in terms of a hysterical woman argument. Stanton is cold and factual, and refuses to give those who would seek to discredit her any leverage that may harm her argument. Stanton is clearly a powerful woman with a powerful voice and an extraordinary ability to write and explain her arguments.