The change of America for the better was the work of many courageous Americans that stood up and acted for their country no matter the risk. In 1842, on July 4th, a brave African American was given a chance to speak and give a speech called the “The Hypocrisy of American Slavery, July 4th, 1842” and he said what no one else could and was brave enough to say and changed the way how many saw America. Later on, in 1876 an everyday woman by the name of Susan B. Anthony gave her speech called, “ Women’s right to suffrage”, had also changed the lives of many women in America giving them the right to vote. Both of these people were fighting for the right of their kind, but who had a bigger impact on the way they changed America? Although, both arguments …show more content…
Anthony’s speech was well thought through and it gave off a positive connotation. She argued not as an odd one out but as a fellow citizen. Susan B. Anthony’s claim was that women’s right to vote was not a crime, but she was just exercising her rights as a citizen. She also stated that “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.” here she also used undeniable facts to prove her point. The union isn’t made by only men or only white, it was made by all the people of America. Another point that she made that stood out was, “Webster, Worcester, and Bouvier all define a citizen to be a person in the United States, entitled to vote and hold office. The only question left to be settled now is: Are women persons?” The rhetorical question used here was a strong statement. It is the question that opens people up to realize that the answer is yes but the government has been ignoring the fact that it’s true. Also, she used an outside source such as dictionary brands to say that many people have also claimed that women are people, so it’s not just her that believes this, yet people have not been listening to the truth and have been living a big gray lie. Susan B. Anthony made many great points that made her speech strong, and powerful, but her use of emotional appeal really made her points stand like, “the supreme law of the land. By it the blessings of liberty are forever withheld from women and their female posterity. 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;” She claims that to the government women are nothing and that women were blessed to within women, but it meant nothing. This point made it emotional how women are still people and just as good as men but yet they have no place in