I agree that how John brown cast his whole vote In Harper's ferry. John Brown was certainly considered insane, a murderer, conspirer etc. But today he was a face of a revolution, a martyr for a bigger cause, or even a nice kidnapper. In my opinion, he cast his whole vote a little differently than he should of, but he did not personally kill anyone. I would not consider this civil disobedience because they were shooting at people and holding them at gunpoint.
John Brown Hero or Villain The story of John Brown happened many years ago, yet it still puzzles historians today. John Brown was an anti-slave abolitionist who was put to death after pleading guilty of murder, but is he considered a hero or a villain? John Brown is a villain for three simple reason, he murdered many different people, he attacked a federal arsenal, and he could be considered a terrorist. The first reason John Brown is a villain is because he murdered many different people.
John Brown was a good man. He fought for what he believed in and he had good intentions. Brown did the things he did to help free slaves. John Brown was not a terrorist. He was a freedom fighter.
James Beckwourth played a major role in the early setllers. His life was made into a biography. Beckwourth was considered a slave legally. Beckwourths father had to go to court 3 times to keep him because he was considered a slave. His family obviously loved him.
John Brown was very important in some ways. He tried to free slaves from Southern states but, he did it wrongfully. John Brown was a very mean and violent man. Yes, he was trying to free slaves but he was doing it the wrong way.
He was arrogant, and he thought he was invincible as long as the north supported him. John Brown should have been considered a terrorist, because he (in cold blood) murdered 5 people in a field, he led a revolt, and he armed
Brown specifically objected that the people who joined him in the raid were not close friends or even acquaintances. Mr. Brown did not know the team members well and had no knowledge of their intentions, he condemned their actions. A second reason why John Brown is not misguided nor a fanatic is the positive message he sent to slaves. His master plan for the raid was to have the slaves follow in his footsteps, as stated
John Brown was a man with a strong hatred for slavery who tried to lead a rebellion against it. After this he was called a “misguided fanatic” by Abraham Lincoln. Which leaves the question, was John Brown a “misguided fanatic”? I think John Brown was a misguided fanatic, or according to dictionary.com a, mistaken person with an extreme, uncritical enthusiasm, because he was so set in his rebellion that his mind couldn’t be changed even when told his plan wouldn’t go well, and although he was told his actions would be fatal he went on to do so . In The Life and Times of Frederick Douglass, Douglass states that there was no changing Brown
Nick Baxter What caused the Civil War? DBQ The Civil War was caused by three main reasons are economic differences, interpretation of Constitution, and moral beliefs. The North and the South were very different economically.
Brown had a familial history of using violence to achieve freedom and giving aid to oppressed people. Brown was named after his grandfather who was a captain in the Revolutionary War. He grew up a Calvinist, and his father instilled a strong sense of God fearing faith in him. Brown would later teach that same faith to his children. When Brown was twelve years of age, he caught sight of a slave boy, no older than himself, being beaten.
John Brown is seen by some as a hero and by some as a villain. Some believe is to be hanged for treason, while others believe he shouldn’t. I don’t believe he is a hero or a villain. He fought for what he thought was right and in killing men he wasn’t doing much wrong as the Civil War killed thousands of men. He killed men without the real need to, though, and tried to start a revolt in an area that hardly had any slaves at all.
“John Brown began the war that ended American slavery and made this a free Republic. His zeal for the cause of my race was far greater than mine. I could live for the slave, but he could die for him,” Frederick Douglass said. John Brown was an abolitionist; someone who wanted to ban slavery in the US. He had the right idea and was successful, although he was a bit violent.
Looking at what he has fought for, it’s no doubt that he fought for a noble cause which is the freedom of slavery. John Brown shouldn’t be known as hero or terrorists because of want he has done applies to both sides. John Brown shouldn’t be known as a terrorist or a national hero because of his violent attack and raids. After, September 11, 2001 John Brown has been called a terrorist which has caused controversy about Brown’s legacy and reputation. Furthermore, in the article, The 9/11 of 1859 says, “He led 21 men all but two in their 20s, and many of them radicalized by guerilla fighting in Bleeding Kansas, the abolitionists’ Afghanistan”(Horowitz).
Well, the only main reasons I think people would argue the fact that he was a terrorist, I explained above. John Brown never wanted people to fear him. All he wanted was to create equality, and without his attack on Pottawatomie Creek and Harpers Ferry, there may have been equality between races, for all we know. At least it would not have occurred as fast. Speaking in that matter, why should we think of John Brown as a terrorist?
Through his writings, Brown tells us he had no doubt in his intentions being for the better, choosing to ignore these lives lost as they didn’t serve to further his cause. Scott John Hammond tell us about John Brown’s calculated nature by comparing him to Machiavellian philosophies, a philosophy associated with the use of power in often ruthless means, “Given the fact that all founders and reformers will inevitably encounter resistance from those enemies … Machiavelli notes that a lawgiver … must go forth armed and prepared for struggle” and “A founder is consonant with the idea of virtue, or grandeur of soul - a character of extraordinary proportions, defined in terms of “ingenuity, skill, and excellence.”
