John Brown was an abolitionist, someone who was extremely against slavery, in Kansas who from 1856 to 1859 was deeply involved in the proslavery vs. antislavery causes, which was the start of the civil war. John Brown was also most definitely a terrorist and not of the hero type. He followed all the actions that today would have earned him the title of terrorist. “Becoming involved in dubious dealings, including horse stealing, he moved on to attack Lawrence” (Bailey, 7). Killing innocent people, leading a raid on a federal arsenal, and stealing from the men he killed all imply terrorist. First off, John Brown killed innocent people, “You can’t say you done it to free slaves. We had none and never expected to own one” (Doyle, 5) Five men …show more content…
Now, he may not have committed any of the actual murders but “he was the undisputed leader and made the decisions as to who should be spared” (Backer, 3). Even though he was doing this for a good cause, the federal arsenal was not inclined one way or the other as to the slavery vote and did not have a reason to be attacked. Now some may argue that he was a hero because he died for his cause, “grandly gives himself and all he has to a righteous cause” (Douglass, 9), but that is not necessarily a heroic action. Do we call the suicide bombers on 9/11 heroes? No, we don’t. Just because someone dies for what they believe does not mean that they are a hero. Not by a long shot. Dying for something does not immediately make it a good cause. In conclusion, although he was fighting for a worthy cause, John Brown was a terrorist. His actions were those that these days would be associated with terrorist and not with hero. Heroes help people; they do not destroy lives and bring fear to people. From 1856 to 1859 the name John Brown was largely associated with fear. And that is what a terrorist does; they bring fear but disguise it under a worthy cause. John Brown was nothing but a mentally ill
This would create a productive discussion between readers, not the sporadic, vague, non-committal suggestions the author currently included. McPherson only begins to touch upon an idea for an argument in the last two pages, where he looks into the suggestion of whether or not John Brown was a terrorist or not. However, he leaves this answer up in the air with the statement that what one person believes counts as terrorism, another believes is an act of heroism – yet another open-ended thought with no assertions as to what a firm answer may be. For me, this was the only part in which I was truly made to think deeper into the impact of an individual’s actions as a symbol beyond the Civil War. It was only after that I was able to look back and dig through the essay to find the vague assertion of the broader impact that was woven through the narratives of these individuals’ lives. I understand that these topics are incredibly subjective and sensitive, but that is why, more than any other reason, that McPherson should be writing towards a clear answer in this hotly debated topic as opposed to subtle
Brown had his mind made up to travel on the pathway to Harpers Ferry right when he was born and believed he is the only one that has to lead this battle. His parents were passionate Calvinists who taught their children to view life as an endless fight contrary to evil. The battle of John Brown was on a more personal level where he remembered a memory when he was five years old and his mother whipped him for stealing a vast amount of brass pins. In addition, the battle was somewhat on a political point as well because Brown and his family considered that the sincere had to be spectators against the bad people in America. They assumed that the biggest evil during their time has to be none other than the establishment of slavery. Therefore, the father of John Brown replaced their family residence in northeast Ohio into a stop on the Underground Railroad and made his son into a dedicated abolitionist. Brown’s developing participation in the movement in the 1830s and ’40s made him set his commitment as well as the rising nationwide fight over slavery’s position in a country supposedly devoted to equal opportunity. During this era, abolition...
This gives the readers a form of trust in the author, his sources seem dependable and improves Horwitz understanding of the subject he’s talking about. One of the sources he uses is a poem by Langston Hughes, a poem that addressed black Americans and John Brown’s raid. Hughes describes John Brown as a hero when he states, “Took twenty-one companions, white and black, went to shoot your way to freedom…”(Horwitz,2011,p.937). This primary sources is used to identify the type of person John Brown is viewed as. There are authors who speak differently of John Brown and this is proven in the following two monographs. The novel “Fire from the Midst of You: A Religious Life of John Brown” by Louis A. DeCaro reveals Brown’s roots in Puritan abolitionism and theorizes that Brown’s reasoning for the raid was because of his religious preferences. The second novel is Patriotic Treason: John Brown and the Soul of America by Evan Carton. Here, in this monograph the author makes it very clear that John Brown fought for slaves because he truly cared for one to have equal rights. The previous historiographies differ in believing why John Brown proceeded in fighting for the slaves. However, they do share a similarity in explaining Brown’s early life and all three authors do favor John Brown’s
There is a great significance of John Parker story/memoir in telling us of enslavement in antebellum U.S. John Parker was a African American abolitionist that was also a inventor , and iron molder. He was very active when it came to helping African descendent slaves escape from the slave states. He was an industrialist that helped hundreds of slave escape to the Underground Railroad resistant bases in Ripley Ohio. He help rescued slave for fifteen years and was one the first African American patent as an inventor.
John Brown secured the support of six prominent abolitionists, known as the "Secret Six," and assembled an invasion force. During this time he also gathered funds to help support his people. His group or “army” grew to include 22 men, included five black men and three of Brown's sons. The group rented a property in Maryland which was ...
“I act from a principle,” and “I say, break the law” are not only the names of two out of the five parts in this book, but the words by which John Brown lived so passionately everyday. At earlier times in his life he lived by his sword as well. The Sword and the Word illustrates John Brown’s own ideas and intentions and how he lived by them. A main issue of this book is that truly a man of his word who believed that morals should outweigh the law of the land, John Brown lived and died for the abolition of slavery and did as much if not more for that cause than many other slaves or free men.
In the years of my life, I’ve been known by multiple other names, Nelson Hawkins, Isaac Smith, Old Osawatomie Brown, Old Man Brown, Captain Brown, but largely by my own. I am John Brown. You can call me a “radical abolitionist”, for my dedication to ending slavery. Others call me persistent. I have never been one to quit, I’ve reached as far as possible to make my goals happen. My most famous words were my last; “I, JOhn Brown, am now quite certain that the crimes of this guilty land, will never be purged away, but with blood. I had now as I think; vainly flattered myself that without very much bloodshed; it might be done.” It means that our country, America, has seen sin and won’t ever fully recover on its own, but with war, the wrongs of slavery will soon fade. We will see peace as a country, but it may take sacrifice.
John Brown was a white abolitionist who wanted to start an armed slave revolt in 1859 by taking over a US arsenal at Harpers Ferry. He wanted to recruit black slaves, freed slaves and fugitive slaves for the raid against the south. There were many people who told him he was a dead man or that he couldn't do it but John Brown thought he could, therefore moved onto the next person for recruiting. There was an anonymous letter sent by David J. Gue of Springdale, Iowa, his brother and someone else trying to warn the government about the raid John Brown was planning to Secretary of War John B Floyd but they didn't believe them. This caused President Buchanan to send out a reward for John Browns capture but not the right one. When the time came to begin the raid John Brown left four people behind to act as a rear guard at the K...
After his time in Kansas John Brown started his journey east and was heralded as a hero by some abolitionists. He took this opportunity the next two years to raise money and gather weapons which he said were for the struggle in Kansas. Some doubted his story which was not completely true. He had decided years before that the only way to bring an end to slavery was if he could have the slaves fight for themselves. He was well versed in the slave revolts in the south as well as the maroon wars in Jamacia. His plan that he had been working on for almost twenty years was to attack slave
Also known as the Second Great Awakening, the Abolitionist Movement swept through the colonies in the early 1830’s. This was a movement to abolish slavery and to give blacks their freedom as citizens. Many men and women, free and enslaved, fought for this cause and many were imprisoned or even killed for speaking out. If it were not for these brave people, slavery would still exist today. The Abolitionist Movement paved the way in eradicating slavery by pursuing moral and political avenues, providing the foundation for the Underground Railroad, and creating a voice for African Americans.
He opened the eyes of all the Americans and showed them the country’s desperate need for war. According to Douglass, the raid rose unexpected awareness and it was not easy for the situation to be conceived as more abundant in all elements of horror and destruction. The amount of fear and distress that the raid caused helped many historians acknowledge that it was truly a, “pivotal event that pushed the nation closer to a civil war (Douglass).” Karen Whitman agrees with this statement and believes that there is ample proof that Brown was not a madman, but actually was very courageous comparing to other anti-slavery men and women of his generation
In his last speech he says, “I never did intend murder, or treason, or the destruction of property, or to excite or incite slaves to rebellion, or to make insurrection. Now if it is deemed necessary that I should forfeit my life for the furtherance of the ends of justice … I submit; so let it be done.” This is a reliable source because these are John Brown’s words in a speech he wrote while on trial in Virginia. Brown wasn’t trying to cause a rebellion, or mass casualties, he just wanted to make African Americans free. He felt he was acting as “an instrument in the hands of Providence” according to a New York Herald account of the interrogation of Brown. As a northern abolitionist, he felt that he was doing what was morally right and didn’t think twice about ending his life for
Throughout history, events are sparked by something, which causes emotions to rise and tensions to come to a breaking point. The Boston Massacre was no exception; America was feeling the pressure of the British and was ready to break away from the rule. However, this separation between these two parties would not come without bloodshed on both sides. The British did not feel the American had the right to separate them from under British rule, but the Americans were tired of their taxes and rules being placed upon them and wanted to succeed from their political tyrants. The Boston Massacre would be the vocal point in what would be recognized, as the Revolutionary War in American history and the first place lives would be lost for the cost of liberty. Even though the lives were lost that day, eight British soldiers were mendaciously accused of murder when it was clearly self-defense. People who are placed in a situation where their lives are threatened have the right to defend themselves. History does not have the right to accuse any one event those history may have considered the enemy guilty when they are fighting for their lives.
He knew eventually he would die, either a hero or a traitor in people’s minds. But he also knew he would “die in faith” because he believed his actions were “God’s will”. He did not feel “degraded by my imprisonment, my chains, or prospect of the Gallows”, quoted in a letter to his friend Reverend H. l. Vaill. He even finished the letter cheerfully stating, “I send, through you, my best wishes to Mrs. W I and her son George, and to all dear friends.” John Brown knew that something had to be done about slavery in the South. I believe that if Brown wouldn’t have made such bold, strong actions, slavery may still be here
You also don’t have to kill anyone, conquer foreign land, or risk your life to be a hero. Anyone who influences anyone else by saving or helping save his or her lives is a hero. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. changed the lives of millions of people by bringing justice to minorities. Mahatma Gandhi, one of the greatest heroes, led a nonviolent revolution to free his country.