For centuries, people have discriminated against each other for small-minded reasons. Wendell Phillips used Toussaint Louverture as an example of how prejudices have little application to someone presents their character. Phillips uses many different strategies to praise Toussaint’s character.
Comparisons
Phillips compares Toussaint to Napoleon and Washington, who both fought and gained the praise of their countries. They were both despised by their enemies, but not to the extent where their lives were written about in the countries that they defeated. “All the materials for his biography are from the lips of his enemies…” (Phillips 1861) which proves how far powerful leadership can influence someone’s reputation. In contrast, Napoleon and Washington are remembered for patriotic and nationalistic purposes inside their countries.
Prejudice. Toussaint’s skills were disregarded in the eyes of many because, “men despised him as a negro” (Phillips 1861). Because of this prejudice, Phillips appears a, ”fanatic” because …show more content…
While many of the other war leaders Toussaint has been compared to have questionable character, “the Muse of History…will write in clear blue ink, above them all, Toussaint Louverture.” (Phillips 1861). The clear blue ink represents his notable loyalty and strong leadership, while being a transparent and truthful person that stands up to today’s criticisms. “This man risked his empire rather than permit the slave trade in the humblest villages of his dominions” (Phillips 1861) shows the difference between the principles of Toussaint, George Washington, and Napoleon. Washington is known as a founding father of a country based on freedom, also owned slaves, which is hypocritical. Napoleon was willing to conquer other countries and promoted slave trade in the name of his country. Toussaint, being a former slave, openly fought against the slave trade and defended his country from those who were trying to force them to participate in the slave
Comparisons
Phillips compares Toussaint to Napoleon and Washington, who both fought and gained the praise of their countries. They were both despised by their enemies, but not to the extent where their lives were written about in the countries that they defeated. “All the materials for his biography are from the lips of his enemies…” (Phillips 1861) which proves how far powerful leadership can influence someone’s reputation. In contrast, Napoleon and Washington are remembered for patriotic and nationalistic purposes inside their countries.
Prejudice. Toussaint’s skills were disregarded in the eyes of many because, “men despised him as a negro” (Phillips 1861). Because of this prejudice, Phillips appears a, ”fanatic” because …show more content…
While many of the other war leaders Toussaint has been compared to have questionable character, “the Muse of History…will write in clear blue ink, above them all, Toussaint Louverture.” (Phillips 1861). The clear blue ink represents his notable loyalty and strong leadership, while being a transparent and truthful person that stands up to today’s criticisms. “This man risked his empire rather than permit the slave trade in the humblest villages of his dominions” (Phillips 1861) shows the difference between the principles of Toussaint, George Washington, and Napoleon. Washington is known as a founding father of a country based on freedom, also owned slaves, which is hypocritical. Napoleon was willing to conquer other countries and promoted slave trade in the name of his country. Toussaint, being a former slave, openly fought against the slave trade and defended his country from those who were trying to force them to participate in the slave