Different Concept of Freedom in American History

This chapter discusses the different concepts of freedom in American history through three documents: the petition of committee made before Andrew Johnson, William Graham Sumner on social Darwinism, and the populist platform. While there are similarities in these documents regarding the concept of freedom, there are also differences and conflicts. The implementation of these concepts has been successful to a certain extent.

Running head: AMERICAN HISTORY
Different concept of freedom
Name of the student:
Name of the university:
Author note

1AMERICAN HISTORY
Similarity regarding the concept of freedom:
In this chapter, there are three documents such as the petition of committee made
before Andrew Johnson, William Graham Sumner on social Darwinism and the populist
platform. There are certain similarities observed in those documents regarding the concept of
freedom. All these documents are stating about the labour class and the labour movement. A
concept of economic inequality can be observed in these documents and according to these
documents; the lower classes have all the rights on the property. They have the rights to enjoy
their lives, to get education and to practice their own religion (Shockey 2016).
Difference regarding the concept of freedom:
There are certain differences present too in these documents. In Social Darwinism,
the law of the nature has been defined. According to this principle, evolution is a natural
process in the human society. On the other hand, in the petition of committee, the slaves have
tried to disclose their wills to the then President of America who had decided to return the
federal lands to the white Americans by ousted the labours from the lands. In this petition, the
slaves had not only asked for the rights over the land, but reveal their interest regarding the
freedom of worship, education and political stance. In the populist platform, the negative
character of the national policy has been prescribed (Seidman 2016). The financial and
monetary statement of the state policy has been made there.
Matter of conflict:
According to the social Darwinism, human society is the most important thing to
establish the principle of freedom and advancement is a basic concept in the human society.
However, this concept has been denied in the platform confined in the populist charter. The
platforms are focussed on the financial portion and of the view that the national wealth of the

2AMERICAN HISTORY
country should not be monopolized. On the other hand, the petition of committee has
emphasised the freedom to have property rights for the slaves or the lower community and
the conditions of the petition is based on the liberalisation of the state policies.
Implementation:
The petition of committee has been implemented in Plessy v Ferguson 163 U.S.
537 (1896) where the court was pleased to pass that all the citizens should be treated equally
irrespective of their colour. John Marshall Harlan had stated in this aspect that the
constitution of America is colour-blind.
Different way of implementation:
The concept of slavery should be abolished and all the citizens should have the
equal rights. If there is any separation made regarding the particular classes of people, the
base of the same should be concrete in nature and should maintain the principle of equality.
Were the plans successful?
The plans and platforms were successful to certain extent. The rights of the lower
classes of the society have been established and the financial inequality has been reduced.

3AMERICAN HISTORY
Reference:
2018. http://The Populist Platform (1892).
2018. http://William Graham Sumner on Social Darwinism (ca. 1880).
Hollis, Martin. Models of man: Philosophical thoughts on social action. Cambridge
University Press, 2015 pp 74-76.
Inside.Sfuhs.Org.http://inside.sfuhs.org/dept/history/US_History_reader/Chapter6/
FreementoJohnson1865.pdf.pp 65-67
Krämer, Benjamin. "Populist online practices: the function of the Internet in right-wing
populism." Information, Communication & Society 20, no. 9 (2017): 1293-1309.
Seidman, Steven. Contested knowledge: Social theory today. John Wiley & Sons, 2016 pp
84-88.
Shockey, Kyle. "Intellectual Freedom Is Not Social Justice." Progressive Librarian 44
(2016): 101-110.