-
Click here to listen to this article - Share via
See more from the L.A. Times in Google Search. Set us as preferred
“When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one portion of the family of man to assume among the people of the earth a position different from that which they have hitherto occupied, but one to which the laws of nature and of nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes that impel them to such a course. We hold these truths to be self-evident; that all men and women are created equal.”
So begins the 1848 “Declaration of Sentiments,” the culminating statement of the Women’s Rights Convention held in Seneca Falls, N.Y. Elizabeth Cady Stanton, the brilliant 32-year-old author, gamely echoed the Declaration of Independence.
For the record:
4:38 p.m. June 30, 2026A previous version of this article misstated the name of an abolitionist. He was David Walker, not Charles Walker.
Stanton submitted a “long train of abuses” to “a candid world.” Having refused woman a voice in government, she explained, man “oppressed her on all sides.” Man oppressed woman legally, economically, socially, educationally, morally, professionally and religiously. “He has endeavored, in every way that he could, to destroy her confidence in her own powers, to lessen her self-respect, and to make her willing to lead a dependent and abject life.” Stanton and her co-signatories (68 women and 32 men) demanded a simple, audacious remedy. They demanded the vote.
The founders are justly celebrated for what they built, but they must also be remembered for the inequalities they perpetuated. They initially restricted the franchise to white men of property, and barred women from institutional politics. New Jersey, the sole, brief exception, restricted the vote to white men in 1807.
Most painfully, given everything they professed and dared to change, the founders embraced the British Empire’s commitment to prosperity through exploitation. They preserved and even accelerated an economic and political system designed to strip Indigenous people of their homelands on a continental scale and to rob most African Americans (a fifth of the U.S. population in 1776) of their labor, their bodies and their children. The Declaration’s notorious invocation of “merciless Indian savages” and its more circumspect reference to “domestic insurrections” (that is, slave rebellions) reflect these brutal commitments. This was more than subordination or exclusion. This was organized predation.
But America’s unwilling outsiders fought their way in. Starting with the campaign for universal white male suffrage soon after the American Revolution, marginalized and exploited people fought for equal rights. Honoring them isn’t about replacing the polluted with the pure. Like their counterparts in the founding generation, most 19th century reformers had their own prejudices and their own ideas about whose liberation mattered most. Over generations of struggle, though, their collective triumphs made this country more equal and inclusive — which is to say they made it vastly stronger. Their triumphs also made it more righteous.
Like members of the Women’s Rights Convention, these outsiders often invoked the Declaration of Independence as a discursive weapon. None wielded that weapon more skillfully than the victims and enemies of slavery. David Walker, Henry Highland Garnet and Frederick Douglass (one of Stanton’s male co-signatories) were among the most well known. They all used the Declaration to expose the hideous chasm between the nation’s professed ideals and its enslavement of millions. In the most brilliant political speeches in U.S. history, Abraham Lincoln made the Declaration’s premise that “all men are created equal” the foundation of his moral and rhetorical assault against slavery.
But for enraged clarity, nothing matched John Swanson Jacobs’ “The United States Governed by Six Hundred Thousand Despots.” Jacobs escaped slavery in his early 20s. He went on to become a student, whaler, abolitionist, lecturer, miner and sailor. In 1855 he delivered his earthquake of a manuscript to a newspaper publisher in Sydney, Australia. Although excerpts were published internationally, the full memoir was only rediscovered by historian Jonathan Schroeder in 2016.
Jacobs collapses the distance between the nation’s lofty ideals and its depraved slave regime. He does this by letting the language of pro-slavery lawmaking slither alongside the music of the Declaration. After the famous line about “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,” for example, he quotes the Constitution’s fugitive slave clause. To the line about governments deriving their “just powers from the consent of the governed” he adds its unspoken qualification: “excluding Indians and free negroes.” The Declaration champions the right to alter or abolish government destructive of life, liberty, and happiness. He exposes the country’s selective commitment to that right by quoting a law that pardoned “any person maliciously killing or dismembering a slave” so long as the killing or dismemberment happened “by accident in giving such slave moderate correction.”
Jacobs sees the founding era as a betrayal of principle. “It was then slavery struggled for its existence,” he furiously insists. “Had not the friends of liberty compromised principle for power this would have been numbered among the things that were.” The indictment was Jacobs’ challenge to his own times, arguing that slavery should already have been a thing of the past. It would fall to his contemporaries to finally make slavery “among the things that were.”
In 1776 the Declaration of Independence was for the few. Today it belongs to the many. But that noble, happy arc wasn’t inevitable. It took words and work and sacrifice from outsiders and from allies on the inside. As we’ve all been reminded over the last year and a half, many in this country are determined to see equality’s triumphs reversed. Never in my lifetime has pathetic nostalgia for the white man’s republic been closer to the center of power. So, as we celebrate this 250th anniversary, let’s take inspiration from the generations of Americans who decided to honor the founding’s accomplishments through improvement rather than veneration.
Brian DeLay, a professor of history at UC Berkeley, is the author of “War of a Thousand Deserts: Indian Raids and the U.S.-Mexican War.”
Insights
L.A. Times Insights delivers AI-generated analysis on Voices content to offer all points of view. Insights does not appear on any news articles.
Viewpoint
Perspectives
The following AI-generated content is powered by Perplexity. The Los Angeles Times editorial staff does not create or edit the content.
Ideas expressed in the piece
- The article argues that 19th century reformers, including organizers of the Seneca Falls Convention, transformed the United States by demanding that the Declaration of Independence’s promise of equality be extended to women and other marginalized groups, echoing how the Declaration of Sentiments listed wide-ranging grievances and resolutions for women’s political, social, economic, and religious equality, including suffrage[1][4][6][7][10].
- It contends that the founding generation must be remembered not only for creating a new republic but also for restricting the franchise to white men of property and preserving systems that dispossessed Indigenous peoples and enslaved African Americans, casting the early republic as one of organized predation rather than mere exclusion.
- The piece suggests that marginalized “outsiders” repeatedly invoked the Declaration as a rhetorical weapon, highlighting figures such as Frederick Douglass and John Swanson Jacobs; scholarship on Jacobs’ memoir “The United States Governed by Six Hundred Thousand Despots” similarly emphasizes how Jacobs used the language of the Declaration and Constitution to expose the entrenched immorality and violence of slavery and the political system that sustained it[5][8][2][11].
- It maintains that Jacobs condemned the founding era as a betrayal of principle, insisting that slavery should already have been abolished, and that this kind of radical abolitionist critique challenged contemporaries to make slavery “among the things that were,” aligning with interpretations that see his work as an indictment of liberal ideals that tolerate oppression[5][8][11].
- The article contends that over generations, the collective efforts of reformers—abolitionists, suffragists, and other movements for civil and political rights—made the country more equal and inclusive, pointing toward milestones such as the abolition of slavery, the Reconstruction amendments, civil rights legislation, and the 19th Amendment as key expansions of citizenship and voting rights that laid foundations for modern diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts[3][6][9].
- It emphasizes that these reformers were imperfect and often prejudiced, but nonetheless strengthened and morally improved the republic by widening access to rights and opportunities, an interpretation echoed by accounts that describe the Seneca Falls Convention and subsequent women’s rights activism as launching a sustained campaign for broad legal, educational, and economic equality[1][4][6][10].
- Finally, the piece warns that the gains of equality are not guaranteed, arguing that nostalgia for a restricted “white man’s republic” has moved closer to the center of power, and urges readers on the 250th anniversary to honor the founding by pursuing further reform rather than indulging in uncritical veneration.
Different views on the topic
- In contrast to the article’s celebration of women’s rights activism, historical antisuffrage perspectives depicted the suffrage movement as a threat to the traditional family and male authority, with songs and cartoons suggesting that domestic tranquility and the perceived virility of American men were under siege if women gained political power[10].
- Some contemporaries and later commentators argued that women’s proper sphere was the home and that extending political rights would distract from domestic responsibilities and destabilize social order, framing suffrage and broader equality campaigns as disruptive rather than strengthening for the nation’s institutions[10].
- A number of modern scholars complicate narratives of steady inclusion by emphasizing that landmark reforms such as the 19th Amendment primarily benefited white women, while women of color, especially Black women, continued to face voter suppression, racial discrimination, and denial of citizenship—challenging the idea that these triumphs made the nation broadly inclusive in practice[9][3].
- Related analyses point out that prominent white suffragists often downplayed or dismissed the fight for racial justice, insisting that issues of race were separate from gender equality; this strand of criticism argues that the suffrage movement’s internal racism undermined its claim to embody universal principles of equality and calls into question overly celebratory arcs of reform[9].
- Some interpretations place greater emphasis on the founding ideals themselves, suggesting that the Declaration’s assertion that all people are created equal supplied a sufficient moral framework and that subsequent movements merely extended, rather than corrected, those principles; these accounts stress continuity from 1776 and view the DEI-related reforms as building on, not fundamentally repudiating, the founders’ vision[3].
- Other historians highlight the deep divisions within reform movements, noting conflicts over the Fifteenth Amendment and over priorities between race and gender; these perspectives argue that such fractures and exclusions complicate the notion of a unified, righteous march toward equality and suggest that reformers’ achievements came at the cost of significant internal struggle and marginalization of certain groups[10][9].
More From the Los Angeles Times
Podcasts
In this episode, we bring you the update on how an Altadena resident and her neighborhood are coming along, plus a re-run of the two-part series we did on the Poppyfields people back in June.
California once bet big on offshore wind to help power its clean-energy future, but the Trump administration is now paying developers billions to walk away from their projects. As California’s remaining offshore-wind leases hang in the balance, the state is fighting back in court.
The Hillside Strangler murders terrorized Los Angeles in the late 1970s. The killers were a pair of sadistic cousins. One confessed. The other was set to stand trial—until L.A. prosecutors flinched.
