The Alien and Sedition Acts
1. What is the author arguing?
These readings don’t really seem like arguments, but more along the lines of a statement of authorization, since these laws were put into effect.
Alien Act:
The author is saying that the president has the authority to apprehend, restrain, secure, or deport resident aliens if their home countries are at war with the United States. At that time, war was considered likely between the U.S. and France.
Sedition Act:
The author is saying that it is a crime to write, print, utter, or publish any false, scandalous, or malicious writings against the U.S. government/officials with intent to defame them. If tried against a court, the person who committed this crime would be fined up to 2000 dollars or sent to jail for up to 2 years. It was preplanned for this act to expire on March 3, 1801.
2. How does the author appeal to logos (logic), pathos (emotional quality), and ethos (the writer’s perceived character) with their argument?
Logos:
Everything the author wrote seems to be solid and backed with sufficient force to support this law. In the Sedition act, the author writes “And the jury who shall try the cause, shall have a right to determine the law and the fact, under the direction of the court, as in other cases.”. This seems very fair to me, because under this law the person guilty of the crime has equal opportunity to defend him/herself. Nothing he writes seems out of place or exaggerated which makes me think his reasoning is very logical and sound.
Pathos:
I don’t really feel much emotional quality in these Acts. They just sound very official and government oriented to me. But if I were to find any emotional quality, it would be a cautious demeanor, especially from the Alien Act. The law states that in the case of war, alien residents from the opposing country can be deported or apprehended based on the judgment of the president. They don’t want to take any chances that enemy aliens could harm their country and that the government wouldn’t become weakened by seditious material.
Ethos:
Again, I don’t really see a much personal style in this writing. If I were to guess what the person who wrote this was like.. I’d guess qualities like formal, follows the rules, supports the president. But these are written with opinions from many decision making officials, not just the one person who put it in words.
3. What is the historical significance/relevance of this document?
The historical significance of these documents is that the alien and sedition acts were used as political ammunition in elections against the federalists. Also, the alien act is what justified sending the Japanese to internment camps later in world war II. Oh and the alien Act is still intact today. Another addition to the pool of laws and rights, and another responsibility of the president.
4. Do you find the author’s argument convincing? Why or why not?
Personally, I think that the sedition act was appropriate at the time, but for modern times it doesn’t fit. Now its all about free speech and expressing your opinions, so our society runs off the opposite of the sedition act now. I think the alien act is kind of over the top, but I think that being a U.S. citizen should mean something, and that if we were at war with another country, it makes sense to want to deport people native to that country, (unless they are naturalized citizens). But I don’t think internment camps should ever exist again. Since relationships between countries is a lot more open now (at least compared to when the acts were written), its not as necessary to worry about people from other countries now, because our technology is better and we can investigate issues more thoroughly. But then again, you never know what could happen. I guess not going to war would solve all our issues :). We wouldn’t even have to worry about this kind of stuff… hahahaha…
These readings don’t really seem like arguments, but more along the lines of a statement of authorization, since these laws were put into effect.
Alien Act:
The author is saying that the president has the authority to apprehend, restrain, secure, or deport resident aliens if their home countries are at war with the United States. At that time, war was considered likely between the U.S. and France.
Sedition Act:
The author is saying that it is a crime to write, print, utter, or publish any false, scandalous, or malicious writings against the U.S. government/officials with intent to defame them. If tried against a court, the person who committed this crime would be fined up to 2000 dollars or sent to jail for up to 2 years. It was preplanned for this act to expire on March 3, 1801.
2. How does the author appeal to logos (logic), pathos (emotional quality), and ethos (the writer’s perceived character) with their argument?
Logos:
Everything the author wrote seems to be solid and backed with sufficient force to support this law. In the Sedition act, the author writes “And the jury who shall try the cause, shall have a right to determine the law and the fact, under the direction of the court, as in other cases.”. This seems very fair to me, because under this law the person guilty of the crime has equal opportunity to defend him/herself. Nothing he writes seems out of place or exaggerated which makes me think his reasoning is very logical and sound.
Pathos:
I don’t really feel much emotional quality in these Acts. They just sound very official and government oriented to me. But if I were to find any emotional quality, it would be a cautious demeanor, especially from the Alien Act. The law states that in the case of war, alien residents from the opposing country can be deported or apprehended based on the judgment of the president. They don’t want to take any chances that enemy aliens could harm their country and that the government wouldn’t become weakened by seditious material.
Ethos:
Again, I don’t really see a much personal style in this writing. If I were to guess what the person who wrote this was like.. I’d guess qualities like formal, follows the rules, supports the president. But these are written with opinions from many decision making officials, not just the one person who put it in words.
3. What is the historical significance/relevance of this document?
The historical significance of these documents is that the alien and sedition acts were used as political ammunition in elections against the federalists. Also, the alien act is what justified sending the Japanese to internment camps later in world war II. Oh and the alien Act is still intact today. Another addition to the pool of laws and rights, and another responsibility of the president.
4. Do you find the author’s argument convincing? Why or why not?
Personally, I think that the sedition act was appropriate at the time, but for modern times it doesn’t fit. Now its all about free speech and expressing your opinions, so our society runs off the opposite of the sedition act now. I think the alien act is kind of over the top, but I think that being a U.S. citizen should mean something, and that if we were at war with another country, it makes sense to want to deport people native to that country, (unless they are naturalized citizens). But I don’t think internment camps should ever exist again. Since relationships between countries is a lot more open now (at least compared to when the acts were written), its not as necessary to worry about people from other countries now, because our technology is better and we can investigate issues more thoroughly. But then again, you never know what could happen. I guess not going to war would solve all our issues :). We wouldn’t even have to worry about this kind of stuff… hahahaha…
posted by Julie at
10:35:00 PM
8 Comments:
I personally think that the two acts were appropriate for the time they were written but now seem very extreme. They did not have the control the government has now, the people felt that they still had the choice to do what the government said or to just do what they wanted because they did not have the enforcement of the law that we do now. The legal system had just begun and they did not have police officers to apprehend those who disobeyed the law, or multiple levels of the justice system. These laws were so specific and extreme that it's no wonder most people greatly opposed them, the laws discouraged french from moving to the states because if the two contries were to go to war they would almost all of them would be alienated and deported especially since they increased the amount of time you must have lived in the states to be a citizen. The Sedition act just seems so closed minded compared to the freedom of speech we have now like you said. I love that that is my right and I think I use it to its full extent whenever I feel like it and everyone should. The laws are as you said written very formally and do not show much emotion they just tell it how it is, if you do this then these are the consiquences you will face.
I think the passage of the alien and sedition acts was a good move back then. I agree with the both of you when you say it would be extreme nowadays. Our country in this day and age has definitely become one where people have a lot of free speech. You think about politics and the media and how much the media can bash on people it's almost like that law is completely invisible, or like you said opposite. I was actually surprised to read about the sedition acts. Personally I think the press becomes too much of distraction now but it has to do its job because that's more money for the economy. Also, I think the internment camps were horrible. Those just make me think of how the US believes in equality but they had those internment camps and I just don't think that was very fair at all.
I totally agree with you. These acts were appropriate back then than now considering there were lot's of disagreements with different countries. I do feel that it makes sense to send the people who came from a country the U.S were in war with unless they were born in the U.S then it would not be right to send them back. I do feel that this act was very logical and to the point. I agree that this document does not have any emotion either. I also agree that this document was convincing. I believe that it would be fair that if the U.S were to go to war with a different country for example France, then it would make sense to deport anyone who would look suspicious or anyone who comes from France.
Obviously, I agree with you all that there isn’t really an element of pathos to this reading. However, in regards to the alien act I don’t think that we could quickly say that it isn’t used today, I mean look at the Patriot act of today. Even though it doesn’t necessarily cover deportation it almost as severe, there have been many people falsely accused or looked into based on race or ethnicity alone, another example of this would be airport security. Even though security is necessary and screenings could be helpful they are too unfair. This too me seem much like the alien act, so I wouldn’t say that we have grown as a nation completely out of the reach of an act like this or one similar.
I do agree with you all in regards to the second act, the free speech of our country is great and it definitely is a good thing that we have grown to accept all forms of people or opinions. I believe without the free speech we have today we wouldn’t have grown as much or so far from acts like the alien act. An understanding and diverse community affects us all and defiantly politically as well.
I think that you did a great job reviewing this information, and it was interesting reading everyone’s responses. Great job!
Great Job on your Text Analysis. I agree with the texts alien and seduction acts. Back in the day people disagreed about many different things. If a country was at war with a “resident alien’s country”, and if the president feels that the alien is a threat then he can order the authorities to apprehend, restrain, secure, or deport the alien. Apprehending, restraining, securing, or deporting the alien gave the security that the alien won’t go against United States. The seduction act was right at that time because the people needed to gain confidence in the government by hearing everything good about the government. This act restricted writing, printing, uttering, or publishing false things about the government. This act wouldn’t fit modern days because freedom of speech is widely practiced and people can express their own opinions without being punished. I agree with you about the authors appeals about these texts. They didn’t show emotions at all. It’s sad that the alien and seduction act was used during the World War II and that the innocent Japanese had to live in very poor conditions. I think that the acts should be easier on the people. I liked your text analysis I think that this was the best out of all of them today.
I think that firstly this particular document was a difficult one to do TA for, so you did a nice job of breaking it down and clearly explaining how you interpreted the two government Acts. Your response to the second question brings up the valid points that it is difficult to pinpoint emotional quality or personal voice in the Acts, but I think you explain the reason for this in pointing out that it is not a document which can be read as coming from a single voice. The thing that I especially liked about your TA was your response to the last question, on whether you found the argument convincing. Obviously, you had to answer the question more along the lines of whether or not you agree with the enstatement of the Acts, and the purposes behind the Acts, but you do an effective job of providing your opinion on this. I too agree that it is important to remember that times are much different now, and the mentality that was behind the Alien and Sedition Acts when they were first written does not exist in the same way today. The Alien Act was definitely created out of fear and the need to protect our nation in wartime. I think that this fear still exists in some ways, but we are able to have more open lines of communication and, as you mentioned, use technology as a protective means. Overall, great TA, you really got me thinking :)
After reading your Text Analysis I would have to say that these laws were alright to make back then because they didn’t know who was a spy or not, better to let them live than kill them. Also, I would say that the government felt more secure with deporting and restraining the alien if the president felt he/she were a threat to the people. I also think that the seduction act was a good law because many people were in a lot of trouble with the government and they needed to hear some good about the government. In the modern days I don’t think that these laws would work well because if you start deporting and restraining aliens it would only cause hate and hate leads to violence and war. The seduction act would also be a fail because many people know that the government isn’t all that nice and they know that the government is hiding information from us and if they start saying good stuff about the government then people will start losing hope in their own people.
Interesting analysis. The acts do seem outdated and not useful in modern times. Think about all the countries the US has been at war with in the last 80 years. The alien act would make any immigrant or person of ancestry from an opposing nation very vulnerable and discriminated against. As for the Japanese, the alien act was twisted to serve the needs of the fear of the US government because the US actually interned not only aliens, but its own US citizens. Most of those interned were born and raised here. They happen to be of Japanese ancestry. The US govt played off of fear, propaganda and prejudice in interning masses of its own citizens in deserted barren arid land. Now think of the same thing happening to others in this country who are descendents of those the US has gone to war against.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home