EMMELINE PANKHURST AND HER SPEECH IN CONNECTICUT Summary A range of persuasive techniques: the language of revolution historical allusions. She explains why many British women had become self-proclaimed militant activists in a "civil war" for suffrage. She urges her American audience to avoid a similar conflict in their own country. "I Am Here as a Soldier" Pankhurst introduces herself to her audience by defining herself not as an advocate for women's suffrage but as a soldier on leave from battle. (is intended to provoke her audience: revolution and civil war will resonate with Americans, whose nation was founded after a war for independence from Great Britain) Moreover, at the time of her speech, the country was only 50 years removed from the divisiveness of the American Civil War (1861–65)) Yet because she agitates for her rights, she is considered dangerous and is currently under sentence. Referring to recent political uprisings in Russia (1905) and China (1911–12), Pankhurst acknowledges that her audience expects revolutionaries to be male. She argues that women have had to adopt revolutionary tactics in order to win their basic human rights. To support her point, Pankhurst poses a rhetorical question. She asks, what if the men of Hartford had a grievance the government ignored? Her answer is that they would vote out the government. But what if the men of Hartford did not have the power to vote? Pankhurst predicts two outcomes: the men would either submit, or they would rise up just as their ancestors did during the American Revolution. The Path to Militancy Pankhurst provides some context for the rise of the self-proclaimed militant suffragists (who were also commonly referred to as suffragettes). She explains how British women have been roughly treated for merely inquiring about their rights. While no man has ever been punished for questioning an elected official, many suffragists were ejected from public meetings and jailed, despite having broken no laws. Pankhurst uses the analogy of the crying baby to illustrate the dynamic of effective politics. Those who are most vocal and disruptive get covered in the news, gain the public's attention, and see their grievances addressed. Pankhurst argues it is for this reason the suffragists decided to turn from patient advocacy to militancy. Pankhurst concedes that there is a price to be paid for militant action and civil war. The war in this case is between disenfranchised women and a powerful government run by men. Returning to the example of the American revolutionaries, she notes that women suffered and sacrificed for the men's pursuit of glory. But this current civil war is being waged by women, and their goal is to bring about "an honorable peace." Pankhurst's tone changes from pathos—an emotional appeal that arouses feelings of sadness—to pride as she describes the sabotage committed by suffragists in Glasgow, Scotland, in February 1913. They used wire cutters and explosives to interrupt telegraphic communication lines, disrupting commerce across Britain. What she is describing is war without guns and by any means possible. This assault in Glasgow used the tactics of guerrilla warfare. Pankhurst marvels at the women's ingenuity and suggests that they will not stop the disruptions until they have won the war and gained the vote. Pankhurst warns that the civil war waged by women is different from other kinds of social conflicts. One example she gives is the Industrial Revolution, which created a sudden shift from a primarily agrarian economy—one based on agriculture—to one dominated by manufacturing. It also disrupted traditional gender roles and served as one catalyst for the fight for women's suffrage in both Europe and the United States. As Pankhurst sees it, industrialization resulted in a class war with clearly denoted sides—the wealthy factory owners versus the working poor. However, in the civil war over suffrage, there are no clear sides because the enemy—women—are everywhere, in every class and community. Pankhurst argues there is no way to successfully fight a war against women. To illustrate this point, she discusses the steps the British government has taken against the suffragists: imprisonment and legislation. These tactics, however, have failed to keep the suffragists down. "We Withhold Our Consent" Pankhurst explores the concept of the consent of the governed. This consent is a basic principle of the social contract as outlined by English philosopher John Locke (1632–1704). Locke argued that no civil government can rule without the permission of the people. Pankhurst notes that the British government expects women to submit to its unjust laws. She points out a flaw in that reasoning. As long as women consent to the injustice of being denied their rights, they will be unjustly governed. However, by withholding their consent, they become empowered. As unconsenting citizens, they live outside the law and can generate chaos until their demands are met. To protest their imprisonment, some suffragists, including Pankhurst, went on hunger strikes. Pankhurst recognizes that a hunger strike is an action of last resort. Painful, unjust, last resort. Yet, despite the force-feeding, suffragists were not discouraged from their activism. They continued to protest, be imprisoned, and embark on hunger strikes. In addition, publication in newspapers of illustrations of the forced-feedings began to shift public sympathy toward the suffragists. A Stark Choice: Women Will Gain Voting Rights or Die Pankhurst concludes her speech by making logical, emotional, and ethical appeals. Pointing to the suffragists' efforts to embarrass and weaken the British government, she sums up the outcome of the conflict in binary terms. If the government wants to end the civil war, then it must either kill women or give them the vote. She urges the American men in her audience to avoid putting their own government in the same position. She tells them they "must give those women the vote." To Pankhurst, the logic is obvious. If the Americans give women the right to vote, they can avoid a civil war like the one going on in Britain.
