Tupac Amaru: The Struggle Between Slavery And Freedom
In Session Two of this reading, slavery and freedom has sparked confusion. A person would think that rebelling against anything is always for the benefit of the majority. Taking the initiative to stand up as an insurgent over the higher power and create civil disorder, normally over current or impending issues. Those are the kinds of divergent actions any person would follow; if thinking it is for the advantage of society. During the 1700’s, a leader named Tupac Amaru II, rose above conformity and attempted to accomplish what he believed was correct. Tupac Amaru II was a leader of rebellion starting in 1730. He led “The Great Andean Rebellion”, a time when thousands of indigenous people had revolted against the colonial officials in Peru
…show more content…
Someone cannot say they are for gay marriage then the next day protest against it. That is called being hypocritical, and Tupac Amaru II brought that upon himself. He should not have written that proclamation to begin with, especially not if he was going to terrorize the people who believe and support his operations. His purpose was to gain approval for the rebellion to undermine the Europeans. The text did not say how his supporters reacted to his words but must be that they did not since his rebellion turned out unsuccessful. In April, Tupac Amaru II was captured and taken to Cuzco, Peru. He was not immediately executed, but was first forced to watch the suffering and execution of his wife and family. That is something so awful and should not be wished upon a soul, but that could have been his own fault. The point of Tupac Amaru II leader role was to act out as the lower class rebel for the greater good of his people. He sought out to abolish the judgment of the Spaniards which he believed was not virtuous. His work seemed to be good but his proclamation on slavery was deceitful. This session on Tupac Amaru II confuses his entire image, ending his appearance as the
Someone cannot say they are for gay marriage then the next day protest against it. That is called being hypocritical, and Tupac Amaru II brought that upon himself. He should not have written that proclamation to begin with, especially not if he was going to terrorize the people who believe and support his operations. His purpose was to gain approval for the rebellion to undermine the Europeans. The text did not say how his supporters reacted to his words but must be that they did not since his rebellion turned out unsuccessful. In April, Tupac Amaru II was captured and taken to Cuzco, Peru. He was not immediately executed, but was first forced to watch the suffering and execution of his wife and family. That is something so awful and should not be wished upon a soul, but that could have been his own fault. The point of Tupac Amaru II leader role was to act out as the lower class rebel for the greater good of his people. He sought out to abolish the judgment of the Spaniards which he believed was not virtuous. His work seemed to be good but his proclamation on slavery was deceitful. This session on Tupac Amaru II confuses his entire image, ending his appearance as the