Post History

I'm reading the question with an eye toward language rather than to the actual intent or ultimate purpose of the declaration you're considering, Becky. In other words, my answer has nothing to do with whether it's a good or bad idea to write a declaration of independence for a website. 

**You asked:** "How does someone write a moving Declaration of Independence?" 

**and you quoted:** "A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people."

The second line is moving because it represents an ideal. Tyranny is wrong. One man cannot justly sit in dominion over all other men--we recognize this. It is the difference between (1) "let us listen to our better angels" (which implies 'we' touch the divine, and from a position of student. Humility. That within us which is inherently good and true--those things are a must, I think, in the writing you describe) and (2) "it's my way or the highway, bucko" (which aspires to nothing).

So, draft the piece you have in mind. Then redraft it to shape it into something aspirational, something that recognizes human values and goodness. 

As an example, I'm pulling up something that would fail for your purposes. It's the beginning of the unabomber's 1995 manifesto:

*The Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race. They have greatly increased the life-expectancy of those of us who live in “advanced” countries, but they have destabilized society, have made life unfulfilling, have subjected human beings to indignities, have led to widespread psychological suffering (in the Third World to physical suffering as well) and have inflicted severe damage on the natural world.*

That is clearly written, with specifics and an obvious target (industry=villain). But, it also sounds vaguely like a call to arms, or that such will soon manifest, (and in fact it does: "We therefore advocate a revolution against the industrial system"). 

It's a manifesto. It's not an aspirational piece of writing, but a but of a screed. 

He wrote it **the way he wanted to write it**, and i chose it because it represents something very different than you are after. Let's say your first draft of a DoI comes across as a screed, like that. Then, if you wanted to shape it in a less adversarial way, I might suggest (1) using encompassing language (encompassing both people and the nature of history--encompassing our triumphs and our challenges). Also, (2) try weaving *ideals* within that language. 

If I'd been a beta reader for Ted Kazinsky (!! LOL) I'd ask him if he might want to skew more in the following direction, so as to be less likely to turn people off:

*Today, as has been true too many times in our past, we endure a period of turbulent upheaval and death. And, in this era of environmental degradation, the ideals of the founders including that "all men are created equal" are further from our grasp than ever before, and we ourselves hold blame. We squarely hold blame for the social inequities that define our society. In these deep and dark times, we call upon one another to claim common cause: just stewardship of the environment toward the well-being of ourselves, our children and our grandchildren. Toward that goal, we find growing will to enact the following:*



**tl;dr:** My answer is to write a draft and then play with language within it. Make the language encompassing of people and time/history/common experience, tone down judgmental and innately oppositional statements, weave in the ideals that people typically respond to (to be responsible, to grow, to help one another, to recognize our shared humanity and that we all are, in fact, equal). Strong language is a must, but I suspect that any strong language that makes an activist call should be placed properly, after the reader's heart has swelled in recognition and support.