Daily Inspiration Quote by William Lloyd Garrison

Garrison’s question lands like a lit match in a room full of genteel assurances. “Convertible terms” is the sly tell: he’s mocking the idea that moral truth can be exchanged like currency, swapped in and out depending on whatever the crowd is currently buying. The phrasing is legalistic on purpose. It mimics the cool language of contracts and commerce to expose how neatly a democracy can launder brutality into “consensus” when enough people agree to look away.

The intent isn’t philosophical recreation; it’s a trap door under complacency. In Garrison’s America, slavery wasn’t a fringe crime - it was a mainstream institution, protected by law, lubricated by economics, and stabilized by the social pressure to be “practical.” By asking whether right and wrong are “dependant upon popular opinion,” he forces his audience to confront an uncomfortable implication: if morality is just majority rule, then abolition is merely a minority preference, and bondage is temporarily “right” because it polls well. That’s not an argument; it’s an indictment.

The subtext is aimed at moderates and institutions that prized unity over justice - churches blessing order, newspapers hedging, politicians bargaining with human lives. Garrison’s genius is that he frames moral relativism as cowardice dressed up as sophistication. The question doesn’t invite debate so much as it exposes the stakes: if public opinion gets to author ethics, then the oppressed are always waiting for permission to be human.