The WSPU, proved themselves to be very determine to succeed in what they did. They did a great deal for the women’s suffrage movement and without their strength and determination many historians believe it would have taken much longer to receive the vote. Some do say that this group of women went the wrong way about it however, but in the end they brought themselves publicity, attention, and got their campaign noticed nationwide. The use of violence and protests in their campaign did numerous of times end them up imprisoned and many historians would argue that the WSPU was run undemocratically whilst others often disagree saying there was formal equality.
There are many similarities between …show more content…
Source 1 is written by Christabel Pankhurst who was the leader of the WSPU. This means the source is primary evidence as it was written by not just a member of the society but by someone who ran it, resulting in us receiving firsthand knowledge on the nature of the WSPU. “The founders and leaders must lead, the officers must carry out instructions” This shows how the leaders and founders were the ones in control and the rest had to just obey their orders. This is an example of how the WSPU was thought to be run undemocratically. Both sources one and three, give the impression that the WSPU was run very similarly to how an army is run. Source one mentions that those who join the rebellions must come as soldiers. This gives us an incredibly violent and strong minded impression of how the leaders wanted the WSPU to be run. Sources 1 and 3 both emphasise the need for action to be taken and which again makes the WSPU comparable to the army in the sense that each individual must be willing to fight for their cause and the constant repetitiveness of the world ‘rank’ in source 1, makes you automatically