I look at the world From awakening eyes in a black face —
And this is what I see:
This fenced-off narrow space
Assigned to me.
I look then at the silly walls
Through dark eyes in a dark face —
And this is what I know:
That all these walls oppression builds
Will have to go!
I look at my own body
With eyes no longer blind —
And I see that my own hands can make
The world that's in my mind.
Then let us hurry, comrades,
The road to find.

Which detail from the poem best shows how the speaker wants to change the world?

A
"This fenced-off narrow space / Assigned to me." ( Lines 4-5)

B
"I look then at the silly walls / Through dark eyes in a dark face — " ( Lines 6-7)

C
"That all these walls oppression builds / Will have to go!" ( Lines 9-10)

D
"I look at my own body / With eyes no longer blind — " ( Lines 11-12)

faulty parallelism is a grammar construction where there is no balance in the parts of a sentence they have a similar meaning but the grammar structure is not equivalent.

the correct version of this faulty parallelism in the sentence is:

jefferson wrote the declaration of independence, and he was the nation's third president.

the problem with the first version is that the sentence:

"jefferson was both the writer of the declaration of independence"

presents jefferson as both a subject and an agent for the verb "write" because if he was "the writer" then the declaration of independence was written by him, besides that fact, the sentence presents a dependent clause.

while the second sentence:

he was the nation's third president.

presents a basic subject+verb+object structure

so, to give a proper balance to the structure, or better said, to give a parallel structure, we must write a basic s+v+o structure in both sentences:

jefferson wrote the declaration of independence, and he was the nation third president.

paine is arguying that they had tried everything before coming to the conclusion that they needed to fight for their freedom.

argument: "every quiet method for peace hath been ineffectual."

claim 1: "our prayers have been rejected with disdain; and only tended to convince us, that nothing flatters vanity, or confirms obstinacy in kings more than repeated petitioning and nothing hath contributed more than that very measure to make the kings of europe absolute."

claim 2: "wherefore, since nothing but blows will do, for god’s sake, let us come to a final separation, and not leave the next generation to be cutting throats, under the violated unmeaning names of parent and child."

you didn't list the options but im guessing it's resolving contradictions