I think candy analogies were somewhat destroyed by Eric Trump in the presidential campaign. At any rate, as you say below, you yourself don't find it very useful. So perhaps in the next draft you could save the space and use it wisely for something else.

Perhaps it would make sense to talk about revolutionary and ameliorist flavors of equality, in which the ultimate demands of the idea are either taken seriously, or defused for the value of present effect in incremental change. Obviously, Jefferson understands both that equality is ultimately inconsistent with slavery, and that a definition of equality requiring abolition will not be accepted as a basis for colonial solidarity against the King. Are we not observing in your draft the consequences of that uneasy distinction?

The spiritual outcome of the draft may be its purpose, in which case it would be a good idea, I think, to signal that to the reader at the outset. Or it may be that the more analytic first part of the draft is where you meant the weight of the reader's attention to fall. Either way, the path to a better next draft seems to me to lie through sorting out what is primary from what is secondary, and reorganizing somewhat accordingly. You want to state your main idea in the introduction, so that the reader can follow your thought without losing her way, or being disoriented in her travel by the discontinuity between the beginning and the end.