The first American Revolution may have been an occurrence of history impossible to replicate. The history I was taught did a poor job describing the constant turmoil and revolutionary behavior of the colonists toward the European powers which attempted to keep them under control. We were essentially given the Readers Digest Condensed version – people were being persecuted for religious reasons, they came across on the Mayflower and nearly starved to death until the Indians fed them and taught them to grow maize. A bunch of other folk came looking for gold, mapping out in a haphazard way a new found continent and then they got sick of being overtaxed and had a revolution, which they won. Then it was time for Christmas break, you came back and found that a second revolution was happening, with the revolutionaries losing (the American Civil War). Then we fought the war to end all wars, had a depression and battled Hitler and Hirohito until it was time to go home for summer. In the fall you went back to school and repeated the cycle.
What I failed to fully comprehend was that the time between the formation of the first colonies and the revolution beginning in 1775 was roughly equivalent to the time between that revolution and the present and the friction between the colonists and parliament was ongoing the entire time. To be a British politician tasked with governing the Massachusetts colony was the kiss of death for one’s career as they were fiercely independent and essentially ungovernable. So long as Britain maintained a policy of benign neglect, all went fairly well – a condition that Washington DC would do well to emulate today vis-à-vis Flyover Country. But this independent streak spawned a generation of men and women who were well educated in the classics, moral and religious, and who truly cared about freedom. As in every revolution, it was initiated and led by the elites, but the elites did not seek to rule over their fellow revolutionaries – or, in the case of the ones who did, they were overruled by their more democratically minded brethren. Those salivating over the possibility of revolution today would do well to consider the uniqueness of this in light of subsequent revolutions; most, if not all of which, have ended with fratricide among the leaders of the revolution and simply replacing one despotic form of rule for another.
There is our conundrum. The elites are already firmly entrenched in power. Who will lead the revolution to remove them from power without seeking to replace them? Who will take the risks inherent in the endeavor to return the sovereignty of America to ‘the people’ and not seek to keep it for him/herself? This is assuming the American people will accept the responsibility that comes with sovereignty, which is a mighty large assumption when one considers the results of the 2012 elections. I know of no group seeking to return us to sovereignty that seems to be presenting a viable plan for doing so, possibly for the reasons outlined above. There is certainly no political party which would have my support. The RepubliCrats are securely controlled by the oligarchy and offer no hope at all. The Libertarians position on the issue of abortion disqualifies them for most who seek smaller government and a return to federalism as it is historically known. How can one claim the RIGHT to kill another – how can that possibly be a classical Liberal position? On the other hand, the Constitution party seems to be seeking a theocracy or something close. Most who call themselves conservatives seek to use government to force others to live by the moral standards they themselves hold. I may agree with their moral standards, but the purpose of government is not to legislate them. It is to protect the natural rights of individuals that they may live by the moral standards they choose, among other liberties. The Greens, the Progressives…well, they are not Liberal by any historical definition of the term. They seek (and have achieved) a Leviathan state with totalitarian powers controlling nearly every aspect of our lives. So I don’t know if there are enough Americans left who will actually consent to a Constitutional Republic which seeks an America as the founders envisioned. Identity politics has succeeded in producing a populace that seeks a government which uses its force to bend others to their will, whether through redistributionist policies, through legislating morality or for some other end.
What I am certain of is that, in the end, Americans will revolt against the police state in which we are either already living or which will be necessary to maintain the totalitarianism or near-totalitarianism emanating from our rulers in “that far-off country” of Washington DC. The spark may come from economic circumstances, such as the collapse of the counterfeit currency they force us to use with a gun to our heads. It may come from a political decision to disarm the populace – this I consider to be the Rubicon for too many Americans. Where it will come from, I don’t know, but I am sure it will come. The only means of preventing violent revolution (with the carnage and uncertain outcome that entails) is to have one which is non-violent - a political revolution vice an armed one. I don’t know if it is possible to wake Americans from their lethargic and apathetic slumber in time, but without offering them their ‘morning coffee’ in the form of a viable plan, they will continue to hit the snooze button. This was the outcome of both the Tea Party and Occupy movements. America said, “well, yeah – you’ve got a point – what’s the plan?” When each offered up the same-ol, same-ol of the RepubliCrats, America hit the snooze button.
So we’d better start brewing some coffee…and soon.
No comments:
Post a Comment