Back to Gaffer's Philosophy
Archives.
The Gaffer's Philosophy:
Part 4: The Declaration:
March 4, 2002:
I want to begin this discussion about where William leaves off
on his Evolution of Democracy. In 1776 some pretty courageous
gentlemen got together and defied the king of England by declaring
the independence of the thirteen colonies. The Declaration of
Independence was approved by the Continental Congress on July
4, 1776. Those patriots did not take that step for trivial reasons.
The English had been oppressing the colonies for several years.
In fact, when we read the document, we find that it is really
a very serious indictment of the King of England.
We can be sure, this perturbed the King a great deal. He probably though that he was a pretty decent guy doing a grand job of administering the colonies. Then ,suddenly, he has these smart mouthed upstarts telling him, in very clear language, that he is nothing but a dirty, lowdown son-of-a-gun.
The local British Military then attempted to put down the rebellion and restore the honor of the crown. Well, that was the first time, but not the last, that fools from other countries have underestimated America's resolve. To be fair, we had some significant help from France, Spain, and others in our struggle. They had their own reasons for disliking the British.
The major mistake the English made was the assumption that they were facing a disorganized mob of rabble. Instead, they were confronted with a disciplined, organization of very determined hit-and-run guerilla soldiers. That was something they had never before encountered and it proved to be their undoing. Of course, the British also committed a few atrocities, which did not further their cause. It simply served to strengthen the American resolve.
Now, you may get angry with the king for what he did, including hanging some of the rebels. However, let's put it in perspective. Consider the fact that he was well within his rights under international law. From his standpoint, he was dealing with treason. It was not much different in kind than what the North did to the Southern Confederacy in our civil war. The big difference is in who won and lost. In the revolution, the rebels won. In the civil war, the rebels lost. To us Hale is a patriot. To the English, he was a traitor.
After a while, the American forces grew into a very good army. Then the little cleanup action that the King probably envisioned turned into a rout of the English troops. That was all well and good for America. We won the war of independence, although it took long years of struggle. Cornwallis finally surrendered at Yorktown on October 17, 1781. A final peace treaty was signed in Paris on September 3, 1783 and The United States was recognized as a sovereign nation.
What followed was not so good. We did not have a democracy at that time. What we had was a confederation of thirteen independent states which promptly began to disintegrate. "The Articles of Confederation" were adopted early in our struggle on November 15, 1777. This agreement had serious weaknesses. It required that at least nine states consent to all important measures. It also required the unanimous consent of the colonies for any changes in the articles.
In addition the central government was so in name only. It had no way to compel the compliance of the states with congressional decisions. Nor could the Congress regulate trade. The greatest weakness, however, lay in the Congress' lack of power to levy taxes. They could not pay for the operation of the government. Something had to change.
After a false start in 1786, A Federal Constitutional Convention was convened in Philadelphia in 1787. Its task was to revise the Articles of Confederation. What came out of that convention was The Constitution of The United States. This was not a done deal at that time. There was a great deal of opposition to placing so much power in a central government. Much of it was power based and inherently divisive.
It fell to Hamilton, Jay, and Madison to make the case for a federal democracy. This they did most eloquently in the Federalist Papers. There were 85 documents in all, published over a period of seven months. The goal was to convince the voters to change the union from the confederation of states which had become moribund to a federal democracy with a strong central government. Despite opposition and largely due to these papers a sufficient number of states ratified the Constitution to make it effective by the end of June 1788.
Hamilton fired the first salvo in his opening general introduction to the series. In that, he discussed some of the motives of the opposition. He also admitted his own bias for the constitution in this rather frank statement.
"In the course of the preceding observations, I have had an eye, my fellow-citizens, to putting you upon your guard against all attempts, from whatever quarter, to influence your decision in a matter of the utmost moment to your welfare, by any impressions other than those which may result from the evidence of truth. You will, no doubt, at the same time, have collected from the general scope of them, that they proceed from a source not unfriendly to the new Constitution. Yes, my countrymen, I own to you that, after having given it an attentive consideration, I am clearly of opinion it is your interest to adopt it. I am convinced that this is the safest course for your liberty, your dignity, and your happiness. I affect not reserves which I do not feel. I will not amuse you with an appearance of deliberation when I have decided. I frankly acknowledge to you my convictions, and I will freely lay before you the reasons on which they are founded. The consciousness of good intentions disdains ambiguity. I shall not, however, multiply professions on this head. My motives must remain in the depository of my own breast. My arguments will be open to all, and may be judged of by all. They shall at least be offered in a spirit which will not disgrace the cause of truth."
In the following papers, the three men, Hamilton, Jay and Madison, systematically debunked each and every argument against ratification. There were many. Of course, they also presented every conceivable argument for ratification. For those who wish to pursue this, the Federalist Papers are well worth your time. Here is the URL to the government site; http://lcweb2.loc.gov/const/fed/fedpapers.html. In addition, they are being posted, one per week, on the Wesoomi home page.
One thing which comes out very clearly in these papers is the profound confidence these men had in the intelligence of the voters. The papers also demonstrate our founder's confidence in the people's sense of responsibility. Everything these early leaders wrote, including our constitution, fairly resonates with this confidence in the voting public. It troubles me deeply to realize have far we have drifted from that ideal to arrive at our current, "Father-Knows-Best," "Cradle-to-Grave" federal government. We now have a government wherein the people are expected to act like children rather than responsible adults. Shame on us!
Next time, I want to look at our constitution and also take
up the amendments to it.
Back to Gaffer's Philosophy
Archives.
|
|
|
|