The House That Independence Built

"The Shooting of Major Pitcairn by the Slave Salem" (courtesy of the NYPL).

The Declaration was a piece of paper. It was one verbose representation among many: a manifesto issued to impart a single, noble meaning to the nasty, inchoate program the American colonists had already staked everything on. They had already begun violently opposing unwarranted repression. They had already fostered an interstate dialogue. They had already begun working in concert across distances. They had already taken up arms, formed a congress, organized a military.

The elite group of people who signed the Declaration were descendants of empire. They were creatures of hierarchy who understood that political survival depended on collaboration and being as shrewd and sophisticated as the rulers they wanted to free themselves from.

The Declaration told the world about the King’s threats against Americans, the top-down edicts that grieved them, the customary freedoms the Crown and Parliament were bent on taking away. The Declaration drew a line against what was intolerable. It was written by white men who did not want to be reduced to the level of slaves. Positively, the Declaration defined an ideal of natural rights that, it asserted, no government had the authority to take away.

The Declaration passed judgment on the colonists’ real status while envisioning an ideal state toward which they promised to strive. The Declaration was in the form of a conventional petition. It wasn’t a petition, though. It was a path of action that its signers and the people they represented were already working toward and committed to.

We would be justified in seeing that piece of paper, the Declaration, as along the lines of a powerful op-ed. In itself, it was “a nothing-burger”: flimsy, inert, inconsequent. It was up to its adherents, then and now, to make reality correspond. An independent nation composed of free self-governing people could not come into being without consensus and compromise.

Without leadership and some degree of popular assent, some voluntary buy-in, independence would have remained chimerical, unattainable. Independence could not flourish without the nasty tradeoffs of provisioning and financing a military, without the hierarchy, organization, and internal discipline it took to win battles against an imperial power. Independence was dependent on common defense and collective action, which meant, in human terms, that it could not come into being without internal conflict, without the drama of hurt feelings, blighted ambition, unusual talents, and egos soaring high. To gain their liberty, Americans had to fudge on ideological purity; they had to practice toleration toward one another, even when that toleration was a corrupt bargain displeasing to God.

The desire to be free and self-governing is a powerful motivating force, as we see in the case of the Ukrainians. Their struggle against Russia offers a living parallel to what our revolutionary forebears endured for the sake of this indwelling desire. Our own fight for independence was equally unlikely. It was a miserable, messy slog to beat bad odds. Our course was littered with slimy bargains, epic failures, embarrassing gaffes, botched opportunities. Nonetheless, Americans kept it together long enough to prevail. They triumphed over the British by staying in the field and clinging to their goal without intermission for eight uncertain years.

Their pursuit of independence was never innocent, it was never as plain and pure as what they put down in the Declaration. However, the house that Independence built was one belonging to its inhabitants alone. What remains to each generation is the grueling, gargantuan task of doing better than they.

Image: from this source.

Why the Declaration Isn’t the Supreme Law of the Land

Assembly Hall, where the Constitution was signed.

On the 4th of July, 1776, the British subjects of thirteen colonies in North America declared through a makeshift congress that they were gunning for total independence from Britain.  They were already in a state of war against the British, but it was a defensive war against occupation, a war without aims.

Since the fighting had broken out a year earlier, representatives of the American colonies had applied themselves to the problem of how to win the war, a war against one of the world’s great military powers.  The Declaration successfully articulated the colonies’ grievances against the British Crown.  It presented a catalog of grievances against the monarchy, using the language of natural rights to justify throwing off a remote government that Americans feared would reduce them to “slaves.”  The Declaration legitimated war on the grounds that the British government did not represent the will of Americans.  Britain’s colonial system condemned Americans to live under an authority that was not of their own making, in which they had no voice.

The Declaration was a radical document, a glorious aspirational document that, beyond firing up the colonists, has inspired oppressed people to seek independence, equality, and self-determination down through the years.  With its ringing assertion of each person’s right to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” and its rejection of government without “the consent of the governed,” the Declaration gave the colonists a sound philosophical justification for rejecting British rule.  Their rebellion was justified because becoming a self-governing nation was their aim.

Inspiring in its idealism, the Declaration was never intended as a blueprint for national government.  The Continental Congress that approved it never approached the stature of the English system of King and Parliament that the colonists threw off.  The Declaration’s fiery phrases recalling past grievances couldn’t sustain the Revolution as it dragged on.  Having put the super-capably George Washington in charge of the war effort, Congress became diffident.  Enthusiasm waned.  Each state wanted what was best for itself, and no state wanted to give up much of its newly gained independence for the sake of a more powerful collectivity.

General Washington had to beg and cajole Congress for the basics to keep the Revolution going.  Valley Forge was the shameful nadir of the states’ indifference and irresponsibility. Continental troops, encamped there for the winter, perished not from battle but for want of human necessities such as clothing, shelter, and food.  Washington despised the Continental Congress for its weaknesses, blaming it for a war that was unduly costly and long.

Peace and independence came after eight tedious years.  Congress’s deficiencies became even more glaring once the colonists’ common enemy, Britain, had been expelled.  The fragile nationhood achieved through the Revolution began crumbling, as citizens and states grew tired of the extraordinary effort that acting in concert as a nation required.  Returning home, Washington confronted his own near-bankrupt condition. He faced the same uncertain prospects that all Americans faced, after shunning membership in an imperial economy that, for all its faults, had helped power American prosperity.

No wonder that Washington and other leading Revolutionaries put their weight behind the Constitution of the United States, which, in 1789, with the consent of the states then extant, became the supreme law of the land.  In subsequent decades, as the nation grew, western states sought admission to the United States, voluntarily placing their states under subjection to the Constitution.  States like Texas, briefly an independent nation, eagerly sought to become part of the US, its sovereignty pale beside the Constitutional Union’s advantages.

All this matters because aggrieved Americans now justify their anti-federalism by quoting phrases from the Declaration, as if they do not realize that all that they owe to the Constitution, all the benefits and protections that have accrued to them and their states, thanks to this transformative Founding document.  Oddly, people who don’t know the history or limitations of the Declaration misuse the fiery document that Thomas Jefferson wrote as a young revolutionary hungry the very self-government that Americans gained.

The glorious heights this nation and its people have attained since the War for Independence rest entirely on the Constitution.  The individualism and liberty that the Declaration makes so much of would have come to nothing had the United States not subsequently embraced a strong centralized vision–the Constitution, which spells out the federal system of self-government and individual rights we live by now.

It’s disturbing to hear anti-federalists railing against the federal government using phases from the Declaration.  These benighted citizens come across as yahoos.  The Constitution, not the Declaration, supplies the legal basis of government.  It ensures our freedoms, balances our interests, and gives us sufficient power to be self-governing.  The Constitution, not the Declaration, is the font of all present-day rights, court decisions, and laws.

The Declaration of Independence was never intended to pit Americans against one another or to attack the representative self-government that, thanks to the guarantees of the Constitution, is the birthright of all Americans.

Lincoln’s Death Bed

pencil sketch of Lincoln's death bed by Union artist A. R. Waud

On this day in 1865, President Abraham Lincoln died of gun violence.  The previous evening, the president had attended the theater, where a Southern-born actor with rebel sympathies slipped into the private box where Lincoln was sitting and fired a bullet into the back of his head.  Stunned witnesses carried the badly injured president out of Ford’s Theater and across the street to a room at Peterson’s boarding house, where he died at 7:22 a.m. the next day.

It was a politically motivated crime, a vengeful coda to the Civil War, which had ended with the South’s surrender at Appomattox just one week before.  Even now, 156 years after Lincoln’s death, the despicable act that deprived this nation of one of its brightest lights casts doubt on whether our republican form of government, which depends on civility and a respect for the popular will, can prevail in the face of a vulgar resort to violence.

Image: from this source.

Lincoln and the Broken Politics of His Time

On this day in 1809, Abraham Lincoln was born.  He was born into an American heyday, when the new United States (having fended off the British in the War of 1812) were mushrooming.  In 1809, the nation consisted of seventeen states, the westernmost being Ohio, along with a vast territory that pioneers were flooding into, appropriating from natives, and organizing.  Lincoln was born to one such pioneer family and grew up in Illinois, which became a state when he was nine.

By the time Lincoln became president, the number of states had doubled.  The nation stretched to the Pacific.  His milieu was morphing as quickly as he was, a reckless proliferation the politicians could barely control.  The gargantuan Lincoln, with his terrible grooming, was a perfect embodiment of this rough hasty time. Continue reading

Green The Journey: New Year’s 2022

The new year 2022 unscrolls.  As we struggle to get clear of the wreckage of 2021, the question is whether Americans have it in them to begin again, to journey into the future with some humility.  Can we leave behind the evil passions that have eroded the order and security of American life and re-envision something more wholesome, more generally beneficial, that’s kinder to nature and humankind?

The pressure to turn conservative is increasing: by which I mean, the pressure to appreciate and preserve what we have and to consolidate public sentiment around goals consonant with our historical strengths.  Partisan sniping, barbarizing technologies, upper-class selfishness, and decades of in-migration have triggered keen disillusionment, anomie, and rage.  Meanwhile, our love affair with globalism has turned sour.  We are croaking from the environmental and monetary costs.

Amid the disappointment and weariness, January invites us to be open, to be curious, to regard the world with fresh eyes.  Paradoxically, the recollection of what Americans have struggled toward as ideal goods can green the journey, can guide our hejira through a broken world.

Image: “The Journey” (1903)
by Elizabeth Shippen Green Elliott,
from this source.