“But O, good Lord! What strange phenomenon is this? What name shall we give it? What is the nature of this misfortune? What vice is it, or, rather, what degradation? To see an endless multitude of people not merely obeying, but driven to servility? Not ruled, but tyrannized over? These wretches have no wealth, no kin, nor wife nor children, not even life itself that they can call their own.” ~ Etienne de la Boetie

If you want your home to last, one of the first things you need to do is to build a strong foundation for it to sit upon. If that foundation is weak, or if it becomes eroded over time, the house will eventually suffer; possibly to the point of collapsing. If you’ve been reading my essays for any length of time, you should, by now, recognize that I’m speaking metaphorically; that there is a point to all this.

Before I get to the meat and potatoes of this essay, there is a quote I’d like for you to ponder, “A house divided cannot stand.” I believe that quote originates from the Bible, the Book of Mark, Chapter 3, Verse 25 if I’m not mistaken. Now, let’s get started…

What are we? Are we a country, a nation, or simply a people occupying a geographical location on a map? When the first European (British) settlers came to this land, did they constitute a nation; a country? No, they were merely a handful of Colonists who had sought an existence in a land that was separated geographically from their home country, but bound politically to that country.

As more and more of these Colonists came to this land, distinct and independent Colonies arose. For instance, there was the Colony of Massachusetts; which took its name from the Massachusetts Indians which inhabited the region. There was the Colony of Pennsylvania; named after its founder William Penn. There was the Colony of New York; named after James, Duke of York.

The point is, by the time of the American Revolution there were 13 distinctly separate, and individual Colonies occupying land along the eastern portion of this continent. Each of these Colonies was, for the most part, self-governing; although they were still obligated to obey the laws imposed upon them by the Mother Country, Great Britain. It was friction between the Colonies and their government over these laws that led to, first resistance and civil disobedience, then to separation from Great Britain that led to the American Revolution.

The question that arises is this; After the Revolution ended, and independence was obtained, did these Colonies become a single, indivisible country; a nation? Some might say yes, while others might say no; my question is; upon what do you base your answer? When the war ended, a conference was held in Paris to lay out the terms of peace between Britain and her former Colonies. In the treaty produced by that conference we read, “His Brittanic Majesty acknowledges the said United States, viz., New Hampshire, Massachusetts Bay, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia, to be free sovereign and Independent States…”

That is historical fact; anyone who is so inclined can easily verify that by doing a web search for: Treaty of Paris, 1783. This treaty was signed by representative of the British Government, and representatives from the former Colonies; Benjamin Franklin, John Jay, Henry Laurens and John Adams. Both sides recognized that each former Colony had become a free sovereign and Independent State.

As free sovereign and independent states, each was free to govern itself in any manner it chose. Although it would have been ridiculous to fight a war to free themselves from the arbitrary will of one monarch, only to establish a monarchy in their state, any of the Colonies could have done so had they so desired; and none of the other Colonies could have done anything in opposition to them. What you have to understand is, prior to the Revolution the Colonies already viewed themselves and independent from one another; the only thing binding them together in any way, shape, or fashion, was that they were all subject to British rule. In his book, A Brief Enquiry into the Nature and Character of our Federal Government, Abel Upshur goes into great detail regarding this point; far too great for me to provide any brief quotes from it.

The fact is, in the mindset of the Colonists, each Colony was independent from one another; the only reason they joined together to fight against the British was that they realized that they could not defeat them on their own; they had to unite to defeat a common enemy. However, in uniting together to fight the British, they never once relinquished their sovereignty and independence from one another.

There is something else people need to understand about this period of American History. At the time of the Revolution each Colony was different from one another in their cultures, their religious beliefs, and in their economies. They did not always see eye to eye with one another on every subject, so something very compelling must have forced them to come to an alliance with one another to go to war against the mightiest army on the planet at the time. So, what was it that caused them to forge such an alliance?

If you know me at all, you should know the answer by now. However, just in case you haven’t figured it out yet, it was the fact that their central government, the British Crown and Parliament, had infringed upon the rights they believed all freemen held as gifts to them by their Creator. They did not (unlike many today) believe that their rights were granted to them by their government, or some piece of parchment with words scribbled upon it. They knew that their rights were inherent, and unalienable, and it was their right – their duty – to resist any infringements upon them.

Look at the history leading up to the Revolution and you will see that the Son’s of Liberty, and all those who resisted the tyranny of King George III did not wait until their government had restored their rights, or given them permission to resist; they resisted each and every instance their rights were imposed upon by the laws coming from their government.

Most are familiar with the Boston Tea Party and the Battle at Lexington and Concord, but how many are aware of the widespread resistance to the Stamp Act; resistance so effective that no revenue was collected for the Crown? How many are aware of the Pine Tree Riots; where the crown labeled certain trees as belonging to the Crown for building spars on British warships, yet were cut down and used for building homes in the Colonies as a form of resistance?

Less than a decade after the Revolution, a young James Madison would write, “Because it is proper to take alarm at the first experiment on our liberties. We hold this prudent jealousy to be the first duty of Citizens, and one of the noblest characteristics of the late Revolution. The free men of America did not wait till usurped power had strengthened itself by exercise, and entagled the question in precedents. They saw all the consequences in the principle, and they avoided the consequences by denying the principle.”

What does Madison say there; that it is our option to resist experiments upon our liberty? No, he says that it is the first DUTY of citizens. It was that thirst for liberty that is the foundation that united all 13 Colonies together to fight against a government that had encroached upon that liberty. My God, all you have to do is read Patrick Henry’s speech of March 23, 1775 to realize that, “Give me liberty or give me death!”

That is the foundation (underlying principle) this country was built upon – individual liberty. It is due to the lack of adherence to, an erosion if you will, of that principle that lies at the root of almost every problem we fact in America today.

The Declaration of Independence describes the principles this country was founded upon in great detail, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”

Look at the people of this country today, arguing amongst one another over which party should hold the reigns of power in government, and what should be done with that power. Rarely do you hear people use the words politics and liberty in the same sentence. Most often all political debate in this country is split among those who follow the Democratic party platform, or the Republican party platform; with the various issues/causes each side supports defining all political debate.

I’ll be the first to admit that the Democrats are about as far from the principles this country was founded upon as a party can get without admitting that they are full blown Socialists. However, the Republicans are not that far behind them; the only difference being is how they use the power of government for the benefit of the party faithful.

You have to remember, it was Nero Trumpus who said the president has nearly unlimited power, and it was Nero Trumpus who said take the guns first give them due process later. And let us not forget that it was George W. Bush who gave us the entire rights infringing apparatus to fight global terrorism.

Like I said, the Republicans aren’t stellar in their defense of the rights and liberty of the people. How many Republican presidents or Congresses (in your lifetime) have repealed laws that infringe upon your individual rights, your individual liberty? So please, stop with the nonsense that the Republicans are our only chance to save this country…they aren’t!

If you were to compare your political beliefs, or what those seeking office promise to do, against what the Declaration of Independence says is the function of government, how close to those principles would you, or your government come? I’m guessing, if you were honest in your evaluation, they would be miles apart.

Yet people argue with one another over who is best qualified/suited to run this thing you call government; without any concern over whether or not it holds to the principles this country was founded upon. And you say I’m the problem because I don’t vote? I don’t think so! I would like for you to read something Frederic Bastiat wrote in 1850, for it shows you how ridiculous your partisan bickering actually is, “In fact, if law were restricted to protecting all persons, all liberties, and all properties; if law were nothing more than the organized combination of the individual’s right to self defense; if law were the obstacle, the check, the punisher of all oppression and plunder—is it likely that we citizens would then argue much about the extent of the franchise?”

I have been told that people agree with what I say on principle, but that they do not agree with my stance that we need to abolish this system, or revoke our consent for it until I come up with a better system. I see numerous problems with that statement.

First, people are saying that they are going to continue the same destructive behavior that created all our problems until I can recommend a better system.

Second, with so many people dependent upon (addicted to) a system that provides them with comfort, security, benefits, subsidies, and a whole laundry list of other goodies, how many people are going to say, “Okay, I’ll surrender all these wonderful things government gives me and start accepting complete responsibility for my wants and needs.” Not very many, if you want my honest opinion. So, even if I were to come up with a better system, very few would want to adopt it.

Finally, any time there is a system in which there is no means by which the individual can defend their life, their property, or their liberty (against other individuals or government itself) without being punished, then the inevitable outcome will be the same; a loss of individual liberty and a constant move towards collectivism; the belief that the needs of the many outweigh the rights of the individual.

As long as people think that voting is their only option; that obedience to the law makes one a ‘good’ citizen, there will be no change in America. Our country was founded by rebels, tax evaders, and other such dissidents. Were people to behave in that manner today, society (even those calling themselves conservatives) would condemn such actions; calling them dangers to society; when in truth it is those who comply, those who obey, those who put their faith and trust in the system who are the dangers to society.

I see no way out of the mess we’ve created, (and I speak not only for this generation, but those which preceded us.) The best we can do is pick and choose our fights, and do our best to be as free as possible in a country in which freedom has become a four-letter word; something to be feared and despised by millions of dedicated statists who know no other way of living than oppression.

In closing, I’d like to leave y’all with a quote from Etienne de la Boetie’s book, The Politics of Obedience; for it describes the people of this country to a T, “But O, good Lord! What strange phenomenon is this? What name shall we give it? What is the nature of this misfortune? What vice is it, or, rather, what degradation? To see an endless multitude of people not merely obeying, but driven to servility? Not ruled, but tyrannized over? These wretches have no wealth, no kin, nor wife nor children, not even life itself that they can call their own.”

April 4, 2022

~ The Author ~
Neal Ross, Student of history, politics, patriot and staunch supporter of the 2nd Amendment. Send all comments to: bonsai@syix.com.

If you liked Neal’s latest column, maybe you’ll like his latest booklet: The Civil War: (The Truth You Have Not Been Told). Life continues to expand for this prolific writer and guardian of TRUE American history.