Liberty’s Lost Cause

I promised a friend of mine that I would read her essay and make some comments about it.  You can read her article here:  http://littlereb.wordpress.com/2008/08/30/libertys-lost-cause/

This was surprisingly less of a burden and more of a treat than I had expected! Ms. Liberty has written a paper called, “Liberty’s Lost Cause,” and in it, she highlights the tragedy of America’s “War Between the States” and discusses the topic of liberty in the context of the war. After getting to know Ms. Liberty perhaps I shouldn’t have been surprised at the ardent display of passion in this particular work, and my subsequent enjoyment of it.

 

Which of the bloodstained patriots would have thought that in the year 2008 the love of freedom would be systematically eradicated from the hearts of millions of emasculated Americans? Everyday on my walk to work I am struck by the terrible irony of our current dilemma.

 

After passing the old “Presbyterian Meeting House” once frequented on a regular basis by none other than George Washington himself; I saw a newspaper box with headlines declaring the most recent travesties of the U.S. congress.

A few blocks down, I usually stroll past Robert E. Lee’s boyhood home. Standing just a block down from the birthplace of such a striking defender of liberty was a woman carrying a sign promoting presidential candidate Barack Obama. She looked at me as I walked by and assured me that “change was on the way!.”

 

No doubt change IS on the way, and God speed its coming, if for no other reason than the people of Alexandria Virginia earnestly desire a good night’s sleep. (They’re being kept awake by the sound of all the dead patriots rolling over in their graves!)

 

I wish that the Alexandrian dog could read! Perhaps then he could be similarly inspired by Ms. Liberties essay and shed the horrible shade of tyranny that clouds his eyes. Yes; sadly, even the Alexandrian dog now feels the cruel rod of the state, and we self righteous Christians applaud! What little is left of my heart is tempted to melt when I lock eyes with the wretched beast, imprisoned behind the glass door by his cruel masters (who themselves are similarly locked behind a glass door constructed by a veneer of liberty.) God has blessed this poor animal with some far distant memory of being a wild thing; a memory that in practical application allows him to realize that he is indeed stuck behind a door. If only God would so bless his masters.

 

Perhaps the first sprinkling of this blessing is to come through the keystrokes of Ms. Liberty? Perhaps it will be possible to stir the cowed hearts of Americans towards passion again and provide them a glimpse however small, through this hazy glass door at an amazing sight; the Lost Cause of Liberty.

 

By way of critique I have very little to say.

 

Perhaps Ms. Liberty is a tad quote heavy, but when faced with such a wealth of great material her desire to include as much of it as possible is more than understandable. When debating about the ideas of our founding fathers it is an oft employed tactic to appeal to various quotes of the men in question in an attempt to establish their character. I wouldn’t condone such a method of argumentation, and thankfully Ms. Liberty does not take that route in her essay.

 

She DOES however effectively utilize certain quotes to show the origin of the lines of thought and philosophies which contributed to the particular understanding of liberty held by our founders.

 

Towards this end, I realize that she was limited in space and therefore would be hard pressed to encompass an entire view of history to bring the reader to the period under discussion. That said I would recommend that she take a step back and give an even greater overview of the time period. I’m specifically thinking of the historical context which gave birth to much of American thought that lead to the “revolution;” namely, the Renaissance and the Enlightenment.

 

It is a far too often used argument that our founders were not inspired by Biblical thought but rather were deists after the likes of French revolutionaries, and other enlightenment thinkers. Therefore, Ms. Liberty leaves herself vulnerable to these sorts of attacks by not sufficiently highlighting the development of “natural rights” doctrines throughout the Enlightenment.

 

This is a harsh criticism on my part though due to various concerns. Lack of space, (as I said above) and also the wealth of material to be poured through in presenting such a study would no doubt seem daunting.

 

It would be important to note however, that more firmly securing the foundation and growth of natural rights theory would benefit this paper enormously, since as Ms. Liberty points out, the War Between the States is so often mischaracterized as a “civil war.”

 

Likewise, the “revolutionary” war was not a revolution, but rather a legal judgment carried out by the colonists against an unjust tyrant. It was essentially the king that “revolted” against the people!

 

Once this concept has been clearly laid out, then the particular matters of succession, states rights, and due process, find their natural place in the argument. To merely present these doctrines in a pragmatic appeal is to deny “natural law” and instead appeal to the moral right of a majority.

 

Democracy is often (and humorously) characterized as two wolves and lamb voting on what to have for dinner. Tyranny by tyrant or tyranny by a majority is tyranny in either case.

 

This I feel is the one weakness in an otherwise excellent paper.

 

I suggest a deeper look at the necessity and progression of “natural law” theory by adding a few more quotes from John Locke in proper context as well as looking through the first few chapters of William Blackstone’s “Commentaries on the Laws of England” volume one. (Blackstone is published online, and I’m sure you could find some of Locke’s works as well, in addition to what you’ve already written concerning him.) Contrast these views with that of Thomas Hobbes and Sigmund Freud (A Renaissance man and Enlightenment man respectively) who both believed in a totalitarian type “Leviathan” to coerce individual men into a pattern desirable by the intellectuals. Through contrasting them, the real difference between the founders and Enlightenment thought will manifest itself.

 

Additionally, I love your list of 15 infractions of our current state. These sorts of travesties cannot ever be listed enough.

 

I am very encouraged by the winds of freedom that blow from the pages of this essay!

 

Now, if we could just learn to speak “dog” perhaps we’d have a real change in the near future!