All Americans treasure the
concept of freedom—our colonial forbearers’ determination to achieve it gave
birth to our country during the American Revolution. Not everyone was
considered worthy of the blessings of freedom, of course. To their eternal
shame, our Founding Fathers excluded the men, women, and children being held in
bondage from its enjoyment, but the Founders justified that by defining Americans
of African descent as a brutish and inferior people unworthy of freedom. And,
of course, it did not hurt that “this species of property” was worth a
staggering amount of money even in those early days. But the majority of white
American colonists clearly knew what freedom meant, and they were willing to
die to achieve it for themselves.
How did these early Americans
define “freedom”?
For the British colonists
living in North America in the 18th century, the word had a simple
meaning: to be free was to be free from
tyranny—free from the tyranny of King
George, free from the tyranny of a British Parliament seeking to impose taxes
on them without their consent, free from the tyranny of being forced to quarter
red-coated British troops in their own homes, the list went on and on. And the
American colonists, of course, reacted violently to what they considered
tyrannical policies emanating from the mother country (policies, it might be
added, driven largely by an effort to raise revenue to meet debts incurred in
the defense of those self-same colonists during the French and Indian War).
This concept of freedom was
clearly reflected in the words of the Declaration of Independence in 1776 and
the Constitution eleven years later. After Thomas Jefferson’s stirring preamble
declaring that “all men are created equal,” he went on to enumerate multiple
dastardly acts committed by the British crown, “…all having in direct object
the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States.” The careful
balance of powers crafted into the Constitution in 1787 was motivated by an
absolute determination to prevent a president of the United States from ever
becoming another King George, either in the near term or on some distant
horizon when a crisis gripped the country and a sitting president might be
tempted to say “When somebody is the President of the United States, the
authority is total, and that’s the way it’s got to be.”
This definition of freedom as
the absence of tyranny changed over time.
In the 19th century,
as Jacksonian America took shape, freedom and equality became linked in the
American mind, but not equality of condition—equal
opportunity became our watchword, a
level playing field for all, with the accident of birth or the actions of the
government not acting as a hindrance to individual advancement. Abraham Lincoln
was powerfully motivated by this concept, and he extended its reach to include everyone
held in bondage in this country—close to 4 million children, women, and men at
the moment of emancipation in 1865. Lincoln’s bedrock belief in free and equal thus led to the greatest
act of social reform ever carried out in the United States;
In the 20th
century, the American definition of freedom again underwent modification. As a new
urban and industrial society took shape, Thomas Jefferson’s ideal citizen, the
yeoman farmer, guaranteed his freedom and independence by living on the land,
no longer defined the vast majority of our population. Freedom increasingly
involved not only imposing restraints on monopoly power (the Jacksonian
concept) but also took on a new dimension: the guarantee of a basic level of
security for each citizen. FDR and the New Deal were the embodiment of this new
definition: to be truly free meant one also had to be secure from the multiple
ravages of an increasingly complex society—joblessness, hunger, lack of
shelter, even the death march of a previously unknown epidemic disease. This
new definition, free and secure, clearly
could only be underwritten by a dramatic expansion of government.
So where are we now?
It seems to me we are
witnessing a struggle between the devotees of the 18th century and
the 20th century definitions of American freedom. The heavily armed,
Confederate-flag waving, screaming-in-the-face-of-state-troopers demonstrators
are convinced they are being oppressed by tyrannical governors who are
depriving them of their freedom. Most Americans, according to every poll out
there right now, holds to the more recent definition: that freedom and security
are joined at the hip, that a government that is keeping them safe is
protecting their ability to enjoy the benefits of freedom (not to mention
keeping them alive). Both of these views
are deeply rooted in American history. Now might be a good time for us to ask
ourselves “which side are you on?” After all, both sides are as American as
apple pie.
Given the preference for "progress" in America, I'm leery of labeling this a battle of devotees of the 18th versus the 20th centuries. Even if "both sides are as American as apple pie," the presumption of newer=better leads to judgment.
ReplyDeleteThe argument to me comes down to the various priorities listed in the Constitution's Preamble.
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
How ought we balance the goals of Union, Justice, Tranquility, general Welfare, and Liberty? Some focus nearly entirely on Liberty. Others choose the general Welfare, defined pursing their understanding of "the greatest good for the greatest number." Others expand an understanding of Justice, often defined as "equality." Some pursue Tranquility, building institutions and practices to reduce conflict.
The pandemic reveals existing divisions and strains between those who prioritize various values.
I think that the goals of the founding fathers are united under a single trait: the absence, prevention, and foiling of extremism. Right now we are seeing a lot of extremism, in people, in their politics, in their views and in their behavior. It's not a uniquely nationalistic phenomenon. However, the founders were aware of the dangers of extremism and put their efforts into insulating their newly founded government from it. On this memorial day, let us honor those who were lost to extremism, and make up our minds to temper extremism wherever it might flourish. This allows us to deal sanely and concretely with challenges such as those we are facing, knowing the difference between the consequences of extremism and the actual fact of a disease or any other problem.
ReplyDelete