I remember a poll from several years ago that showed that a staggering percentage of the American public had no idea what event the 4th of July was meant to celebrate. That event, of course, was the signing of the Declaration of Independence, easily among the most important documents in the history of mankind. In declaring our separation from the rule of King George of England, the founders also declared, for the first time in history, that the only legitimate purpose of government is to protect those unalienable rights which preexist its formation. That declaration was more profound and important than even the founders themseles realized, having led to a far greater expansion of freedom and equality under the law than they ever imagined.
The promise of freedom was only partially secured by the revolutionary war and the subsequent constitutional system set up to replace divine rule, of course. It was denied to blacks, to women, to Indians, and to others. But the power of the ideas unleashed so eloquently by Mr. Jefferson would eventually overcome the limitations placed on them by those who expounded them. It is not an accident that those who would later fight for equal rights in so many areas, from Frederick Douglass to Martin Luther King, invoked the Declaration in their calls for equality and liberty.
Today is not only the 230th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration, it is also the 180th anniversary of one of history's strangest coincidences. When the founders set upon the task of writing the Declaration of Independence, it was originally to be written by Benjamin Franklin, the elder statesman among them. But Franklin was ill at the time and he passed it along to others. A committee was formed that included Franklin, Jefferson, and John Adams. Adams and Jefferson argued over who should then write it, each one thinking that the other should. In the end, Jefferson was convinced that a Virginian should write it and he wrote the first draft, which was then edited by the whole committee and the final result sent on for adoption.
After the war and the establishment of the new Constitution, Jefferson and Adams became bitter political enemies. We often speak today of negative campaigning as being something new, but the election of 1800 rivaled the most vile attack ads we see now. The charges thrown around by their supporters were scandalous and it was one of the nastiest election fights in history, so nasty that when it was over Adams left Washington in a coach headed for his home state rather than stick around for Jefferson's inauguration for a symbolic peaceful transfer of power. Imagine the scandal of such an action today.
After both had left public life and retired to their homes, however, a beautiful and profound friendship bloomed between them. In a most remarkable series of letters between the two great men over more than a decade, you can almost feel their affection growing as they discussed an immense variety of subjects. If you've never read those letters, I urge you to do so. There is more genuine brilliance expressed in them than in half the books in a good library combined.
The story ends in a twist that even a movie screenwriter would have to reject as just a bit too coincidental. Both men died on the same day - July 4th, 1826, the 50th anniversary of the signing of the document they had labored together to produce, a document that would change the whole history of human civilization. Legend has it that the last words spoken by John Adams on his deathbed were, "Thomas Jefferson survives"; he did not know that his friend was also on his deathbed hundreds of miles away (Is this true? Andrew Burstein has an interesting article examining the historical evidence and finds that Adams did indeed mention Jefferson as his last words, but that the word "survives" was apparently inaudible and, perhaps, assumed by his listener).
The 4th of July, for me, has very little to do with patriotism or nationalism, feelings that seem to affect me far less than most men. My allegiance is not to the nation, it is to the set of principles upon which the nation was founded. When the government upholds those principles, I offer it praise; when it violates them, I offer my anger and my opposition. Those principles of individual liberty and equality before the law are, in my mind, sacred and inviolable. They are the cornerstone of my view of human civilization; whatever advances them has my support, whatever impedes them my opposition.
And this is a day to celebrate not only the clear expression of those ideals found in the Declaration of Independence, but also the bravery of so many who would not accept their incomplete application. On this day, celebrate not only the wisdom of Thomas Jefferson and John Adams; celebrate also the valiant efforts of Frederick Douglass, of Harriet Tubman, of Sojourner Truth, of Elizabeth Cady Stanton, of Susan B. Anthony, of Martin Luther King and of so many others who used the power of those ideals to compel this nation on to a more complete fulfillment of the promises of liberty and equality. For their efforts left not only this nation but the entire world a far better place.
- Log in to post comments
Wonderful piece, Ed. Thanks!
Nice report.
It took Lincoln to forever link the Declaration with the Constitution. But today the ideas Jefferson so well captured are so engrained as a part of human thought that even those governments that do not plan to establish freedom at all, must call themselves "Democratic Republics," and pay some homage to Jefferson's ideas of freedom.
Ideas don't sleep, of course, and those small concessions to freedom as an ideal often are the seeds that establish it in reality, later.
Whenever I tell the story of Jefferson's and Adams' friendship in class, with their deaths on the same day, the 50th anniversary of the Declaration, I tear up. The story is powerful, and holds the attention of people studying history. It's a grand story.
"My allegiance is not to the nation, it is to the set of principles upon which the nation was founded. When the government upholds those principles, I offer it praise; when it violates them, I offer my anger and my opposition."
In my view, that is patriotism. It's the patriotism of Tom Paine.
"Independence is my happiness, and I view things as they are, without regard to place or person; my country is the world, and my religion is to do good." - Paine, The Rights of Man
That was and is such a radical idea that a substantial portion of the American public can be swayed by the false argument "Where in the Constitution does it say that you have a right to blahblahblah?" The concept of unenumerated rights seems to go against an idea ingrained in most people that the government parcels out certain rights, not that the people grant powers to the government. Perhaps one could make an argument that it's an evolutionary thing -- reflexive loyalty to the tribal leader would tend to confer a survival advantage in more primitive times.
Ed, very nice, very eloquently said. You articulated very clearly what I felt but had never quite put into words - where my patriotism really lies, the ideals of the declaration of independence and in the constitution, not in any particular administration, government, or nation. I feel some nations, especially in Europe, embrace some of those ideals more than we do now but, it was us, our nation's founders, who first put them down on paper and enshrined them into the foundation of law that define our nation now, though many of those ideals are still not applied to all equally yet - especially gays and non-christians (non-theists in particular).
I am especially angry right now at our present administration and congress who seem especially intent on trampling on those ideals we hold so dearly. Their ignorance of and vile hatred for gays, and non-believers in particular is about as foul and contrary to those ideals as anything I have seen in our government in my memory. They way this administration seems utterly intent on running over the civil liberties enshrined in our constitution is repulsive; the way this congress seems utterly unwilling to stop it on any level is disgusting.
I could go on but I wont, not today. What I will do is continue to do my part and participate in this democracy in any way I can starting with being sure to vote at the next elections to vote those betrayers of our civil liberties out of office, out of power. If enough like-minded people do the same, we will succeed in doing so.
VisualFX wrote:
I think this depends very much on which specific issue you're looking at. Yes, most of the nations of Europe treat gays much better than we do and we are clearly behind the curve on that one. But by the same token, most European nations simply do not have the same protections for free speech that we do and that is equally important. I'm glad they recognize gay rights, but not at all happy that they also seem to think that therefore it's okay to punish anti-gay speech, or anti-religious speech, or any other kind of speech they don't like. As we speak, there are people in prison or on trial in Italy, Austria and Sweden for nothing more than speech someone else finds offensive (Fallaci in Italy, Irving in Austria, and at least one minister in Sweden for giving a sermon against homosexuality). And in England, anyone making even mildly anti-gay statements in public gets a visit from Scotland Yard to "investigate". So again, I support them when they're on the right side of principle and condemn them when they're not, just as I do with my own government.
That was a nice post. One of the best I've read, really.
Beautiful.
Case in point. Although only one of those is about either Jefferson or Adams.
Ed Wrote:
But by the same token, most European nations simply do not have the same protections for free speech that we do and that is equally important. I'm glad they recognize gay rights, but not at all happy that they also seem to think that therefore it's okay to punish anti-gay speech, or anti-religious speech, or any other kind of speech they don't like.
Agreed. That is why I said "some of those ideals." What you are describing here is political correctness gone too far and truly defies the ideal of free speech - no matter how vile, hateful or unpopular it may be - must never be quashed.
With that said, there appears to be a concerted effort to quash free speech in this country as well, both officially and in the general public. It ranges from wrong-head decision by the Supreme Court to not protect whistleblowers http://www.aclu.org/natsec/gen/21831prs20051128.html to attacks on the porn industry http://www.avn.com/index.php?Primary_Navigation=Articles&Action=View_Ar… which really is a much broader attack on free speech.
That is part of what I am angry about and fighting against as are you. And, at least for now, we certainly do have it over most of Europe on that issue.
However, as I stated, when it comes to things like equal rights for all and church-state separation, we are far behind. Take Norway for example, they have recognized civil unions of gay couples (though they do not allow church weddings or adoption) http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/660zy… and, despite not having official separation of church and state, Norway is pretty much a secular country with very low church attendance. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Norway There is a growing move towards officially separating church and state in Norway however http://www.aftenposten.no/english/local/article1210780.ece
I feel our constitution is the strongest there is in protecting civil rights for all but, it is not being applied to all equally yet (this is where some of the European countries have us beat in some regards) and there are strong forces looking to erode those rights. This makes me not very enthusiastic about celebrating this government or this nation right now. Instead, like you, I choose to celebrate the ideals that our constitution embodies.