Across the country, the "Tea Party" movement is spreading. Anti-stimulus protests in Arizona, Washington State, Kansas, Georgia, and elsewhere are popping up, and of course CNBC's Rick Santelli has become an instant folk hero after calling for a Chicago Tea Party. But if we're going to compare our actions to those brave Bostonians of 1773, we should really take a look at what their protest meant, and what happened afterwards. To simply compare ourselves to those men and women, without truly understanding what they did, at the least cheapens our shared history and could lead to consusion over the motives of this new "Tea Party" movement.
The decision to dump 45 tons of tea into Boston Harbor wasn't made at the spur of the moment. It had been carefully discussed and planned by the leaders of Boston's patriot community. They knew exactly what they were doing when they boarded those three ships and began breaking open the heavy chests filled with tea from the East India Trading Company. They were committing an act of insurrection, not political theater.
Let's back up for a second. In colonial America, there were a lot of tea drinkers, but many of them bought smuggled tea. The reason was simple: it was cheaper. There was already an import duty on British tea which made it more expensive than the Dutch tea many merchants (including John Hancock) smuggled in to the colonies. In April of 1773 Parliament tried to rectify this by passing the Tea Act. The legislation granted a monopoly of the North American market to the East India Trading Company in order to try and keep the company from economic collapse. At the same time, Parliament imposed a new tax on tea, but one that would be paid in London as a surcharge. The Americans would actually see lower prices on tea, but the tea they purchased would already come pre-taxed. Historian Benson Bobrick says it "remains a noble feature of the whole confrontation that immediate economic interest did not determine [the colonists'] response."
And Americans didn't take the bribe of lower tea in exchange for accepting a revenue tax. In Philadelphia, ships bearing tea couldn't find anyone willing to lead the ships into harbor. In Charleston, South Carolina, the tea was off-loaded, but was stored in moldy warehouses where the product quickly rotted and became useless. In New York City, storms prevented the tea-laden ships from docking.
Boston, already filled with thousands of Regular troops sent to suppress the insurrection, would be a different story. Three ships eventually landed at Griffin's Wharf in Boston Harbor, but armed townspeople stood guard over the vessels to prevent the tea from being unloaded. Patriot leaders pleaded with the captains of the ships to sail away, but they refused to do so until their cargo was removed. Only when word was received that the tea was to be off-loaded and imported the very next morning did the patriots act.
The beginning of the Boston Tea Party took place at Fanueil Hall. The large meeting house was packed to the brim on the night of December 16th. When he was informed that the governor had rejected pleas for help from the colonists, Samuel Adams, a staunch supporter of the Patriot cause (and something of a rabble-rouser) cried out, "This meeting can do nothing more to save the country!"
That was the signal that triggered the Boston Tea Party. Two hundred men disguised themselves as best they could (it's interesting to point out that at the time, no one dared publicly admit they had taken part in the Tea Party) and set out to dump the tea, while thousands of residents watched from the streets.
It took them three hours. They did not burn down the ships, or vandalize them. They didn't steal any tea. They only destroyed it, and then marched off the boats and down the street with a fifer leading the way.
I mentioned earlier that His Majesty's troops were already in Boston that night. They did nothing to stop the Tea Party. Warships anchored less than a mile away did not fire upon the crowd, nor did they send a detachment of soldiers to try to break up the silent riot. Instead, the Crown's men exercised a great deal of restraint (no doubt thinking back to that March night just a few years earlier when troops opened fire on a crowd of belligerent Bostonians, killing five of them in what became known as the Boston Massacre). Still, Admiral John Montague couldn't help but open a window as the patriots passed by on the street below. "Boys, you have had a fine, pleasant evening for your Indian caper, haven't you? But mind, you have got to pay the fiddler yet."
They paid, all right. The reaction from Parliament and the Crown was swift and severe. Parliament quickly passed the Coercive Acts, better known in the colonies as the Intolerable Acts. The response to the insurrectionist Tea Party was to try to break the will of the colonists. They shut down the port of Boston, revoked the charter of Massachusetts, removed any civilian governing authority and replaced it with Royal rule, and re-established the practice of quartering troops in civilian homes. Additionally, more than 5,000 more troops arrived to crack down on the rebellious Bostonians. Boston at the time was a city between 15,000 and 20,000, which meant that there was nearly one Regular for every adult male in the city. General Gage, the new military governor of Massachusetts, soon set out to confiscate gunpowder and arms stored in towns throughout the colony. Long before Lexington and Concord, Regular troops marched on the towns of Somerville (where they successfully removed the powder) and Salem (where they were forced to turn back by a crowd of civilians). Patriots responded by seizing the armed garrison at Portsmouth, Maine (then a part of Massachusetts) without firing a shot.
In short, the Boston Tea Party was an act of defiance and insurrection that set in motion a chain of events that led to armed rebellion against Parliament and the King. I wonder, do we really mean to compare ourselves to the men and women who, even at that early date, were ready to sacrifice their all for the cause of liberty?
It seems that what we're actually seeing now is a relatively low-key and sedate protest in relation to the audacious and incredible increase in government power. Frankly, the patriots who took part in the Boston Tea Party would probably call us cowards for not responding in a more full-throated manner.
I'm not objecting to the protests. Far from it in fact. I'll be at the protest in Washington, D.C. But I am not expecting anything other than street theater, or the political equivalent of clearing our throat rather than the yelling our politicians deserve to hear. I won't compare it to the Boston Tea Party, because there is no comparison. To claim otherwise is to both cheapen the actual protest by 200 Bostonians and their thousands of supporters, and to inflate the magnitude of our current actions.
I wonder, what are we expecting to achieve from these protests? Are we content to merely register our disapproval, or are we seeking to change what Congress and our president have done? If it is the former, I'm sure the politicians will note our objection, and wait for us to quiet down. If it is the latter, I fear our current protests are too scatter-shot to do any real good.
What is the target of our protest? Are we protesting the President and Congress for an act already passed, or are we petitioning our state and local governments to refuse to accept the stimulus money?
What do we do if these protests do not result in the change in policies we are asking for? What happens next?
Make no mistake, once a movement like this has begun, it will, sooner or later, have to answer these difficult questions or risk failure. Now is the seed-time of liberty, and the steps we take and the words we use will either be recalled triumphantly by our grandchildren, or seen as a sad charade conducted by children who could not muster the strength and conviction of their ancestors.
In 1775, just a few weeks before blood was spilled at Lexington Green, Dr. Joseph Warren addressed a crowd of Bostonians who had gathered to commemorate the anniversary of the Boston Massacre.
Our country is in danger, but not to be despaired of. Our enemies are numerous and powerful; but we have many friends, determining to be free, and heaven and earth will aid the resolution. On you depend the fortunes of America. You are to decide the important question, on which rest the happiness and liberty of millions yet unborn. Act worthy of yourselves. The faltering tongue of hoary age calls on you to support your country. The lisping infant raises its suppliant hands, imploring defence against the monster slavery. Your fathers look from their celestial seats with smiling approbation on their sons, who boldly stand forth in the cause of virtue; but sternly frown upon the inhuman miscreant, who, to secure the loaves and fishes to himself, would breed a serpent to destroy his children.
With all due respect to Dr. Warren, this is not your father's protest movement. This is your forefathers' protest. Act worthy of yourself.
Saturday, February 21, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
26 comments:
The next step is a general strike. Stay home from work and refuse to buy anything. Those who work and pay taxes ultimately control the economy and should demonstrate that control.
Rather than buying government bonds invest in gold.
Anytime Obama leaves the White House organize a protest. Show the politicians that we have a voice and are willing to use it.
The next step should be a general strike. If on a specified day everyone stays home from work and refuses to spend any money, we can demonstrate the impact the taxpayers have on the economy.
Contemplate your belly button all you want, but show up at the protests and make clear the message to the idiots in control of the mad house for now -- legislation that has not even been read and fully debated before enactment is NOT true representation! Not unless you count yourself a mushroom waiting in the dark for the next shovel full to be dumped on you.
A Tea Drinker
I rather enjoyed the comedy stylings of that guy who'd follow Clinton about, dressed in a foam outfit cut to the shape of a giant penis.
We need that same sort of comedic hook.
Oh, I know the legacy media will do what it can to label every remark against The One as racism, but I think most people will get tired of that tune soon enough.
Asking us to hold to standards that our enemies never do is stupid and sucicidal. Some eggs will be broken to make an omelet. Yes, let's do the best we can - but NEVER let your enemies use your own best instincts against you. They don't get to make the rules. We do.
An excellent summation and I agree.
I hope we can account ourselves worthy of our past.
One thing that you alluded to but never said explicitly is that the English tea - with the tax - was actually cheaper than the smuggled Dutch tea.
The Boston Tea Party was an act of revolution on principle. The Colonists would rather pay higher prices for smuggled tea which wasn't taxed.
" Frankly, the patriots who took part in the Boston Tea Party would probably call us cowards for not responding in a more full-throated manner. "
Indeed. Very good post. The colonists, of course, also knew that the Brit government was across the sea - which was a great deal more distant, in practical terms, than it is today. They wanted more autonomy. The situation we have today is quite different. We really can't throw off our OWN government, which is NOT across the sea. It's right here, and it is, unfortunately, everywhere. The government we want to throw off won't get tired of dealing with a rebellious colony at long-range (as the Brits did here and subsequently, in India and elsewhere). And the French won't swoop in with support at the last minute, either.
You want to make a protest that is more than symbolic? Want to send a message that goes straight to the heart of what pisses us all off about this bailout?
Start making all of your mortgage payments 15 days late. Federal law imposes a grace period of 15 days, and forbids the imposition of late fees or credit reporting on late payments that are made within the grace period. There is no penalty, but if 1 million people did this with an average $1000 mortgage payment, that is like pulling a billion dollars out of the system.
To really twist the knife, withdraw permanently $1000 from your checking, savings, or brokerage account. Keep it at home in cash, or buy an ounce of gold with it and hold on to that. Now those "late" mortgage payments are not offset by the cash sitting in an account, they are pulled out of the system altogether.
That will not be ignored. Its your money they are screwing with, let them know how it feels when enough people decide to take their ball and go home.
This crisis can be solved but it will mean that some prudent people will be enriched or at least not markedly penalized and that is what has the Left so up in arms. No solution that rewards the prudent is acceptable.
What we need is a shock to the system. Say, in the manner of a month where the Federal Government receives far less than expected in revenue. Pick a month when quarterlies are due. Don't send them. Also, people who are self-employed through corporations take the same month prior "off" so as not to generate any withholding. I am not sophisticated at all in these matters so this is just the brainstorming of a descendant of John Adams at work. Can you imagine the result of "starving" the beast for a month? With enough planning, those of us who truly provide the feds with the capital they need to remain operational could "starve the beast into submission." Thoughts??
I was at the Overland Park protest at Congressman Moore's office today. The big concern to me is the lack of a coherent message. My hat's off to the protest organizer, but she got caught up by some softball questions tossed by a Cameraman/Reporter from a local affiliate. I think if people are going to protest like this, and I think they should - it was extremely worthwhile - they need to take an hour, look at the facts about whichever bailout it is to which they object, and be prepared to deliver a :15 second soundbite that clearly and concisely articulates why you are there. We have the internet, folks. I had a print off of some of the wasteful spending in my pocket. I almost handed it to this wonderful lady. She just got caught a little flat footed, but she did fine. However, people need to be prepared to do better as things roll out across the country. The questions will get harder and more pointed. Be specific, unlike the opposition.
In a parliamentary system a bill is not enacted until after it has been read and voted on, several times. Could someone with more expertise comment on whether it is possible in other systems to do what the American Congress routinely does and just did with the largest expenditure in history? Is there any other democracy, or for that matter dictatorship, where the legislature can vote on a bill that has not been read publicly and entered into the record for comment?
This discussion is heartening. A movement is budding. It is less than 72 hours since Santelli's "rant", so of course it is disorganized and incoherent. However, the suggestions here and elsewhere are thoughtful and, unlike the cacophony that issues from protest movements on the left, supported by (sometimes flawed) reason rather than mere emotion.
Perhaps Atlas really will shrug, and the shrug will be effective.
Yes, that's the real question isn't it. What are you prepared to do?
The original Boston protesters were prepared to shed their own blood. More importantly, to spill the blood of their own countrymen, their oppressors.
"... [W]hen a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."
Your duty is clear. It is not marching. It is not honking if you pay too much tax. It is not writing clever signs to get on CNN.
Your duty is to throw off such government, and provide new guards for your children's security.
There is only one way to protest the tax ... and believe me there is a tax coming to pay for the $787 billion boondoggle.
There's only one protest that has any meaning, and that is to not pay your tax. Don't file. Don't declear your income. Don't pay what's due.
You know, if I was the Pentagon, located in Clarendon, VA ... and I wanted to get up a list of the IP addresses of everyone who was ready to revolt in this country ... I'd start up a blog much like this one to solicit comments from people fed up enough to actually do something about the usurpations.
Then, once I had all those IP addresses, I'd make sure those people got what was coming to them.
I think the first thing we can accomplish is at least showing the American people there is resistance to all this taxing, spending, and "bailing out". Why is that important? Because a compliant media has written about this as if Americans are ALL sitting at home with their hands out waiting for Obama to save them. We're not. We want him to get out of the way and let the market work.
If media coverage then spurs more opposition, many gutless wonders in Congress may think twice before voting for even more gargantuan government expansions.
It's too early to be thinking of "revolutions". Right now the most important thing we can do is educate the public and find ways to make the media cover it.
Uh, Florida,
Go back to bed. You haven't a clue.
Some 80% of the IP addresses parceled out in the retail broadband market are dynamically assigned addresses. So there is no guarantee that an IP is sacrosanct to an individual.
We tend to view history through rose colored glasses and selective memory. The non-violent Boston Tea Party was a major protest, but it was a relatively minor act by the most radical of the patriots, the Sons of Liberty. Organized in most of the colonies to protest the Stamp Act, they had been protesting various injustices for years before the Boston Tea Party (the Boston group was formed in 1765). Moderates, like Ben Franklin, opposed the action and urged and/or offered payment for the destroyed tea.
What's important to note is, by this point the Sons of Liberty weren't above the use of violence. While an effort was made to police themselves, they were accused of tarring and feathering customs agents and Loyalists, various acts of vandalism, in 1765 they seized and burned the governor of New York's gilded coach to ashes and burned Andrew Oliver(commissioned Distributor of Stamps for Massachusetts) in effigy - along with his house on Kilby St. The sheriffs and the troops refused to confront the protesters. They destroyed several revenue boats (the equivalent of Coast Guard cutters), culminating in the forcible seizure (the Lt. in command was shot and wounded) and subsequent burning to the waterline of the HMS Gaspée in 1772 - a year before the Tea Party. The Tea Act, and subsequent protests, were the end of a long chain of taxes and tariffs that the cash strapped British Crown had attempted to impose on the colonies; such as the previously mentioned Stamp Act and the Townshend Act. Because of the existing friction, the Crown felt a crackdown was required to prevent insurrection; they were effectively unable to collect taxes in the colonies, and the Sons of Liberty had voices in government and had demonstrated their ability to control commerce, even effectively shutting down major ports. One would argue that the reason the Boston Tea Party was peaceful was because all parties involved knew that the Sons of Liberty were capable of using force.
I say that to say, we're not nearly at the point that the colonists found themselves at in 1773. Not saying we won't get there, and while it's catchy to use the evocative and familiar historical reference, but the situations aren't analogous. However if and when they do become analogous, you'll know, and you're going to want the proper tools available. because the best hedge against us ever getting there is the understanding, by both sides, of the consequences of someone doing something stupid. If you don't own a proper rifle, get one, get ammo (heck, learn to reload), learn how to use it, teach a friend.
Junyo,
Excellent look back at history.
I'd also just like to point out that when these events were occurring, we were all British subjects. And so, the war that was brewing was a civil war.
I'm also reminded that Obama is frequently compared to Abraham Lincoln. And let's not forget that Abraham Lincoln, who I greatly admire by the way, has the sole distinction of being the only US President to unleash the awesome power of the United States military to kill other Americans whom he disagreed with politically.
I believe Obama is capable of nothing less.
A General Strike? No.
I've never understood what the left found so compelling about demonstrations and marches. All it did was make me not want anything to do with such angry, rancorous people.
A third party? No. The party apparatus with a significant constituency who believe in smaller government is already in place, but the constituency hasn't been very assertive.
That definitely needs to change. I couldn't care less about demonstrations, but I would like to see some teach-ins.
Excellent post. Let us remember as well that our forefathers were in more than a little danger in this quiet act of rebellion. Had the British army chosen, these brave men and women could well have been shot or hung. It is only thanks to their courage that we are able to protest without fear of the same. For now.
Don't Feed the Beast!
http://inthebreach.blogspot.com/2009/03/dont-feed-beast.html
Great post
website design nyc
A singular message is one of the key points you bring up for any protest and it must be honed to bring attention to our politicians and the media that we have the muscle to actually effect the change we want. I only hope that most of us can muster up the commitment that exemplified those brave revolutionists during our Nation's formation.
When growing up I remember my father telling me that as your income grows so will your expenditures as your appetite for the things you couldn't afford before increases. He then cautioned me that once you get used to that higher style of life, it's awfully hard to cut back on those expenditures that you once thought were luxuries but now think are necessities.
Since much of the angst among many of us is derived from the government playing by a different set of rules than the average American citizen does, this I believe is one of a number of sound rallying points we can all get behind.
Every American with the exception of the uber rich, has to make adjustments in their spending habits because of a slowing economy, so why shouldn't our government do the same?
It doesn't matter if it's bailouts, welfare, taxes or self-serving politicians that gets your dander up. There isn't one American that can write a check to pay for anything if there is no money in the checking account and the Government shouldn't be any different.
A possible slogan we might use that hammers home our outrage of this double standard could read something like this...
"I've Had To Cut Spending,
Now It's The Governments Turn."
It would also be extremely effective to name our movement even though it's only in it's infancy. That would go a long way in further solidifying our message as one associated with a significantly large group of like minded citizens. Plagiarizing those early revolutionists monicker "Sons of Liberty" would be my suggestion.
What this movement should do is become something so visible that our politicians take notice and change their ways. What should we accomplish? I would set a few odd goals:
* We should vote out all - good and bad (sorry) - the Congressmen and Senators who have been in office 6 or more consecutive years. Lets face it - they're the ones most deserving of blame.
* We should force the new legislators we vote in to sign a pledge/contract with the people promising to serve no more than 6 consecutive years.
* We should start a movement within the states to enact a term limits amendment. Note to self: don't allow another Constitutional Congress!
* We should with the amendment make the legislators paid by the states - not the federal government. This would include any pensions etc. (I'd rather offer no pension and double their salary...). If they offend their constituents, the state legislature could reduce their salary to $1 to get accross a point.
Change in the system - reducing the size of government and reducing taxes - comes from being wiser about who we elect. I spent many hours on the street in this last election. I'm ashamed at how ignorant people were of the candidates, issues, and more importantly where their candidates stood on issues. Only a few seemed to vote based on knowledge. If only voters could be required to take a test.
In short the movement has to educate people - not just on candidates and issues, but also on the simple fact that when you ask government for something it usually comes at a steep price.
Post a Comment