Or, WHAT A COUNTRY.
This Fourth of July, 2006 commemoration is placed under category, MIRACULOUS, because the date, the holiday, the history and how our nation came to be impresses me as miraculous and always has. Led by heroic individuals and their ideals, our Revolutionary War that birthed our United States of America was inspired toward the miraculous: there would be countries in North America since dates after 1776 but there would certainly not have been The United States of America as a republic form of government had there not been George Washington and the Revolutionary War that Washington and those referred to as our Founding Fathers organized and constructed by plan and method. Some men are far larger than others and certainly our own George Washington was, and in my appreciation of him and his place in history, he remains so today, along with the other Founding Fathers.
There’s trendy, recurring use recently of the phrases “our founding fathers” and “the founding fathers” and much of the misuse of those expressions is done by the Left and by those with counter-purposes to the United States, uses done wrongly to attempt to associate our United States Founding Fathers with socialist, paramilitary liberals with liberal ideology, these expressions used in our day to counter conservativism in our current society by suggesting some conflict with “the founding fathers” and such. And, used by the Left today, in my view, as attempt to rationalize and justify increased government and ongoing advances of socialism, if not communism, as if that was the purpose of our Revolutionary War when it was purposed in quite the polar opposite.
These inaccurate, miscast references to our Founding Fathers in attempt to reprimand those who today seek reduced government and defense of our nation is foolish, given that our Founding Fathers would hardly tolerate anyone in their time making such claims to the contrary of what it was they valued and pursued: no man subject to anyone, most of all government, and by that government, threat to life, liberty and the individual pursuit of happiness. When government presents itself by way of socialism upon our lives, as upon the lives of the Colonialists (required to “swear an oath to the Monarchy” under penalty of imprisonment or death), there is no representation of the individual, but instead, harm upon individual liberty.
To the contrary, our Founding Fathers were not liberals, nor were they socialists. They were not remotely near to the context that characterises communist revolutionaries and equating the United States Founding Fathers with the likes of the lowly Che Guevera and Fidel Castro, among others of their same lowly character, methods and ideas is not only academically nonsensical, but it is also and most significantly disgusting to anyone who knows the history and ideals that made Colonials into Revolutionary War Americans, and which, by outcome, made a new Republic, a nation governed by entirely new precedent: individuals represented as government, under no rule authority other than their own, of their own making.
And yet not for the privilege of any one man in preferance of any other. George Washington, our first United States President (first elected president in 1789 after the nation’s first Presidential election on February 04, 1789 — Washington received all 69 electoral votes — Washington was inaugurated into the Presidency April 30, 1789) continued to reject and reject soundly any notion that he would be anything but an elected President limited to office by terms, despite popular opinion at that time that the beloved man should be “the new monarch” of America, to rule at will for the duration of his life — a suggestion and notion that offended Washington mightily.
George Washington was not an egoist and he also denounced the notion of military rule for the new country he imagined and then fought to establish along with his peers. And he did fight and do so exceedingly well and bravely, considering the legacy he established as a military strategist. A warrior Washington was, but he was offended mightily by the idea that the military should be either purpose or governmental presence in the concept of country he pursued.
Washington rejected soundly the ideas and suggestions of dictatorship, monarchy or committee by inherited placement, and rejected the notion that individual men could not govern themselves. And, because this primary motivation, Washignton and the Founding Fathers pursued a new concept, that of representational government: the individual as citizen, responsible for governing themselves by representational form of government among the larger society and nation. This goal required military strategy and brave, aggressive action on the part of individuals to achieve that, but the method was not glorified so much as it was valued and appreciated as necessary means toward another end: to be able to go home to the family, home and in most cases, farm, and live in peace afterward, a man among men, a man under no other man’s authority other than by good conscience and moral code.
To equate or attempt to associate that and the man of Washington with socialist and/or communist rule, and worse, with communist revolutionaries largely committed to military might inorder to attain command and to sustain military might to maintain command of the land they presume to rule is a terrible miscarriage in reason.
Documents defining the day and the history:
Our Founding Fathers are defined by two separate groups. The first group is comprised of six individuals (George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, John Hancock and Benjamin Franklin).
The second group, however, comprised of the individuals who are signatories and/or authors — all one hundred and three of them — of our federal, founding documents and who were instrumental to the Revolutionary War beforehand (and which second group includes the first six individuals mentioned above).
My opinion is that the latter (the 103) are our Founding Fathers, given that Patrick Henry, good friend to and of George Washington, is by inspiration and concepts among the latter group — not a signator to our Constitution because he did not agree with how it was in final form — and that the documents that define our United States of America that arose during and after the Revolutionary War are as significant to the country as was the War itself.
Patrick Henry is regarded by some, in fact, with being the “father of the Revolution.” To wit, read the Patrick Henry speech in which he declared, “Give me liberty or give me death!”
He (Patrick Henry) had introduced a series of resolutions, highly tinctured with rebellions doctrines, and supported them with his wonderful eloquence. The house was greatly excited; and when, at length, he alluded to tyrants, and said, “Caesar had his Brutus, Charles the First his Cromwell, and George the Third…” there was a cry of “Treason! Treason!” He paused a moment, and then said, “…may profit by their example. If that be Treason, make the most of it.”
George Washington and other Founding Fathers of the United States of America: not Liberal, not Socialists, but soldiers when it was necessary and otherwise family men and rugged individualists.