What did American colonists
mean when they spoke of “liberty” and “independence”?
There are many dimensions of
those words. In the context of today’s hyper, indulgent claims about the
thoughts and opinions of the so-called “Founding Fathers,” I think it’s
important to note that our current understanding of those two words is
remarkably different from the way typical late 18th century
colonists understood them.
For example:
“In the pre-revolutionary world
of Washington and Lafayette, the notion of equality was almost literally
unthinkable. Lafayette’s early opposition to slavery was as prescient as it was
commendable, but neither he nor Washington considered slaves or Native
Americans (or most other people) as even remotely their equals, whatever their
stated principles. Distinctions of rank were implicit in the unspoken language
of everyday life, imbedded too deep to be much remarked on even when they were
pointedly felt, as they often were. Freedom, too, was a strange concept. In
both the colonies and in France, the word ‘liberty’ usually referred to a
traditional or newly granted privilege, such as an exemption from tax. Among
the French aristocracy’s greatest complaints against Louis was the loss of such
special considerations, or ‘liberties.’ The model of ‘independence’ that
Washington held before him was that of the Virginia gentleman, whose property
and wealth liberated him from the need to be dependent on anyone, even powerful
friends. To declare one’s independence was to declare oneself an aristocrat.”
Neither “liberty” nor “independence” carried what we think of as
familiar connotations within the modern liberal-conservative political
spectrum. Indeed, in several respects, neither of those words was associated in colonial times with the ideologies, functions or practices of government.
The quote is from For Liberty and
Glory: Washington, Lafayette and Their Revolutions, by James R. Gaines (New
York: W. W. Norton & Company, 12-13).
Copyright © Richard Carl Subber 2015
No comments:
Post a Comment