- ISTOOK: Obama wants to be impeached
- Obama to Central American leaders: I need help with border
- Military bans troops from Baptist church event honoring ‘God’s Rescue Squad’
- ‘Pocket drones’: U.S. Army developing tiny surveillance tools for the next big war
- Belgian cafe posts sign: Dogs allowed, but Jews stay out
- Gen. Dempsey: Pentagon studying Russian readiness plans not viewed ‘for 20 years’
- John McCain: Botched, two-hour execution of murderer is ‘torture’
- House GOP ready to move border bill
- Bomb squad called after live WWII artillery washes on Cape Cod beach
- HAYDEN: Intelligence, evidence and the case against Russia
CHARLES: The enduring presence of the Founders
Old rebukes to tyranny still refresh the love of liberty
Question of the Day
History casts important shadows that don’t fade with time. The year was 1774. The Declaration of Independence was still two years off, and liberty for those who called themselves Americans was far from inevitable.
What all Americans recognized, however, was a simple truth. The imperial British government was, with inordinate haste, promulgating laws intended to snuff out provincial and individual liberty, aiming to shut down opposition to its central authority.
Moreover, laws protecting individuals against that authority were suddenly going unenforced. The toxic mix — aggressive criminalization of formerly noncriminal acts and blatant nonenforcement of liberty-assuring laws — was more than unsettling.
It created a wave of fear. It also awoke the sleepiest of early Americans, who saw it was not right.
Thomas Jefferson took up his pen. He produced a short piece about basic rights, not the Declaration for which he would later be famous, but a little piece titled “The Rights of British America.”
He hoped to convince the overreaching British government to pull back, show restraint, slow the juggernaut of oppression, and remember that sovereignty belongs to the people, not to a government.
In his essay, Jefferson wrote that “unwarrantable encroachments and usurpations” were curbing basic liberties. He noted that, since the beginning of time, these liberties had belonged to individuals.
He explained that “his majesty” had begun unilateral assertion of formerly legislative powers, and that the crown was undertaking imperial exercise of “wanton power,” and that “rights of human nature are deeply wounded by this infamous practice.”
Jefferson, in his inimitable way, noted that “this is so shameful an abuse of power trusted with his majesty for all purposes, as if not reformed would call for some legal restrictions.” He closed noting that “your majesty or your governors have carried this power beyond every limit known or provided for by the laws.” There he left it.
Meantime, Benjamin Franklin had a word to say. He penned a piece in 1773 titled “Rules by Which a Great Empire May be Reduced to a Small One.”
Among Franklin’s “rules,” in this sardonic parody, he listed what a government should do to properly alienate the people. He noted “a great Empire, like a great Cake, is most easily diminished at the Edges.”
He suggested the king “contrive to punish” those who appeared to be “friends of liberty.” When appointees did something “odious,” the king should “recall and reward them with pensions,” putting them to pasture with profit.
He suggests veterans be “harassed with novel taxes,” that the empire find ways to reduce “security in property,” and “remember to make your arbitrary tax more grievous for your provinces” than those at the seat of power. That was the last humorous piece Franklin wrote about the king.
We inhabit a world that was once founded on the words of these great lovers of liberty. In this new world, we now find novel “encroachments and usurpations,” either by regulation, executive order or one-sided, vote-then-read legislation.
We find growing confusion over the sanctity of individual liberty, with invasions of privacy, incursions into formerly sacrosanct constitutional rights in the First, Second, Fourth, Fifth and 14th Amendments to our Constitution. We witness the criminal investigation of seasoned reporters and celebrated moviemakers, gun banning, and selective political prosecution of future contenders to the throne.
TWT Video Picks
Second- and third-stringers eye 2016 if front-runner stumbles
Get Breaking Alerts
- 'We're coming for you, Barack Obama': Top U.S. official discloses threat from ISIL terrorists
- 'Pocket drones': U.S. Army developing tiny spies for the next big war
- NAPOLITANO: What if our democracy is a fraud?
- Russia shipping sophisticated weapons systems to Ukraine separatists
- Michelle Obama says money in politics is bad, asks donors for 'big, fat check'
- Ohio university quiz implies atheists are naturally smarter than Christians
- Hamas rejects Kerry's call for cease-fire; Fears grow others could join fight against Israel
- Obama orders Pentagon advisers to Ukraine
- EDITORIAL: Detroit's water 'spigot bigots'
- White House readies for House GOP impeachment push: 'Foolish' to ignore