Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 40 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Quote of the Day: The Blood of Patriots
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. –Thomas Jefferson
Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny. –Thomas Jefferson
Among history buffs, Jefferson’s reputation for being the primary author of the Declaration of Independence and contributing to the Constitution is well known. But his comments about revolution and rebellion have been, on reflection, puzzling.
He did support a “little rebellion” from time to time, although he believed that the rebellions must be legal. But his observation about the emergence of tyranny is correct.
I selected these quotations as a way to reflect on the current conditions in the United States. I wonder how Jefferson would view the violence, pro-Palestinian campus protests, shootings in Chicago and the blocking of highways as a means to protest? Would he understand these incidents as a means to preserve liberty? If we become complacent with our lives, do we need these incidents to refresh our views and stimulate engagement? Otherwise, are we likely to take our liberty for granted and not work to reinforce it? Is that why we’ve arrived at this difficult time?
Regarding the emergence of tyranny, we only need to look at the current administration. In spite of the protections embedded in our important documents, haven’t they been “perverted into tyranny?” Has the current situation arisen because of our lack of vigilance for our freedoms, or because power eventually leads to tyranny? Could we have avoided our descent into lawlessness and mediocrity by being more assertive? Was our state of affairs inevitable?
Published in Culture
Re people blocking the road, I bet people back then wouldn’t have tolerated it. The few hired police wouldn’t have stopped the people opening the road back up.
Re tyranny uses, the predicted it. They had a solution when 1/3 of the country was willing to do something, 1/3 was opposed to doing something, and 1/3 was just leave me alone, I have work to do and families to raise..
We are softer. Are we a majority like the latter, or a majority like the second example? I doubt if we have the fortitude of the founders. 2020 and 2022 showed me not even a majority will fight for peaceful fixes.
My high school American History teacher used to ask us if we agreed with Jefferson that “A little rebellion now and then was relished by the best of men”.
Most of the physical rebellion and protest has been carried out by those who would tie us to tyranny. Those who have protested such issues as abortion, the sacrament of the woke, are quickly dispersed and/or jailed.
A large part of what makes Trump so hated in some political circles is that he upsets the applecart of the tyrannical establishment. He has attempted to bring the rebellion through legal means and has been opposed through lawfare and other tools of tyranny. If someone else who spoke as smoothly and kindly as could be were to bring in the same rebellion, he would be just as hated by the powers that be.
A friend of mine once observed that pioneering leaders tend to be rough around the edges and their personalities and accomplishments are two sides of the same coin. One who has the grit to bring it to a tyrant is often a bit gritty in the sight of others as well.
I hope that there is sufficient support of legal rebellion to turn things around.
(Not to make this all about Trump. He is the example that comes quickly to mind. )
I fully agree, RH. We are softer. We are reluctant to fight for what is truly ours.
And an excellent example, too! We all need to be tougher, grittier, if we are going to be successful. Thanks, JoelB.
So true.VDH writer about the tragic hero, the tough guy needed at the time but who isn’t accepted after the job is done. Examples would be the “Magnificent 7” characters, the sheriff in High Noon, and especially Shane.
All the more reason we need to be sure that he has ample protection. No excuses!
Jefferson and revolution is a complicated subject. He was convinced that the American Revolution would serve as a model and that “This ball of liberty, I believe most piously, is now so well in motion that it will roll round the globe, at least the enlightened part of it, for light & liberty go together. It is our glory that we first put it into motion.”
Only it didn’t quite happen that way. He was a fervent supporter of the French Revolution until he became appalled at its excessive violence. (He ended his life believing that the French were “not ready” and that Louis XVI should have issued a French version of the Magna Carta and continued in power as a constitutional monarch.) But his true test came with the revolution on Saint-Domingue, now known as Haiti. It was one thing for people to rebel against their monarch, quite another to support black slaves overthrowing their white masters. The overthrow was committed during the presidencies of Washington and Adams and initially the Federalist Party was a supporter. But the slaughter of white Frenchmen by Jean-Jacques Dessalines in 1804 caused Jefferson to distance the United States from Haiti and the US did not even recognize their government until 1862.
So why did our revolution work? Probably because by 1776 sufficient numbers of the colonists no longer viewed themselves as Englishmen and therefore it became a rebellion against external forces and not internal ones.
Thanks, EJ. Do you think that with the later violence and rebellions, Jefferson would have changed his views?
DEI has made Hanlon’s razor an irresistible force- many are promoted for reasons other than ability & therefore can’t be blamed when they perform to their abilities-so we have rank incompetence in many arenas. Just look at the fitness tests for secret service-they are laughable, particularly the female ones:
https://johnalucas6.substack.com/p/a-new-cut-on-the-incompetence-and
given the above, I can understand the reluctance to put anyone on a barely sloped roof….
plus this nugget from the Babylon Bee
https://babylonbee.com/news/still-think-women-cant-do-the-job-here-are-12-benefits-of-lady-secret-service-agents?utm_source=The%20Babylon%20Bee%20Newsletter&utm_medium=email
Great points, MiMac. And the Babylon Bee is always spot on. Now I’m leaning toward the belief that it was massive incompetence rather than a conspiracy. Just ready to make up my mind into more data come in.
The problem with revolutions that involve bloodshed is that they are like wildfires. Wildfires occur in nature and some flora has evolved to take advantage of wildfires even as other flora and fauna are destroyed. Land conservators accept the reality of wildfires and try to limit their destruction while accepting long term benefits. So Jefferson’s formulation has a good theoretical foundation, but it can really suck to be in a revolution.
The question you’re ultimately asking is “What side of the line does one think Jefferson would have come down on during the American Civil War?” And frankly, I have no idea.
So true! There’s really no way, even with a “controlled fire,” to be certain that it won’t go wild!
I think Jefferson would have supported abolition of slavery and been appalled at the resultant loss of states’ rights.
Men who, unlike the “nice” folks, had the personal characteristics needed to do the job that had to be done, but, for that reason, also could not fit well into society once the danger was defeated. VDH also cites general Patton and possibly Sherman.
Find examples, Paul.
So they didn’t mind being taxed without representation until they no longer viewed themselves as English subjects?
Jefferson was a crazy, or perhaps evil, revolutionary radical.
Our country has an understandable reason to revere the Founders, as a basis for public commitment and allegiance to the country. The revolution was morally wrong, plainly, from a Christian theological perspective. I just taught on this last weekend, as it happens, out of Romans 13. The Declaration set forth a political theology that is contrary to Christian teaching, which is strange in a country that was, supposedly, overwhelmingly Christian.
The dispute behind the Revolution was a tax of about 10% on imported tea. It might have been a bit worse, for some, as a change in British policy right before the Revolution lowered the price of British tea (from the East India Company) to slightly less than the price on banned Dutch tea. As I understand it, John Hancock made his fortune as a smuggler, particularly of illegal Dutch tea.
Do you think that it is a coincidence that this smuggler was the principal signer of the Declaration?
I used to be an apologist for Jefferson, and in my view, this was due to the patriotic narrative on which I was raised, and which I believed strongly, essentially as a religion. Now I see the man for what he was, a violent radical and a hypocrite. The supposed prophet of Liberty was a slaveowner, for crying out loud.
So was George Washington.
Apples and oranges-Washington went to lengths to free & protect his slaves (but couldn’t do much for his wife’s):
“Washington was the only founding father to enact a large-scale manumission in his will.
Washington made several provisions in his will for the financial support and education of Mount Vernon’s freed people. As required by Virginia law, he ordered his executors to establish a permanent fund to provide clothing and food for those too elderly or sick to support themselves. He specified that young children without parents be placed under the guardianship of the court, taught to read and write, and apprenticed in a “useful occupation.” He also sternly forbade his executors from selling or transporting out of state any enslaved people before the terms of the manumission went into effect.”
”Neither Washington nor his wife had the legal authority to emancipate the Custis slaves.”
https://www.mountvernon.org/george-washington/slavery/george-washingtons-will
I knew this information. I was simply saying that to use slavery as a condemnation of Jefferson ignores that there were still many among the Founders who had slaves and, and each determined how to treat them and free them.
True- I was motivated b/c there was many things Jerry said that were incorrect -starting with the horrible exegesis of Romans 13- I just wasn’t sure why you threw the Washington slavery bit into it.
I’m an Old Testament person. Romans isn’t in my library.
So, Hancock was making money smuggling sea because of the tea tax? And he wanted to separate the colonies to get rid of the tea tax which would reduce his profits as a smuggler? I would rethink that point.
VDH on Shane is powerful.
In the early 70s I was a p/t firefighter in Southern California. Saw enough to have great respect for the destructive power of fire.
There are people fighting for fixes, but our media is slanted so that we do not know of them or what they have attempted to do.
One example is Mike Lindell.
He was on a lengthy podcast yesterday with Tim Pool.
Podcast should be here: http://x.com/i/broadcasts/1OwxWNjoEVWJQ
This man spent money out of his own pocket to purchase the voter registration rolls in every county in the nation. (Not at all a cheap endeavor.) He did follow up cell phone and in person visits with various Secretaries of State, many of whom gave him a hard time.
For instance one southern state’s Secretary of State told Lindell that the reason there were so many voters over the age of 104 in their state was due to the healthy lifestyle that their state’s location offered its citizens!
Lindell took numerous situations to courts across the land, often being denied a hearing because “you have no standing.”
Additionally think of the countless Americans who have spent time and energy working on this issue. Our own Saint Augustine is one example.
If we had a say in the press, people would have heard about Lindell’s efforts on a weekly basis. But to most Americans he is simply the guy who sells expensive pillows.
There are also the thousands of Americans who as doctors, nurses, physical therapists and scientists decided to go public with their findings about the dangers of the COV vaccines. For their efforts, they were given pink slips, black listed, denied their pensions and ostracized.
Sure for many people, none of this is as glamorous as someone who boasts about how many guns he owns. And how willing he will be “when the time comes” to step forward.
But courage is not always about waving a gun around.
I’ve always liked Mike Lindell and felt terrible about the way he was treated. He was up against an impenetrable wall.
Courage is often standing up when another guy is waving a gun.