They Don't Dare Tell You What the 4th Is About

PAF

Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2012
Messages
13,561
By Tom Woods
July 4, 2023

From the Tom Woods Letter:

Independence Day is tomorrow, and I wonder how many people really get why it matters.

In school, we were told this: “No taxation without representation.”

Zzzzzzzz.

The real principles were more like the following.

(1) No legislation without representation.

The colonists insisted that they could be governed only by the colonial legislatures. This is the principle of self-government. This is what the War for Independence was all about: local self-government.

Yet today, when the Supreme Court says the federal government has no authority over a particular issue and that it is better decided at the state level, instead of being pleased that the decentralized American political order is once again being respected, tens of millions of Americans respond as if Frankenstein’s monster were roaming the land.

2) Contrary to the modern Western view of the state that it must be considered one and indivisible, the colonists believed that a smaller unit may withdraw from a larger one. Today we are supposed to consider this unthinkable.

(3) The colonists’ view of the (unwritten) British constitution was that Parliament could legislate only in those areas that had traditionally been within the purview of the British government. Customary practice was the test of constitutionality. The Parliament’s view, by contrast, was in effect that the will and act of Parliament sufficed to make its measures constitutional.

So the American colonists insisted on strict construction, if you will, while the British held to more of a “living, breathing” view of the Constitution. Sound familiar?

So let’s recap: local self-government, secession, and strict construction. Not exactly the themes you learned in school.

And not even what you’ll learn in graduate school.

One day I decided I had to know what my fellow Columbia Ph.D. students thought Independence Day was all about.

What could these left-liberals be celebrating? They don’t favor local self-government, which is what the war was all about. They don’t favor strict construction of the Constitution, while the colonists — in a British context — were insisting on precisely that.

So what the heck did they think it was all about?

Only one person answered me: “There was a distance involved.”

So the problem was that the ruling class was too far away?

“Come on, men, we must continue making sacrifices so that we may someday have exploiters who live close by!”

I don’t think so.

This was a student at what at that time was the number-two academic department in the country for American history.

Well, on Wednesday I will have a bit of news regarding the study of genuine American history, rather than the hideous substitute we find in so many classrooms, and I know you’ll be glad to hear it.

Right now, though, it’s back to our London vacation with two of the Woods daughters, who are visiting another country for the first time. More tomorrow.

Tom Woods


https://www.lewrockwell.com/2023/07/thomas-woods/they-dont-dare-tell-you-what-the-4th-is-about/
 
What could these left-liberals be celebrating? They don’t favor local self-government, which is what the war was all about. They don’t favor strict construction of the Constitution, while the colonists — in a British context — were insisting on precisely that.

So what the heck did they think it was all about?

Tom’s giving them too much credit in thinking the reasons matter. It doesn’t matter if the reason for the war was independence from the crown, oil rights for Exxon, southern secession, regime change, or installing a new central bank. The celebration is about fucking winning. The USA fucking WON! That’s it.

That’s the difference between celebrating Independence Day and celebrating 4th of July.
 
Tom’s giving them too much credit in thinking the reasons matter. It doesn’t matter if the reason for the war was independence from the crown, oil rights for Exxon, southern secession, regime change, or installing a new central bank. The celebration is about fucking winning. The USA fucking WON! That’s it.

That’s the difference between celebrating Independence Day and celebrating 4th of July.

Yep if America is defined by anything, it's winning :cool:
 
F0P3N4-WIAAY6m-
 
By Tom Woods
July 4, 2023

From the Tom Woods Letter:

Independence Day is tomorrow, and I wonder how many people really get why it matters.

In school, we were told this: “No taxation without representation.”

Zzzzzzzz.

The real principles were more like the following.

(1) No legislation without representation.

The colonists insisted that they could be governed only by the colonial legislatures. This is the principle of self-government. This is what the War for Independence was all about: local self-government.

Yet today, when the Supreme Court says the federal government has no authority over a particular issue and that it is better decided at the state level, instead of being pleased that the decentralized American political order is once again being respected, tens of millions of Americans respond as if Frankenstein’s monster were roaming the land.

2) Contrary to the modern Western view of the state that it must be considered one and indivisible, the colonists believed that a smaller unit may withdraw from a larger one. Today we are supposed to consider this unthinkable.

(3) The colonists’ view of the (unwritten) British constitution was that Parliament could legislate only in those areas that had traditionally been within the purview of the British government. Customary practice was the test of constitutionality. The Parliament’s view, by contrast, was in effect that the will and act of Parliament sufficed to make its measures constitutional.

So the American colonists insisted on strict construction, if you will, while the British held to more of a “living, breathing” view of the Constitution. Sound familiar?

So let’s recap: local self-government, secession, and strict construction. Not exactly the themes you learned in school.

And not even what you’ll learn in graduate school.

One day I decided I had to know what my fellow Columbia Ph.D. students thought Independence Day was all about.

What could these left-liberals be celebrating? They don’t favor local self-government, which is what the war was all about. They don’t favor strict construction of the Constitution, while the colonists — in a British context — were insisting on precisely that.

So what the heck did they think it was all about?

Only one person answered me: “There was a distance involved.”

So the problem was that the ruling class was too far away?

“Come on, men, we must continue making sacrifices so that we may someday have exploiters who live close by!”

I don’t think so.

This was a student at what at that time was the number-two academic department in the country for American history.

Well, on Wednesday I will have a bit of news regarding the study of genuine American history, rather than the hideous substitute we find in so many classrooms, and I know you’ll be glad to hear it.

Right now, though, it’s back to our London vacation with two of the Woods daughters, who are visiting another country for the first time. More tomorrow.

Tom Woods


https://www.lewrockwell.com/2023/07/thomas-woods/they-dont-dare-tell-you-what-the-4th-is-about/

I was talking to a young black lbtq person yeseterday who was upset with the 4th over the recent Supreme Court rulings on gay rights and affirmative action. I didn't discuss the gay rights part because I knew that would just cause an argument between us. But I did address affirmative action by asking the question "But has it ever really helped black people as a whole?" The obvious answer to that question is "No it hasn't." I said "If Harvard really wants more black people at Harvard can't it take some of the millions it gets from the Federal Government and use it to improve education opportunities in targetted inner city high schools? And it could also just say it's going to have a lottery where it picks from the to 10% of all high schools accross the country. That would guarantee diversity without delvving in to race." He agreed, but said the decision was a win for "white supremacy." I pointed out the fact that at Meharry Medical College, a historically black medical school, the percentage of black male graduates has decreased over the years from near 100% to now about 30%. The overwhelming majority of the population are black women and there are people of other races. He was like "I'm not concerned about black men." (Even though he is a black man. SMH). I know, I know, "Smash the patriarchy! Black men only count when they're being killed by white men or by cops." His other response was "Well maybe more could be done to help black men be prepared to go to medical school." So I responded "If it's not racist for you not to be concerned about black men at Meharry, and if your solution is just better preparation, then why is it wrong for someone to think Harvard should do the same thing? And isn't Harvard doing away with test scores for admissions anyway? And what about the complaints of Asians who have higher test scores than white people?" No real response to any of that.

As for the "gay wedding cake" issue I didn't address, it's odd that liberals are making a big deal over this when this same couple won the right to stay in business without baking wedding cakes for gay couples under a previous court back in 2018 with a 7-2 decision. So it's silly to expect that all of a sudden a supposedly more conservative SCOTUS would force people to back gay cakes in 2023. And the false equivalency between gays not being able to buy a gay cake from one particular baker to blacks who couldn't find a hotel to sleep in or a bathroom to use for 100 miles under Jim Crowe. Lastly, some African countries have the death penalty for certain gay behaviors. Oh, but it's America that's the bad guy for "reasons."
 
Back
Top