Sunday, May 19, 2013

1773 Boston Tea Party = Vandalism

The original "Boston Tea Party" was an unChristian act of vandalism. No true Christian should participate in such acts of violence. I'm willing to believe that Sam Adams, John Hancock, Paul Revere, and others who were involved in this ignoble act repented of their deeds.

Ann Coulter, in contrasting the "Tea Party Movement" and the "Occupy Wall Street" protests of October 2011 writes:
     First of all, the Boston Tea Party was nothing like tattooed, body–pierced, sunken-chested 19-year-olds getting in fights with the police for fun. Paul Revere's nighttime raid was intended exclusively to protest a new British tea tax. (The Wall Street protesters would be more likely to fight for a new tax than against one.)
     Revere made sure to replace a broken lock on one of the ships and severely punished a participant who stole some of the tea for his private use. Samuel Adams defended the raid by saying that all other methods of recourse -- say, voting -- were unavailable.
    Our revolution -- the only revolution that led to greater freedom since at least 1688 -- was not the act of a mob.
     As specific and limited as it was, however, even the Boston Tea Party was too mob-like to spark anything other than retaliatory British measures. Indeed, it set back the cause of American independence by dispiriting both American and British supporters, such as Edmund Burke.     George Washington disapproved of the destruction of the tea.
     Benjamin Franklin demanded that the India Tea Co. be reimbursed for it.
     Considered an embarrassment by many of our founding fathers, the Boston Tea Party was not celebrated for another 50 years.
     It would be three long years after the Boston Tea Party when our founding fathers engaged in their truly revolutionary act: The signing of the Declaration of Independence.
     In that document, our Christian forebears set forth in blindingly clear terms their complaints with British rule, their earlier attempts at resolution, and an appeal to the Supreme Judge of the world for independence from the crown.
     The rebel armies defending that declaration were not a disorganized mob, chanting slogans for the press and defacing public property.
     Even the Minutemen, whose first scuffle with the British began the war, were a real army with ranks, subordination, coordination, drills and supplies. There is not a single mention in the historical record of Minutemen playing hacky-sack, burning candles assembled in "peace and love," or sitting in drum circles.
     A British lieutenant-general who fought the Minutemen observed, "Whoever looks upon them as an irregular mob will find himself very much mistaken."
     By contrast, the directionless losers protesting "Wall Street" -- Obama's largest donor group -- pose for the cameras while uttering random liberal clich├ęs lacking any reason or coherence.
Neo-conservatives like Ann Coulter disapprove of the violence of "irregular mobs," but not the systematic, institutionalized violence of empires like the U.S. "No" to the "Tea Party," but "YES" to the nation-wide American Revolution.

No comments: