1776: America’s Big Mistake

You might be a little surprised by the claim I’m making in the title of this post, namely that the American “Revolution” (actually, as Tom DiLorenzo makes clear, “Secession” would be a much more accurate term) was a big mistake, but I think it’s pretty dead-on.  I’m with Stephen Kinsella on this (and pretty much everything else, it seems).  Consider what happened in the United States as a result of our separation from Britain:  America was a consolidating empire from the very start and the pace only quickened, resulting in all of the horrible effects those of us schooled on the topic are so wretchedly familiar with.  From its inception, the united States became an Indian-fighting, centralizing power that, thankfully, supported a fabulously laissez-faire system with wonderfully low tax rates.  The problem with this equation is, of course, the imperialism.  With the anti-expansionist British (who were tired of paying for Indian wars) off our backs, we were free to push West, young man!, and boy-howdy did we ever!  This expansion was only extended to new heights with the unconstitutional Louisiana Purchase and subsequent conquests/purchases.  Indians were slaughtered with patriotic glee (you can’t spell “slaughter” without “laughter!”), taxes and spending steadily increased, the federation of States grew greater and more powerful, and, of course, the natural tendency for governments to centralize and expand was realized, leaving us with the colossal failure of a state today.  Millions of death and dozens of trillions of dollars later, we need to realize that the American experiment has been an abject failure.  Perhaps even more, we need to realize that fighting one government to establish another can only lead to two massive and massively evil entities.                                                                                                                                                                                                                             I can only excitedly wonder at what might have been had America stayed in the British Empire, quickly surpassing India as the most precious of the crown jewels.  The abolition of slavery in the 1830s, avoidance of the catastrophic and centralizing Civil War, the absolute reign of Manchesterite free trade, assured Anglo-Frankish hegemony perhaps preventing that infamous Prussian aggressiveness (possibly preventing WWs I & II, which I consider as the death rattles of civilization), and numerous other speculative gains that could have drastically shaped world history for the better.  Of course there are plenty of claims just as speculative that one could make regarding how much worse off the world could have been, but truth-be-told, America’s example to the world has been almost entirely negative, especially in the twentieth century.  Sorry to burst your little “Happy B-Day, USA!” bubble, but I would have much preferred Patrick Henry’s version of the Declaration to our lukewarm Mr. Jefferson’s.                                                                                                                                                                                                                               *EDIT for Casey*:  Patrick Henry never (at least, so far as I know) wrote his own version of the Declaration, but he was a far more radical decentralist than Jefferson.  In fact, one might go so far as to call him a radical localist:  that is, Henry thought that only local government was appropriate both morally and practically.  My wording, therefore, was rhetorical rather than literal.  Sorry for the confusion!

This entry was posted on 5. July 2010 at 00:44 and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response or trackback from your own site.