March 23, 1775
-
While we are busy tearing down statues of old white men, consider what this 39 year-old white man had to say...
No man thinks more highly than I do of the patriotism, as well as abilities, of the very worthy gentlemen who have just addressed the House. But different men often see the same subject in different lights; and, therefore, I hope that it will not be thought disrespectful to those gentlemen, if, entertaining as I do opinions of a character very opposite to theirs, I shall speak forth my sentiments freely and without reserve.
This is no time for ceremony. The question before the House is one of awful moment to this country. For my own part I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery; and in proportion to the magnitude of the subject ought to be the freedom of the debate. It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at truth, and fulfill the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty towards the majesty of heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings.
Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren, till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation?
For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth—to know the worst and to provide for it. I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided; and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past. And judging by the past, I wish to know what there has been in the conduct of the British ministry for the last ten years, to justify those hopes with which gentlemen have been pleased to solace themselves and the House?
Is it that insidious smile with which our petition has been lately received? Trust it not, sir; it will prove a snare to your feet. Suffer not yourselves to be betrayed with a kiss. Ask yourselves how this gracious reception of our petition comports with these warlike preparations which cover our waters and darken our land. Are fleets and armies necessary to a work of love and reconciliation? Have we shown ourselves so unwilling to be reconciled that force must be called in to win back our love? Let us not deceive ourselves, sir. These are the implements of war and subjugation—the last arguments to which kings resort. I ask gentlemen, sir, what means this martial array, if its purpose be not to force us to submission? Can gentlemen assign any other possible motives for it? Has Great Britain any enemy, in this quarter of the world, to call for all this accumulation of navies and armies?
No, sir, she has none. They are meant for us; they can be meant for no other. They are sent over to bind and rivet upon us those chains which the British ministry have been so long forging. And what have we to oppose to them? Shall we try argument? Sir, we have been trying that for the last ten years. Have we anything new to offer on the subject? Nothing.
We have held the subject up in every light of which it is capable; but it has been all in vain. Shall we resort to entreaty and humble supplication? What terms shall we find which have not been already exhausted? Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves longer.
Sir, we have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament.
Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne. In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation. There is no longer any room for hope.
If we wish to be free—if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending—if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained, we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of Hosts is all that is left us!
They tell us, sir, that we are weak—unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance, by lying supinely on our backs, and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot?
Sir, we are not weak, if we make a proper use of the means which the God of nature hath placed in our power. Three millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us.
The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable—and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come!
It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, “Peace! Peace!”—but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death!
Patrick Henry – March 23, 1775
-
I t thought this was interesting
People destroy statue of George III during US Independence War
I do not think it was a good idea then, and not now either. But just goes to show that this type of behavior is not new, and the US ancestors are not exempt.
-
@taiwan_girl said in March 23, 1775:
I t thought this was interesting
People destroy statue of George III during US Independence War
I do not think it was a good idea then, and not now either. But just goes to show that this type of behavior is not new, and the US ancestors are not exempt.
You equate the current behavior with the American Revolution?
Always remember, Operation Valkyrie was an act of sedition.
Warning: I post things that interest me. Read and comment at your own discretion. -
-
A way long time ago there was a television show -- I think hosted by Steve Allen (might have been Dick Cavett) -- presenting a dinner party with 6-8 people around the table from various times in history. They held conversations pertinent to their times and how their fields of interest related to each other. Full costume, the actors perfectly in character; it was a great show. Like (making this up, I hardly remember the program) an episode might feature Thomas Jefferson, Marie Curie and Winston Churchill. It was absolutely great.
I'd love to see such a dinner party with Patrick Henry and H.L. Mencken.
Oh, Mr. Henry! Please come back!
Thanks, Jolly.
Success is measured by your discipline and inner peace. – Mike Ditka
-
@Catseye3 said in March 23, 1775:
A way long time ago there was a television show -- I think hosted by Steve Allen (might have been Dick Cavett) -- presenting a dinner party with 6-8 people around the table from various times in history. They held conversations pertinent to their times and how their fields of interest related to each other. Full costume, the actors perfectly in character; it was a great show. Like (making this up, I hardly remember the program) an episode might feature Thomas Jefferson, Marie Curie and Winston Churchill. It was absolutely great.
I'd love to see such a dinner party with Patrick Henry and H.L. Mencken.
Oh, Mr. Henry! Please come back!
Thanks, Jolly.
Steve Allen. On PBS.
-
@Jolly said in March 23, 1775:
@taiwan_girl said in March 23, 1775:
I t thought this was interesting
People destroy statue of George III during US Independence War
I do not think it was a good idea then, and not now either. But just goes to show that this type of behavior is not new, and the US ancestors are not exempt.
You equate the current behavior with the American Revolution?
Not at all. As I said, i dont think it was a good idea then, and is not a good idea now.
However, the winner gets to write history. If the US, were still under that British, how do you think the revolutionists would be portrayed in history books.
-
@taiwan_girl said in March 23, 1775:
@Jolly said in March 23, 1775:
@taiwan_girl said in March 23, 1775:
I t thought this was interesting
People destroy statue of George III during US Independence War
I do not think it was a good idea then, and not now either. But just goes to show that this type of behavior is not new, and the US ancestors are not exempt.
You equate the current behavior with the American Revolution?
Not at all. As I said, i dont think it was a good idea then, and is not a good idea now.
However, the winner gets to write history. If the US, were still under that British, how do you think the revolutionists would be portrayed in history books.
How is American history portrayed now by descendants of the winners?
Education is extremely important.
-
@Horace said in March 23, 1775:
@taiwan_girl said in March 23, 1775:
@Jolly said in March 23, 1775:
@taiwan_girl said in March 23, 1775:
I t thought this was interesting
People destroy statue of George III during US Independence War
I do not think it was a good idea then, and not now either. But just goes to show that this type of behavior is not new, and the US ancestors are not exempt.
You equate the current behavior with the American Revolution?
Not at all. As I said, i dont think it was a good idea then, and is not a good idea now.
However, the winner gets to write history. If the US, were still under that British, how do you think the revolutionists would be portrayed in history books.
How is American history portrayed now by descendants of the winners?
My understanding from reading and learning is the Independence fight was true and just. The cause was the right one.
Have you learned something different?
-
It is a peculiarity of American culture that we have been engaged for quite some time now in reframing our history in a negative light. The revolutionary war hasn't been reframed yet, but if it becomes politically useful to do so, it will be, by the party who's found so much political value in such reframings.
-
I was taught that it was a colonial revolt which some of the British North American colonies did not support and chose instead to remain loyal to the British Crown.
-
I think our history teacher used the term 'ungrateful fucking bastards'.
Which got our attention, as she was a nun.
