Dr. Forbush Thinks

Two hundred and thirty two years ago the frustration of British occupation reached the tipping point and men were killed in the name of freedom. But, what was the freedom these men desired that was worth risking life, limb and property in order to prevail? And, how could these average men from a far corner of the British Empire succeed against then arguably most powerful force on the planet? What motivated the two sides of the conflict and why did they remain motivated?

Every American knows, or should know the story of the first battle in the War that eventually lead to the Independent and free country of the United States of America. King George III sought cash to fund his Empire and he raised taxes on his American subjects. Law abiding Americans respected the authority of the government and paid their taxes. But, a few individuals began to feel that they taxes paid provided them no benefit. The King could argue that he provided protection, but slowly the Kings forces of protection became forces of occupation and enforcement.

This small group of lawbreakers gradually grew in number as they convinced their fellow citizens of the King’s unfairness. Emotions being what they are they began to grow and fuel a hatred against the King and his authority. In the beginning each side could argue reasonably why they believed that they were right, but according to the law the King had authority and by the law he alone had the right to enforce the law. Even so the hatred toward the King grew and grew.

We all know the story, but we often forget that the Americans that stood up to the King were criminals. A curiosity that strikes me every time a conservative that argues the legal status of an action of protest could easily slip into praise of the brave patriots that stood up to the King two hundred and thirty two years ago.

Today we know the outcome of this conflict and we praise those criminals that stood up to the King. But, we rarely think about the emotions and thoughts of those criminals as they made the decision to break the law.

A few years ago I had the opportunity to travel to Boston. Since my ancestors had been from what is now Massachusetts and some of them had actually participated in the legendary battle I felt the need to see what that battlefield looked like. I drove to Concord and went to Minuteman Historical Park. At the time I knew that my ancestor David Forbush was a sergeant in Captain Issac Davis’s regiment from Acton, Massachusetts. I also knew that another ancestor Major John Buttrick was one of the commanders at the battle. So, I looked at this place while I imagined what it would be like to be there on that particular day when the shot fired was heard round the world.

I was caught off guard by the simplicity of the place. A road, a bridge and a weapons cache on a farm on the other side of the river. The river was less than twenty feet wide and surely a few men could cross the river without the aid of the bridge anywhere along the course. How could this little stand off at this bridge be such an impediment to the strongest military force on the planet? Why could the British just set up camp and wait out the rebels and earn the respect of the law-abiding citizens of the town? Why couldn’t they make the argument that the King was the sole authority in the land and prove their point?

We are often faced with these questions when we feel that the laws imposed against us seem to be unfair and dangerous. But, why can’t the more powerful military force control the population and make them obey the law?

We can think about another more recent standoff at a bridge. This time the bridge was in Selma, Alabama and the force to be reckoned with was the Alabama state troopers. The issue was just and powerful and the rebels had freedom on their side. This time the protesters did not carry weapons and in the long run we know that they succeeded. The conflict was just as emotional and people were hurt. The drama in Alabama was played out over many days and the nation watched via television as the state troopers beat the people at the bridge. How could the obviously superior force not stop this rag tag group of criminals? The law was against them, the authority was against them, but freedom was on their side.

The case for freedom winning against the stronger force of authority is a tortured history. Force sometimes wins, but the people need for freedom generally wins over time. And, sometimes the powerful forces are able to take the freedom away even after it is won. Superior force is like that, it can suddenly turn things around at the drop of a hat. In the Congo, Iran, Guatemala and other countries the United States used its superior force to aid in coupes that over threw Democratically elected governments. The people of the United States have largely forgotten these misdeeds, but the people who live in these countries still harbor the desire for freedom. There are many problems in the case made for winning freedom. Freedom implies freewill and freewill can not be controlled. Undesired results will happen when people have Freedom and implement their freewill. The desire for fairness pushed the democratically elected governments of Congo, Iran and Guatemala to move further to the socialist side of the political spectrum than the United States felt comfortable with. And, the United States decided to use its superior power to take the people’s freedom away.

The history of America controlling the freewill of smaller countries has created a narrative that has been exaggerated, exploded and exploited among those who desire political power. People around the world know some of these stories and they imagine that there are even more events that have been covered up by the American conspiracy.

Whether these things are true or not isn’t the point. The point is that the perception of America having its hand in the politics of countries around the world makes the suspicion, fear, and hatred of America grow around the world. And, US foreign policy over the last five years has played into the hands of those who wish to demonstrate the evil ways of America. And, we continue to help them on their way.

Like I said, the truth doesn’t matter when we talk about the motivation of people. People are willing to die for what they perceive to be a noble or righteous cause. Freedom is one such cause that continues to push people forward. And, in Iraq we are on the wrong side of this perception.

In Iraq the majority of Iraqis see the US as oppressors, and enemy occupiers. The Iraqis see America’s interest centered on the oil that they possess. Iraqis want their freedom to determine their destiny. They know America’s history, including the Iranian coupe that took Democracy away from those people. They perceive the unfairness of Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians and perceive America’s ties to this. Some Arabs see the Americans as profane secular hedonists that disrespect their religious practices. And, all of these people desire freedom to create their own laws that may limit the freedom of their own citizens. So, whose freedom is more important?

Everyone can not have all the freedom that they desire. Freedom desired by one may end up impinging on the freedom of another. But can the grand authority of a superior force be used to dictate which freedoms are allowed and which freedoms are denied? That seems to be the current thought of the current administration, and the Iraqi people don’t like it.

But, can a relatively small group of lawbreakers win against the most powerful force on the planet? Maybe the Bush administration should read some history and learn that when the people desire freedom they tend to win in the long run. It doesn’t matter if the freedom that they desire is the same as the picture that we envision. The ultimate authority rests in the desire of the people, it just takes time and the perception of freedom.







-----------------------------------------------------





Don't forget what Stephen Colbert said, "Reality has a well-known liberal bias."


Cross Posted @ Bring It On, tblog, Blogger and BlogSpirit



Reflection