Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: Tublecane

The Sons of Liberty were radicals. The Minutemen were reactionary. Radical does not equate to marxist.


29 posted on 06/28/2009 6:28:56 AM PDT by Bryanw92 (Question O-thority!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies ]


To: Bryanw92

“Radical does not equate to marxist.”

It does equate to leftist. Colloquially if not by dictionary definition.

Sons of Liberty would be radical relative to John Adams, for instance. Then again, Adams ended up being a federalist, whereas firebrand Sam Adams was anti-central government. Leftists/radicals are always in favor of central government, and always use the masses to get there. Sam, contrarywise, aroused the masses to fight for decentralized government. Reactionaries usually rely on traditional authorities to forestall the expansion of the state, but Hamilton, the champion of industrial interest, was a merchantilist. Go figure.

Our revolution is tough to figure out. Partly becuase it wasn’t much of a revolution. Kept most things intact. Gave brith to a mostrous Leviathan, via the Constitution, but that took a long time to ripen. For the most part, and this goes for Sam as well as John and Hamilton as well as Paine, the war was about preserving prerogatives: that is, *privilege*. The Americans wanted their birthrights specifically as Englishmen, though they talked a lot of high-falutin’ Whiggish talk about God-given rights.

I often get confused teasing these things out. You know, not long ago, liberals claimed Jefferson as their own. Against the industrial revolution and entrenched power, for “the little guy”. Now libertarians own him. Go figure.


30 posted on 06/28/2009 6:44:35 AM PDT by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson