Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Paladin2

The right to revolt is natural law.

Some are revolting by nature. Some are only revolting after hard work, others can not be revolting despite their best efforts.

Parallel and opposed to the right to revolt is the right to put down the insurrection. Not all revolts are won. Shays Rebellion, Whiskey Rebellion, Nat Turner’s rebellion, and the Great Rebellion show that it is easier to revolt than it is to win.

Isn’t that revolting?


5 posted on 01/14/2013 4:16:34 PM PST by donmeaker (Blunderbuss: A short weapon, ... now superceded in civilized countries by more advanced weaponry.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]


To: donmeaker

At least the Whisky Tax was rescinded a few years after the Rebellion.


9 posted on 01/14/2013 4:19:09 PM PST by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: donmeaker
Don't forget that the result of the riots of the 60's was more Free StuffTM for the cities that rioted.
12 posted on 01/14/2013 4:21:13 PM PST by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: donmeaker

For at least three of those rebellions there was no right to crush them, I believe. That isn’t a right, anyway, it is a power. Legitimate government gets power through the sovereign people sacrificing liberty for security, ir so the theory goes. But certain things they cannot give up, those being inalienable, and other things they haven’t given up, though government pretends otherwise.

Indirect taxes must be uniform according to the Constitution. The burden if the whiskey tax fell on one region more than others, probably by design, even if it was abstractly neutral. People had a right to resist it, in my opinion, including with violence. Not that everything they did was justified, but certainly Washington’s initial response was tyrannical. The latter response, under Jefferson, was th correct one: repeal.

Slaves had the same natural rights as us, and therefore were not responsible to any laws that would keep them in bondage. They had nit infinitely but unfountably more justification, for instance, than the American colonists revolting against the British.

The Constitution had no perpetual union clause, and the states were not denied the power to secede. Even were they, the people would not be bound by it. Certain of their rights are inalienable, meaning nontransferable, and they canny be forced to live under a government which they feel has become destructive of their liberty, even were the states bound, which they weren’t. The people could use the states as vehicles for their rebellion even if the states were constitutionally bound in union, which again they weren’t.

I don’t know enough about Shays.


65 posted on 01/14/2013 5:22:19 PM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: donmeaker

“Rebellion to Tyrants is Obedience to God”,Thomas Jefferson


110 posted on 01/15/2013 3:02:50 AM PST by ballplayer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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