Why the Left Hates the Declaration of Independence

BushCountry ^ | 07/07/03 | Hans Zeiger, 18, is a Seattle Times columnist

[bedolido]

Since I was six years old, a poster of the Declaration of Independence has hung on my bedroom wall. That’s one reason why I turned out to be a young conservative. But I don’t suppose many Leftists have posters of the Declaration of Independence hanging in their homes and workplaces. They’ve managed to take it out of the schools too. It seems the Left would rather burn it.

The Declaration is of equal importance to the Constitution, because it is the founding creed of the United States. It is a classic doctrine of American ideals that is the foundation of the constitution and the American way of life.

Most importantly, the Declaration of Independence is a spiritual statement of dependence on God. For that reason and the fact that the rights identified in the Declaration come from God, the Left wants to keep the Declaration of Independence hidden from the view of elementary school children and college students alike.

The New Jersey State Assembly passed a bill in 1999 to require school children to recite the Declaration of Independence, and the Left sent out forces to vigorously lobby against it in the state senate. The New Jersey Education Association said the Declaration of Independence is “too jingoistic” and the reference to God crosses the line between separation of church and state. Eventually, the bill was defeated.

What was New Jersey’s proposed recitation? It happens to be the vision statement of America: “We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, that to secure these rights governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”

If somehow the Declaration of Independence can be presented absent of its core principles, the Left will engage in historical revisionism with great fervor. This is the task of Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz in his latest book America Declares Independence. Dershowitz spends most of his time attacking conservatives for believing in the essential Declaration of Independence. “It should come as no surprise that [the Declaration has] been wrenched out of context by partisan pleaders to promote parochial causes,” he writes.

Unfortunately for the revisionist, Mr. Dershowitz, the pure and unaltered Declaration is not a document lacking in honest words and comprehensive discussion of context. The British crown is thoroughly taken to task and the practical reasoning for doing so is expounded in great detail. And if it’s the simple truths of the Declaration that Mr. Dershowitz is so disturbed by, he should remember that they don’t need context. They’re “self-evident.”

The Declaration of Independence is not a fresh abridged translation courtesy of the religious right as Dershowitz contends. The original parchment leaves no stone unturned in its quest to summarize the truth about government and natural rights. Besides identifying the source of rights (God), the investiture of rights (individuals), and the definition of a legitimate government (consent of the governed), the Declaration lists the three things that a free people must be willing to sacrifice to preserve their liberty. The founders wrote, “We mutually pledge to each other our lives, fortunes, and sacred honor.”

So why is the Left so virulently intolerant of the Declaration of Independence? Because it presents a political and philosophical worldview entirely inconsistent with the liberal view that rights come from the government or Mother Earth, that rights are invested in groups and classes of people, and that preserving freedom is a task that can be met through the effortless consumption of rights.

The Left says that we must move beyond the perspectives of slave-owning white males known as the Founding Fathers, that we must cling to the prospects of change and moral relativism. It just so happens that the sacred words of the founding fathers were the summation of freedom for millions of 19th century southern slaves who rejoiced in their emancipation that all human beings “are created equal.”

The Left will continue to distort, revise, and shred the Declaration of Independence as long as we allow them to do so.

President Calvin Coolidge wouldn’t allow the Left to burn the Declaration when he delivered a 4th of July oration 77 years ago. In it, he summed up the disparity between liberalism and the Declaration of Independence.

“If all men are created equal, that is final. If they are endowed with inalienable rights, that is final. No advance, no progress can be made beyond these propositions. If anyone wishes to deny their truth or their soundness, the only direction in which he can proceed historically is not forward, but backward toward the time when there was no equality, no rights of the individual, no rule of the people. Those who wish to proceed in that direction cannot lay claim to progress. They are reactionary. Their ideas are not more modern, but more ancient than those of the Revolutionary Fathers.”

Let’s never forget that we’re the real progressives when we believe in the Declaration of Independence.

Hans Zeiger

Hans Zeiger, 18, is a Seattle Times columnist, activist, and speaker. As an Eagle Scout, he is president of the Scout Honor Coalition. He can be contacted at hanszeiger@yahoo.com. 07.07.03 06:26 AM

[Only1choice____Freedom]

Let’s never forget that we’re the real progressives when we believe in the Declaration of Independence.

Hans Zeiger

That makes Liberals the real repressors!

[steplock]

"That makes Liberals the real repressors!"

Let's get the terminology correct

Liberal & Democrat are NOT dirty words. We have lost the meaning and it is simply confusing the issues. It's hard to communicate when no one knows what you're talking about.

Want to see something rel interesting? You will see references to the above statement in the Principles of Communism and in most communist "how-to" books.

Let's call these POS in congress & senate and elsewhere what they are - COMMUNISTS, SOCIALISTS, ANARCHISTS, and other LEFT-WING RADICAL EXTREMISTS.

By the way ... excellent essay. :>)

[Dead Corpse]

I know some "self governance" Anarchists that would take some fairly serious offense at being lumped in with the commies.

[KarlInOhio]

I think he's talking about Seattle style anarchists.

Against government rules on breaking windows and burning stuff.
For government owned latte shops on every corner. Don't allow the plutocrats to charge $4 for what should be a free cappuccino.

[Kryptonite]

An 18 year old Eagle Scout wrote this. Maybe there is hope for this country after all......

[Dead Corpse]

I think he's talking about Seattle style anarchists.

I know that. I figured I'd just draw the opening statement pointing up the difference and let someone else bring up the Blackshirts\Useful Idiots. ;-)