On March 23rd, 1775, Patrick Henry gave his famous Address to the Second Virginia Convention, which was debating whether or not to join with other states to defy British attempts to divide and rule them ever more onerously. If you substitute "liberal-progressive politicians" for "British", it's still pretty relevant and applicable to our situation today.
It seems a suitable Snippet for the Fourth of July weekend to reproduce his speech in full.
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 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 toward 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 those 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 motive 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 upon 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 those 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!
Indeed.
Peter
9 comments:
Indeed! Thank you for reminding us of this.
Although we celebrate America's "birthday" on July 4th, I have heard it argued and think a more appropriate date for an American birthday is April 19, 1775, the Battle of Lexington and Concord when the first shots of the Revolutionary War were fired.
Patrick Henry, like many others, saw it coming and his speech of March 23rd was only a few weeks before the fighting started at Lexington and Concord.
Lexington didn't happen on July 4th, but I also take inspiration from the words of Captain John Parker of the Lexington Training Band on the morning of April 19, 1775: "Stand your ground, do not fire unless fired upon. But if they mean to have a war, let it begin here!"
Well said, and yes, still applicable today!
Hey Peter;
Very appropriate for today, I see what is going on and i can see the parallels and I wonder if revolution draws near again.
I truly miss the command of the English language we once had. Decades ago I used to make time for Question Time so I could hear the language spoken eloquently in response to a question. The ones you'd expect eloquence out of are an ignorant and pathetic lot. Words can be a barrage.
The root of the problem lies at its root. "All men are created equal" states the Declaration of Independence, while blacks, browns, yellows and reds were excluded, and theistiic religion was invoked.
The thirteenth, fourteenth and fifteenth amendments were installed to shore up the edifice of the Constitution. It would be more becoming if they were in the preamble, rather than a measure of desperation to forestall the collapse of the Constitution.
A plenipotent Constitutional Conventiion to draft a Constitution that would allow participation in the comity of civilized peoples is an option that could avert impendng conflict.
After reading Pattrick Henrys words again, I re-read the Declaration of Independence. Sobering.
And wondered if the charges against the King of England were something to compare and contrast to modern America?
Aside from the punitive acts of forcing Colonists to provide bed and board for British solders where are we now?
Maybe in FAIRNESS and such we shall be commanded to share our homes and pantries with "undocumented citizens". Don't sneer, a version of that is has been going on in Europe with their migrants displacing Germans, French and Swedish families from their "2nd homes" and retirees complexes.
BTW it's freedom OF Religion Robin, not Freedom FROM Religion. Our founding fathers saw first-hand the effects of an "Official Religion" and its harmful results.
ANY Set of Beliefs can become a State Religion with all the historically proven troubles that occur.
See the Worship of the Communist State as an example.
Removing God from a religion doesn't make it superior, just less anchored in the subconscious rules and mores of Gods Laws. Like Thou shalt not commit Murder, Thous shalt not take your neighbors wife and so on.
Those little rules that make living together as humans better.
Praying for wisdom as our country lurches from one crisis to another with leadership directly from Isaiaha Chapter 3. But do read the whole thing, like Sodom, God makes provisions for those that love Him.
In the United States Navy I had to make formations where a deity was invoked that was עבודה זרה
The proffering of deities by the government is problematic.
Mike Rowe does a corker of a dramatic reading of this speech. It's episode 162 of his podcast; I can't get a direct link to the episode, but if you go to
https://mikerowe.com/podcast/ and scroll *way* down, you can get it.
On the home site, and on the rest of the Web
Post a Comment