Yesterday in class we discussed the Battle of Kings Mountain. See, Kings Mountain was a Revolutionary War battle in South Carolina. The interesting part about it, was that it wasn't really a battle between Brittish troops and American Minutemen. Actually, it was fought in the largest part between Americans who were loyal to the crown, and patriots who didn't quite see it the same way. I just wanted to take a moment to jot down some of my thoughts as twenty of us in the class discussed this battle, which ultimately became the turning point in the Revolution both in the South, and in the direction of the war.
So, the backdrop is such that apparently there'd been a lot of infighting in the South to start with. Loyalists who supported the monarchy had been sort of looked down upon by the generations of Patriots who really didnt see the need to continue being under represented and over taxed by the crown. Additionally, there's an entire backdrop of religious undertones that the Scotts and Irish brought with them and the idea of self rule. See, the Patriots, as it turned out, believed in the Protestant ethic of electing their own local leaders who should represent them. The Loyalists on the other hand, were either comfortable with the idea of an established government and the protection it afforded, or a true sense of nationalism which it brought about far removed. Either way, General Cornwallis' decision to send troops South to Charleston and rally the Loyalist sympathizers turned out to be a bad idea.
See, some of Cornwallis' goons decided that they'd recruit the Loyalists and turn them against the rabble Patriots. Well, unbenownst to the Loyalists, the Brittish pretty well thought all of the Americans were dirty heathenist filth and they only elected to spur on the Loyalists to divide the South from the North and establish a foothold and cut off supplies to the North. Well long story longer, it turns out, that during some of the critical battles, the Brittish pretty much massacred the Patriot even after they had surrendered. Killed them all almost down to the last man. Hundreds of them in one battle alone. Well, it pretty well galvanized the Patriots and served as a call to arms. The "Over the Mountain" men from the frontier came to the aid of the Patriots and in defense of their own freedoms and liberties which were now threatened.
Well, as I said, we had a discussion about this, and it occurred to me, that in every conflict, both sides can be right. Consequently, in some regards even, both sides can be wrong. But here's the crux, individuals in positions of authority may and often will make tactical errors. But the errors that seem to cost the most by way of inertia and success on the battlefield, really stem from character and ethical challenges presented during the heat of battle.
What I'm getting at, is that as we discussed the battle, and it's importance, the consequences of the key leaders' actions and the tactical nature of their movements, it struck me. See, the Loyalists in the area were actually right. We're told to support our government leaders and have a sense of national pride and conviction and to protect those same ideals instilled in the protection of nation and citizen. It's the same quandry faced by General Lee in the preceding days of the Civil War. How does one take orders from his nation to kill his neighbors and go to war with his own State and family? Of course Lee chose to command the Confederate Armies, and he believed at that moment he was making the best choice in supporting succession from the Union. In fact, removal of the question of slavery and focussing on State's Rights and the issues associated with self-governance at the local level, in many ways he was right. I would go so far as to say, that with the backdrop of a relatively recent split from the Crown in Brittain, coupled with the dangers of a strong central government and the challenges faced across Europe, he sort of had the right idea.
Here's what's wrong with that now. Of course, hindsight is twenty-twenty, and we see the Confederates (as the losers in this case) as rabble who couldnt wait to enslave mankind and perpetuate an aristocratic ruling class of rich plantation owners. However, I would submit that the majority of people by volume were not rich, nor were they owners of vast plantations, but were in fact eeking out a living as tenant farmers. However, here's where it gets even more sticky. These people, the majority of the southern people, believed in that self-same governance at the local level, and the self sufficiency afforded by the Protestant ethic.
Here's how it all ties in. Well, see the devil is in the details. This is where I think it's important that we sit up and take notice as we go forward in the coming days. See, each party, each person, each man or woman has their own sense of right and wrong. Their own levels of importance and set of values. Each one of those, can be twisted such that it becomes confusing as to who's actually right, and who's actually wrong. In fact, in the vast sense, issues between Democrats and Republicans are really not that great. Both want what's best for America. Both think their correct, and both in a sense are. But what we need is to make decisions as a nation, based on principle. Unshifting principles of right and wrong. Those principles have to be bigger than what is temporarily fashionable. Therefore, they have to be predicated on the principles of right as taught by God. Now, say what you will about mixing church and state, but the state can make shifting rules all it wants and that becomes the new norm. The "State" in Germany during WWII made all kinds of new norms in regards to right and wrong and we have a slug of Hollocost examples to prove why that doesnt work.
All I'm saying is that as we go forward, things will become more and more confusing. It's up to us to make decisions in our leadership based on principle, and not on expediency. I got a lot more to say but I'm running out of time now. Anyhow, I gotta get to school. You know I think the world of ya. Have a great day.
Always,
J
No comments:
Post a Comment