June 15, 1775
Fresh off the Battles of Lexington and Concord, the
rebellious American Colonies had entered into a conflict which most colonial
citizens considered hopeless and pointless. Most colonial citizens were content
to live under British rule. At the time, American’s were considered among the
most wealthy and prosperous peoples in the world. The desire for independence and
freedom was shared only by a small group of men and women who understood the
evil of tyranny and blessings of liberty. In response to the impending conflict
with the world’s mightiest empire, the Continental Congress created the
Continental Army just one day before. With war just on the horizon, Congress
had to answer one important question: Who would lead the Continental Army?
When analyzed from the perspective of disparity and
bleakness that shadowed the Colonial cause, you would understand just how
important this choice would be. After all, military failure wouldn’t just mean
the end of an idealist social experiment. Failure meant a ruthless and unbridled
retaliation from a powerful and unforgiving tyrant. If the colonial rebels were
to lose the war, they would lose their land, their status, and even their own
heads. Their success - their survival – depended entirely upon the
Commander-In-Chief of the Continental Army.
Delegates to the Continental Congress nominated men whom
they considered fit for the position. Most support coalesced around two
candidates. The first of these two possessed an intimate knowledge of British
military tactics. In fact, among all the nominees for the position, no one
could boast more experience in terms of military service. When the war had
become an inevitable reality, he defected from the Royal forces in order to
volunteer his services to the colonies. His name was Charles Lee, and many,
including himself, expected that he be named Commander-In-Chief of the
Continental Army. Lee was erratic and unconventional. Historical accounts
described his behavior as loutish and prideful. His language was coarse and
boorish. Despite having some significant achievement, he felt a constant need
to inflate his reputation with lengthy and exaggerated accounts. Still, he was
highly decorated and willing to assume charge of the Continental Army – for a
price of course.
The second candidate was the perfect contrast to the
personality of General Charles Lee. He was a humbler man, perhaps too humble
for the liking of some within the Continental Congress. Considerably more reserved
and polished than Charles Lee, many thought him too hesitant, too indecisive,
too “damnably deficient”. Nonetheless, support for George Washington was
strong. Of the two nominees, Washington’s character fell most in line with the
principles that the Continental Congress revered. On paper, the decision seemed
illogical, maybe even suicidal. But in reality, there was not better man suited
for the job.
History remembers George Washington as the lowly General who
won the most hopeless war with the most hapless army. As for Charles Lee… I
would wager you’ve never heard of the guy. In hindsight, the decision to elect
Washington over Lee saved the revolution and cemented the cause of freedom in
the American Colonies, and eventually the world. At the time, American’s needed
to choose between the tyranny of the Crown, the crass leadership of Lee, or the
principled leadership of Washington. Most chose complacency with the Crown, but
for a small and principled group of men and women, the decision was made in
favor of Washington. Thank God for principled decisions!
Tyranny & Lawlessness
Coarse & Boorish
Principles &
Conscience
Where have we seen these three choices before?
When I consider the current race for American leadership, I
can’t help but see the similarities between the choices we face now and the
choices the founding fathers had to make too. Make no mistake, our situation
does not look too promising. Turmoil, both foreign and domestic, seems to
simmer hotter and hotter and no one knows exactly at what point things will come
to a boil. The way I see things, we too must make a choice similar to the one
made by the founding fathers and mothers: Do we choose the steady decay of
personal liberty and freedom? Do we choose the lesser of two evils? Or do we
choose principle and a clear conscience? Only one choice saved this nation in
1775. Only one choice will save it again.
Of course, this choice flies straight in the face of the “Now
or Never” crowd. I have heard it over and over again. Even now, I am told to
hold my nose and swallow the Trump nomination like the sour pill that it is. People
that I once revered and respected have let out the cry “WIN AT ALL COSTS!” Not
only do I find this strategy sad, it is downright repulsive. Those who believe
and circulate this narrative belong in the laziest class of citizens. This belief
is a sordid self-abnegation of your sacred civic duty to oppose tyranny and
corruption. The logic dictates that if the bad candidate wins, your power stops
at the ballot box. In essence, you say I give up! I give in! I give out!
This sentiment was best demonstrated in a recent
conversation I was privy to regarding the concept of third party voting:
“Vote your conscience if you really think that is gonna make
a difference for the world. Then tell your children the story of America and
how she used to be the land of opportunity for free people…”
Do you notice the backwards assertion that America is a land
for free people, yet voting with your conscience and free-will outside of bonds
of a major party is unconscionable? Tell me again how much you value freedom of
speech? Freedom of expression? Freedom to assemble? Such is hypocrisy beyond
absurdity – reasoning beyond rationality.
I will vote my conscience. I guess in some ways my vote may
not count, at least not in the sense that everyone else thinks it should count.
I accept that. And when the time comes, I will explain to my kids that I voted
on character, on policy, and on principle.
I will do this because I believe a time will come when I
must make a bigger principled stand.
I will do this because I believe that my power as a citizen
does no stop at the ballot box.
I will do this because I believe that I can help win over
the hearts and minds of those who disagree.
I will do this because I believe my kids need to know that
principles are important in any circumstance.
I will do this because I believe that I will have to provide
an account of where I stood and with whom I stood.
Washington was the principled choice for his time, if not
the popular choice. In the short term, it appeared as if he was indeed the
wrong choice. The British delivered to the Continental Army one disheartening
defeat after another. Many called for Washington’s dismissal. However, every
time the cause of freedom teetered on the brink of disaster, Washington
prevailed. He prevailed because he made principled choices that aligned with
his conscience. Washington always lived to fight another day.
Even now, the cause of freedom does not hinge on a single battle. It doesn’t even end after several battles. America only ends when we cease to do battle – when we cease to fight against corruption, vileness, and tyranny, regardless of party or platform. My allegiance is not to person or party. My allegiance is to my conscience and my country
No comments:
Post a Comment