I go on at great length about seventeenth-century England. But trust me, it’s relevant. Even interesting. And it’s got to do with how we came by our gun rights and why we’ll keep them if we’re wise and worthy.
I go on at great length about seventeenth-century England. But trust me, it’s relevant. Even interesting. And it’s got to do with how we came by our gun rights and why we’ll keep them if we’re wise and worthy.
Well done Claire!!! Well done indeed! The sad thing is today it appears that the average individual in the street is totally ignorant of history. As long as they have their ipod or blackberry they are incapable of understanding what is happening to our country AND its way pf life….at least what has been its way of life. For the most part we as apeople have been more than willing to let the government protect,fund, and dictate our lives. We have been indoctrinated by the media, our centers of learning. In short, we have become lazy, and yes, stupid. When we vote, I truly believe we vote for whoever’s name seems to be to our liking. When is the last time you ever saw any politician going door to door introducing themselves? When is the last time you saw any politician asking you what your thoughts were regarding the state or our country, state, county or city?
Arborath?
I’ve also studied the Jacobite history, and I like the way you’ve tied the 17th and 18th C. together with modern conclusions re: gun rights and American history. (You’ve also managed to explain Burke and Hobbes and Locke in a contemporary frame of reference without mentioning them at all, as they lived through the upheavals, but based on their knowledge of previous English law.)
Claire, maybe it’s time _you_ wrote a small history of gun rights (for “lay” people) as it came down through common law and necessity. There’s been so much written piecemeal (from various sources and various understanding) about the role of firearms in American history, that literarure could use a good summation of overall historical perspective. And rarely has influence of the “common people” been given credit for what took place in history.
” When is the last time you ever saw any politician going door to door introducing themselves? When is the last time you saw any politician asking you what your thoughts were regarding the state or our country, state, county or city?”
Happens here, especially the sheriff. 🙂 You can also go in and talk to him any time.
I don’t live in the city, but I did go with friends to a city council meeting a while back. (About half of us were openly armed…) They had proposed some fool thing and one old retired rancher stood up, pointed his finger at the bunch and said, “You work for us. We don’t work for you.” The measure was put to a vote and there wasn’t any surprise when it was unanimously defeated. They’ve tended to mind their manners since. 🙂
This place reminds me of Hardyville often. [grin]
Great article
Divine right goes back to at least the Roman Empire. One thing I remember from high school — I admit this is pretty hazy at this point — was that Virgil’s Aeneid establishes the divine descent of the Emperor. I didn’t find a specific mention of that at Wikipedia, though it does touch on the propoganda aspect. Certainly, the Holy Roman Empire carries divine right with it as well. Romans 13 provides Biblical basis — perhaps unsurprising, given that Paul was a Roman citizen.
English history is at once both fascinating and confusing. I suppose it isn’t confusing to the scholar spending time to really dig into it, but many times when I’ve taken to reading various articles about the politics and wars, I’ve come away with my head spinning from all the whorls and eddies of the various factions and maneuverings.
That was probly one of your best columns ever, which is an accomplishment indeed.
One of my favorite periods too.
Ever hear about Free Born John?http://www.libertarian.co.uk/lapubs/libhe/libhe025.yum
Roger Moore ― “Ever hear about Free Born John?”
Yes, a long time ago. But your link didn’t work. Here is Wikipedia’s:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lilburne
MamaLiberty;
Good for you! :-)) I live sort of in the middle of nowhere in a western state and we can do the same thing here. However, in most large cities or areas of dense population that is not the case. I don’t know if this is true or not, but some years back a friend of mine lived in New York. I was amazed….he said that a lot of those gplk spent their entire lives living in a small borough and never leaving it. Must be like living in a place like animal farm where everyone is equal only some are more equal than others. Gads……..
Terrific article, Claire. Thanks.
Divine right goes back to at least the Roman Empire.
The Egyptians were at it a couple of thousand years earlier, 3000BC, if the ruler being a god counts.
A couple of thousand years later, c 1079 BC, Israelites decided God needed to appoint kings for them. Saul was the first. It worked about as well as divine right usually does, one or two competent rulers, followed by spoiled progeny, followed by the wheels coming off.
I live in a small town, so politicians are always wandering by. You can usually tell which kind they are based on whether they’re handing out packets of Bluebonnet seeds or raffling firearms.
Reference Claire’s coming book, IMHO to explain early English gun rights you really have to start with the longbow.
Good one Claire, and it’s very true. One wonders what became of the English though.
“Yet now most people unquestioningly accept their “duty to submit” to all agents and all diktats of the state. We accept “sovereign immunity”, the doctrine that the king — or the state and its officers — can do no legal wrong.”
The first might be literally true, although a significant minority thinking otherwise is all we really need. Was there ever a time when the followers did not outnumber the resisters? The second I doubt very much; grudging acquiescence in the face of violent power is not quite the same thing as accepting it. When the Revolution comes, a significant number will stop acquiescing.
“This place reminds me of Hardyville often.”
Ok, I’ll bite. Where is it?
Good comments, once again. And I’m not surprised that the Commentariat knows more about history (English, biblical, and even Egyptian) than is usual.
Rodger — Thank you. I did know about Freeborn John and now I wish I’d mentioned him in the article. Every time I read about him, I’m torn between amazement at his courage, conviction, and strength of character and … well, being glad I never knew him. He must have been a difficult man to know (though a formidable one to try to control).
Excellent article, Claire. Besides being very thorough, it has a common sense perspective so absent in academic circles.
Bravo Ms Wolfe!
Bravo.
A most thoughtful and reasoned essay on consent or withdrawal of consent. A most worthy component of Liberty.
For is it true, consent is something that can only be given, and not taken?
And if true, consent is something far more powerful than any mandarin, oligarch, crook or tyrant can ever hope to possess?
Speaking of reason, I appreciate what you wrote too for it is reason that created this great Republic, it is reason that will save us from tyrants and their tyranny. Of course our natural right to arms and defense of our Liberty is not possible without these two sovereign freedoms being inextricably intertwined.
So another hats off to you fair and courageous Lady.
I often ponder the power of a plurality, or should I say the inherent power a plurality of people possess, the legitimacy and just cause of resistance to tyranny a plurality possesses?
Often too I think of what is a plurality, especially how a plurality of people become one, how it becomes self aware of it’s plural nature, and how it seems to me those running things are committing every crime and treason imaginable, to keep a plurality ignorant of it’s nascent sovereignty and legitimacy.
Because if I have used reason, I believe a plurality of people who cherish Life Liberty and Property constitute a legitimacy and just lawful entity that is The existential threat, the only real threat in the entire world to the crooks and psychopaths who have self appointed themselves rulers and tyrants over us and the rule of law. If true after all, it only makes sense why so many who have the corporeal potential to defy and resist this tyranny descending upon us, are classified as domestic terrorists, racists and a myriad of forms of tyrannical pogrom?
What I’m driving at and what your excellent piece on the roots of Liberty make me consider, is how does a plurality become one?
How or what can create it.
How is it possible for it to recognize it is one to begin with? Indeed, in the context of the time that comes to us?
Vital questions I think.
Maybe in your wisdom and thoughtful prose you could expound and or define it?
In any case,
thanks for a great piece.
I got much from it.
Keep up the great job.
Liberty!
Bravo Ms Wolfe!
Bravo.
A most thoughtful and reasoned essay on consent or withdrawal of consent. A most worthy component of Liberty.
For is it true, consent is something that can only be given, and not taken?
And if true, consent is something far more powerful than any mandarin, oligarch, crook or tyrant can ever hope to possess?
Speaking of reason, I appreciate what you wrote too for it is reason that created this great Republic, it is reason that will save us from tyrants and their tyranny. Of course our natural right to arms and defense of our Liberty is not possible without these two sovereign freedoms being inextricably intertwined.
So another hats off to you fair and courageous Lady.
I often ponder the power of a plurality, or should I say the inherent power a plurality of people possess, the legitimacy and just cause of resistance to tyranny a plurality possesses?
Often too I think of what is a plurality, especially how a plurality of people become one, how it becomes self aware of it’s plural nature, and how it seems to me those running things are committing every crime and treason imaginable, to keep a plurality ignorant of it’s nascent sovereignty and legitimacy.
Because if I have used reason, I believe a plurality of people who cherish Life Liberty and Property constitute a legitimacy and just lawful entity that is The existential threat, the only real threat in the entire world to the crooks and psychopaths who have self appointed themselves rulers and tyrants over us and the rule of law. If true after all, it only makes sense why so many who have the corporeal potential to defy and resist this tyranny descending upon us, are classified as domestic terrorists, racists and a myriad of forms of tyrannical pogrom?
What I’m driving at and what your excellent piece on the roots of Liberty make me consider, is how does a plurality become one?
How or what can create it.
How is it possible for it to recognize it is one to begin with? Indeed, in the context of the time that comes to us?
Vital questions I think.
Maybe in your wisdom and thoughtful prose you could expound and or define it?
In any case, thanks for a great piece.
I got much from it.
Keep up the great job.
Liberty!
“This place reminds me of Hardyville often.”
Ok, I’ll bite. Where is it?
Elendra, I’m in VERY rural NE Wyoming. 🙂 5,000 people, tops, in the entire county. And ours is not the most sparsely populated county, by any means. Most of us are armed, and not much interested in being “ruled” by anybody.