The Radicalism of the American Revolution
Wood credited the revolution because of the nature of the changes achieved as a result of the revolution. Though the society remained rural and mainly pre-industrial, the effects of the revolution were eye catching.
In the text, Gordon Wood has challenged the clique of scholars who claimed that the American Revolution was a conservative rebellion that sought to defend the status quo. While prolonging the period of the revolution to way back in 1760, and taking it further to early 19th century, Gordon Wood believes that the country achieved a valid social transformation. On the basis of the authors understanding, what happened was not about a class overthrowing another instead, it was a relationship overthrowing another (Wood, 1992). In a nut shell, the links of connections amongst people were permanently altered.
Wood anchors his thesis by exploring the transformation achieved through the shift from a monarchical leadership to a republican one en route to a democracy. According to Wood, (1992), in a monarchical ruler ship, the society was linked by those above and below the monarch. There was a hierarchal ranking of people. The lower cadre members looked to those above them in reference to pursuit of their goals. This relationship is what purportedly kept society together.
After the monarchical approach to leadership, came the republicanism. This type of leadership was the one embraced by the colonialists. This mode of leadership served to dissolve or render the monarchical style of leadership obsolete. Republicanism did away with the interconnections established by the early the monarchical approach. Towards that pursuit, the approach did not provide room for hierarchical connections, eliminated dependency and patronage. This was a radical move occurring in the 18th century as observed by Wood, (1992).
The patriotic leaders of the country dreamt of the new American nation as a republic where freeholders were led by gentlemen. These gentlemen were however of disinterested virtue who paid tribute to independence and leisure from what they considered petty commercial distractions. These were individuals who considered themselves to be above the corruptions bestowed on people on the basis of self interest. The rhetoric of equality was taken up by the artisans and mechanics who elected men from the middle ranks in the belief that they would champion their interests (Wood, 1992). Consequently, the United States became the first country to offer leadership to ordinary individuals (Wood, 1992). This ordinary leadership was reflected both in the leadership composition and the electorate recruitment. In a nut shell, a democracy had been achieved without the use of violent means against the anticipations of the founding fathers of the nation.
It is almost universally acclaimed that the American Revolution was a wide ranging success and a good event indeed. This view is accepted across the political divide. However, the revolution had its shortcomings which few people if any have tried to remedy. It is also held that few individuals are willing to point to aspects they believe were failures in the revolution. Wood presents an audacious piece of authorship as e resents the American Revolution as a conservative American revolution which turned out into a liberal democracy. The view presented by Wood is seen as radical in nature due to its perceived dismaying role to those that were behind the American Revolution.
From the onset of the book, Gordon Wood clearly points out that republicanism was the main motif behind the British rulers. Republicanism never belonged to what Wood, (1992), calls margins only, it was equally universal to the left and the right wing of the English political setting. The monarchical and the republican attributes and values were part of the political life of the English. It is thus little surprise that English monarchies had adopted the republican ideals way long before the colonisation period. However, this was acquired progressively though without intent and visualisation of the long term implications of the adoption. Despite republicanism remaining rarely mentioned, people of varying degrees of knowledge including the best celebrated the form of leadership. They liked the spirit behind the leadership form, its morality its leaning towards the sense of duty and friendship, and its conceptualisation of society. As a form of governance, republicanism was preferably comprehensive, pervasive, and more liberal and by far enlightened and could not be viewed in line with the subversive monarchical leadership in America (Wood, 1992).
It is on the basis of the above realisation that republicanism was seen as a good culture to be embraced. It was blended and let t mingle with the monarchical type of leadership and as a result influenced it in unprecedented ways. in a nut shell, the emergence of republicanism in the 18th century did not serve to displace the monarchical type of leadership. It only transformed it in certain ways. On the basis of the republican tradition, man was naturally a political individual. A political individual in reference to the fact the being pursued moral fulfilment through the participation in a self ruling republic. Liberty, both political and public, was used in reference to what is currently seen in terms of positive liberty which is used in association with the chance to participate in government business. Such liberty provided for personal rights and freedoms. The latter liberty is examined in light of the current day negative liberty. Initially, the two forms of liberty were literary taken as one. Liberty was realised in a virtuous living people willing to sacrifice for others. The temptations of the free market economy were not welcome. Any loss of virtue or independence meant corruption.
The virtue pursued by the republicanism mode was thus the public one. Private issues such as frugality, prudence, and industry were valuable though they only made men responsible to themselves only (Wood, 1992).
Republicanism was thus a suppressive approach to individual interest just as was the monarchical structure. However, the republicanism approach required more morality than the monarchical style.
The two party systems and the American constitution pit individuals interests against each other (Wood, 1992). The worst seems to crop up day after day as the state drifts further into welfare programs. If the recent health care law adopted in the United States is anything to go by then the author, Wood is quite right in his assertion there was no revolution in the first place. Wood believes that the chance to be free from the republican tendencies was passed by and there are no chances, the opportunity will arise again (1992).
To further illustrate the above point it is held that a revolution is sought in order to overhaul a system in reference to how issues of governance are run. the fact that the republican leadership and the monarchical one rallied society as a unity that seeks moral issues as a group serves as a pointer to retaining of legacies. As observed earlier, such pursuits were meant to limit individual pursuits by placing a load of other people on others. In the same way, the current leadership has not diverted much it has instead gone back to what the monarch offered. In this light, the revolution could have taken place though it did not alter this aspect. If this constitutes a crucial aspect of the revolution, it is then held, that Wood is right in claiming that it was a change of connections.
The founders erred in discounting the value of virtue (Wood, 1992). This is what destroyed the ligaments that held society together in the monarchical set up. Patronage and kingship was useful in helping the society in sticking together. Invoking the tabula rasa theory as presented by John Locke, Wood, (1992) argues that the rulers thought they could educate their citizenry new things. They also thought that they could replace the traditional norms with the republican ones. The vision and mission of the revolution was breathtaking (Wood, 1992). The leaders expected that the achievement of a utopian society led by virtue was possible. The realisation was stark as they were disappointed (Wood, 1992).
Conclusion
The radicalism of the American Revolution thus lies in the fact that the anticipated end result was the creation of a republic, but what came of it was different. The classical republic the revolutionaries had in mind was later replaced by democracy.
The piece of works of Wood is quite fascinating as it remains challenging in the view that it questions universally accepted wisdom. The focus of Wood was on social change as opposed to the upheaval. The author uses referencing to illustrate and demonstrate his ideas. Considering the presentation of Wood, I am convinced that the revolution was radical in a sense as it ended up at an unanticipated point.
Categories:
0 comments:
Post a Comment