David Kaib said something that might seem very small at first. But it's about language, and language is about defining reality, and (a) that's the first step to changing reality and (b) that's very much what today's little exercise here on Open Left is all about:
Here's my hope
That we can start with the small step of calling this day Independence Day, not Fourth of July. It recently struck me how odd it is to refer to the day by its date - the only holiday I can think of we do that for. Is there any doubt that his is because of its political content - like so much political language, this seems to be an example of "blunt[ing] the too sharply pointed."
From there, I hope that we can reconnect with the meaning of today (this post by Paul, and Mike's above, are great starts) and other holidays - like MLK and Labor Day. Perhaps we might also use this day as a chance to think about the ways we have yet to root out royalism / aristocracy in our culture - whether that be the way we treat presidents, senators, celebrities, or the rich. Or perhaps maybe (it's a small thing, I know), I could go to the grocery store and not have to see magazines detailing the lives of British princes
I couldn't think about any of the above-Independence Day, reclaiming meaning, calling things by their true names--without immediately thinking about another, closely-related meaning of "Independence Day," the Gretchen Peters song made famous by Martina McBride, a song which embodies its own set of contested meanings that resonate powerfully with what we've been talking about here today, and which became a part of campaign contest last fall. Here's the Wikipedia entry on its background:
The lyrics tell a story of a woman's response to domestic abuse, seen from the point of view of her daughter. The song's music video was somewhat controversial at the time of its release, because of its graphic depiction of domestic violence. The ending of the video is particularly intense, as it shows the young girl's home burning to the ground, implying that the mother had been responsible for the fire, and that she and the abusive father both perished in the fire.
The lyrics have a double meaning in that the woman in the story is finally gaining her "freedom" from her abusive husband. Thus, it is her "independence day." The title also refers to the fact that the events noted in the song happened on America's Independence Day, or July 4.
And its use in politics:
Writer Gretchen Peters has objected to Hannity's use of the song, and engaged in a "personal protest" by donating to organizations such as ACLU, PFLAG and MoveOn.org. When the song was used to introduce Republican Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin at a rally in October 2008, Peters publicly announced that she considered the use of the theme, in view of Palin's opposition to abortion even in cases of rape and incest to be "beyond irony" and that "[Palin] represented the opposite of what this song really is all about". She said that she intended to donate all royalties from the song during the election cycle to Planned Parenthood, in Gov. Palin's name.
I would have embeded the video as part of this diary, but embeding has been disabled. It's quite powerful, and you can see it here. Lyrics on the flip.
On this holiday celebrating the courage of America's brave revolutionary founders, all Americans can celebrate. But progressives should take special pride in this holiday, for it was the ultimate achievement of progressive values that brought us this day.
As I discuss in my book, The Progressive Revolution: How the Best in America Came to Be, the Tories who opposed American independence were the conservatives of their day. They revered tradition, and proudly followed orders from the king and the aristocracy in London. They hated and feared the idea of democracy, and thought the idea of equality was laughable. As Tory Samuel Seabury, the first Bishop of the American Episcopal Church, argued:
"If I must be enslaved, let it be by a king at least, and not a parcel of upstart lawless committeemen. If I must be devoured, let me be devoured by the jaws of a lion, and not gnawed to death by rats and vermin.
In a letter to the editor of a British newspaper, another American Tory argued that the colonists had shown:
...an extravagant zeal for liberty without considering...that nothing is as essential as a due obedience to the government they live under.
The Tories valued tradition over justice, feared the unintended consequences of change, and hated the idea of being "gnawed to death by [the] rats and vermin" of democracy.
Our progressive revolutionary founding fathers like Thomas Jefferson and Tom Paine argued that we should "make the world new again." Paine's pamphlet Common Sense lit a fire under the American people, reaching working class and poor people as well as the elites, and fundamentally changed the debate. Before Common Sense was published, most Americans were debating how they could best claim their rights as Englishmen. Afterwards, the debate was about revolution itself.
And make no mistake: the ideas we take for granted today were truly radical in 1776. Before our revolution, every country on earth was ruled by some kind of king and aristocracy. Ideas like democracy and equality were shocking and terrifying to the conservatives of the day. Even among the brave leaders who came together in Philadelphia, their list of grievances with the king and Parliament were pretty basic. But in Jefferson's stunning opening paragraph of the Declaration of Independence, he blew away thousands of years of assumptions about government - the divine right of kings, citizens owing obedience to whatever government they lived under, adherence to tradition, rule by aristocracy. And he set the stage for an American debate about the progressive values of equality and justice that have inspired our debates ever since.
Listen to the words again with fresh ears. Think about how radical they were then, and how their values should inform our modern debates:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just power from the consent of the governed. That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to affect their Safety and Happiness.
Those ideas are progressive ideas. Those values are progressive values. So as we are fighting today's battles - to expand our definition of equality to all of our people, to protect our rights as free citizens, to make sure all of the children growing up in a great country have a legitimate chance at their own pursuit of happiness - let's remember and embrace that history.
As We Celebrate Our Independence, It Is Time for Energy Independence.
On Friday July 4th we will celebrate Independence Day marking 232 years since our founding fathers declared that the United States of America would be an independent nation. Back in 1776, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin and others showed courage, leadership and vision by drafting the Declaration of Independence creating a democratic government based on freedom and rights for the common people.
Now, 232 years later, we need to see the same courage, leadership and vision from our elected leaders to declare independence again. In 2008, the independence we need to declare is not from tyrannical leaders and an oppressive government but energy independence from foreign sources that have too much control over a product that is so vital to our nation.
