Top 10 Most Outstanding Presidents of the United States

Author: Cao Deqian
Publisher:
Publish Date: 2006-06-01
Features: Why did such a wealthy landlord want to revolutionize? Some critics argue that Washington's wealth came from agricultural products, and from Britain's perspective, he would suffer losses from the "scissors' difference," so he wanted to revolutionize. True, Washington would suffer losses from agricultural products, but he had been enduring these losses for a long time. Although his complaints in this regard could not form a book, they could probably be compiled into a pamphlet. However, he never thought of revolution, even when the Boston Tea Party dumped tea in 1773, he still expressed his lack of support for the destruction of tea. Washington's revolutionary ideas developed from his participation in political activities. His lifelong friend, the Fairfax family, were loyalists, so he could not have obtained revolutionary ideas from them. But his political friends, such as George Mason, were "leftists," and he often interacted with them while also frequently receiving information from the North. Thus, the idea of fighting for freedom gradually entered his mind. Some letters prove that Washington's opposition to Britain was mainly due to opposing slavery rather than exploitation. On April 5, 1769, Washington wrote to Mason: "When the arrogant lords of Great Britain are determined to deprive us of our freedom, it seems imperative to take certain measures to prevent harm and defend the freedom we have inherited from our ancestors. However, the question of how to act effectively is still debated. To defend the invaluable and infinite natural freedom that is intimately connected with our lives, each of us should unhesitatingly take up arms. This is my straightforward opinion. But I would like to add that weapons should be a last resort, the last resort. Petitioning the king and appealing to the parliament have reportedly been ineffective. Boycotting their goods and severing their trade may or may not make them reconsider and value our rights, and this remains to be seen." On July 20, 1774, Washington wrote to his loyalist friend, Fairfax: "Dear sir: I must admit that we have significant differences in opinion on how to defeat (abolish) this fiercely criticized and rightly criticized bill. I will not hesitate to acknowledge this. Sir, what exactly are we opposing? Is it opposing the payment of 3 pence per pound in tea taxes because of excessive taxation? No, that is not it. What we have always opposed is not anything else but Britain's right to tax us. To achieve this, we have petitioned the British monarch in a humble and respectful manner as any ordinary subject could. Moreover, we have appealed to the House of Commons and the House of Lords according to their respective legal functions, explaining that as British subjects, our fundamental and most precious constitutional rights should not be deprived. Since what we are now opposing is this right to tax, and in fact, it is true, why didn't they think that exercising this power now would not be as hateful as before? If I were still uncertain or hesitant about whether the British Parliament has the right to tax us without our consent, I would readily agree with your opinion that petitioning, and only petitioning, is the only viable path to seek relief. Because in that case, we would be begging for favor rather than demanding a right. This right, in my view, is an undeniable right granted to us by natural law and the constitution. According to your thinking, I would also consider any step beyond petitioning as a crime; but I have none of that thought. I believe that without my consent, the British Parliament has no right to reach into my pocket and take money at will, just as I have no right to reach into your pocket and take money at will without your consent. The colonies have already explained this principle to them in a firm and dignified manner. What reason do we have to expect their "justice"? On January 1, 1771, Washington made it even clearer in a letter to Robert Morris and others: "I will always remember that we took up arms to defend freedom, and once freedom is achieved, the first thing we should abandon should also be weapons."