Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Economic Independence Day

By David Morris, AlterNet. Posted July 1, 2005.


Sam Adams, Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine and Patrick Henry would have found Bush's brand of patriotism unfathomable -- and even, perhaps, treasonable.
Advertisement

Tens of millions of Americans will celebrate this 4th of July in the conventional way: saluting the flag, marching in parades, and consuming large quantities of beer and hotdogs. Our political leaders will urge us to demonstrate our patriotism.

But perhaps some of us could take a few moments to ponder what patriotism meant to those who took the considerable risk of declaring war on the mightiest nation on earth. And how they went about declaring and defining their independence.

Many events led up to our formal declaration of independence. But the pace quickened when, on a cold December night in 1773, a band of colonists forced their way onto three ships docked in Boston Harbor and dumped more than 90,000 pounds of tea into the sea.

As Thom Hartmann points out in his excellent book, "Unequal Protection," the colonists' actions were as much a challenge to global corporate power as they were a rebellion against King George III.

The ships were owned by the East India Company, a vast corporation with significant economic power over Britain's colonies around the world. The company had suffered large economic losses, in part because of a boycott of their merchandise by the American colonies. That represented a significant loss of revenue to the British government as well.

Thus, in 1773 the British Parliament passed the Tea Act. The Act exempted the East India Company from paying taxes on tea sold in the colonies. The aim was to enable the company to undercut the prices of small competitors, all of whom were subject to the tax, and drive them out of business.

The British government and the East India Company were betting that the lure of cheap tea would overpower any sense of solidarity among the colonists. They were wrong. The colonists continued to support independent merchants and boycott East India tea.

Britain retaliated by closing Boston's harbor to trade until the city paid for the lost tea. The British also converted formerly elected offices in the Massachusetts government into crown-appointed positions, restricted town meetings unless their agendas were approved by the royal governor and required Bostonians to house and feed British troops.

Britain's actions inspired the 13 colonies, for the first time, to work together. The first Continental Congress met in New York City in the fall of 1774. The representatives passed resolutions asking the colonies to raise militias. And they called for an organized boycott of all British goods.

This last was a key development. The colonists understood that independence could occur only if they had the capacity for economic self-reliance. They could claim political authority only if they had the economic, productive capacity.

Before we declared our political independence we declared our economic independence. All things English were placed on the blacklist. Frugality came into fashion. Out of the First Continental Congress in New York came the embryonic nation's first Chamber of Commerce. Given the current policies of the Chamber, it might be useful this July 4th to recall its first campaign slogan, "Save your money and you can save your country."


Digg!

David Morris is co-founder and vice president of the Institute for Local Self Reliance in Minneapolis, Minnnesota and director of its New Rules project.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Stephen Bartram
Posted by: sbartram on Jul 1, 2005 4:27 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Bless you!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Impeach him.
Posted by: kgs1947 on Jul 1, 2005 5:42 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Impeach Bush now! He has lied to congress and the people. He has brought our country to a frightening level of economic and political vulnerability. He is endangering our planet with his rigid and unenlightened environmental policies. He is ignoring the rightful position of Congress in determining the direction of our country. He is ill suited to be called "president" of this country! Impeach him now! Don't wait till it's too late.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Impeach him. Posted by: HuckFinn
» RE: Impeach him. Posted by: susan9390
perhaps, treasonable?
Posted by: nakis on Jul 1, 2005 6:48 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
No perhaps.
Their loyalty does not lie with the people. Bush spoke plainly at a fund raiser. The wealthy elite are his base. The mega-corps and profits are his goal. It's not about the great experiment that America is. It's about the same thing England wanted. What every imperialist, colonialist ever wanted. Money and power. Why else would the state of the America citizen be steadily declining of the past decades. Why else when we go to unprovoked war with the 2nd largest oil producer, take over their nation and the oil companies produce record profits. Why else would the push for more pollution and greater resource harvesting at the expense and health of the people in order to increase corporate profits.
We're playing a game to fatten the rich that we as a nation will inevitably loose. Unless military power is used to take control of competitors and resources. As we spend more on the military than China, Russia and England combined you get another piece of plan.
It's obvious what they are doing. And it's not for us.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: perhaps, treasonable? Posted by: project2501
Time for another tea party...
Posted by: esmalley on Jul 1, 2005 7:08 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Nice article. We don't hear enough about the inseparability of economic and political independence.

One minor clarification: the Chinese corporation Lenovo Group Ltd. bought IBM's PC division for $1.75 billion. This is just one part of IBM, though a symbolically significant one in the context of the history of technology.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Time for another tea party... Posted by: monkeywrench
Economic Sanctions
Posted by: susan9390 on Jul 1, 2005 9:28 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The World Tribunal on Iraq has recommended that we boycott war profiteers, divest ouselves of our stock in their companies, and leave our jobs with them. Since the administration and the media are unlikely to submit to the authority of the Tribunal, I suggest that we do so as individuals.

However, it's not as simple now as it was in the 18th century. First, the Tribunal's Recommendation names a list of "corporations including...." How can we get the complete list? Second, we now have holding companies and umbrella corporations and mutual funds with diverse portfolios. How can we sort all that out? Like most Americans, I am ignorant of such nuances of the world of big business, but like many, I would like to comply with the Tribunal's Recommendations.

Can you provide us with a complete list of the indicted corporations, their corporate investors and subsidiaries by which we may recognize them in our investment portfolios, the products and services by which we may recognize them in the market place, and your own input on any other sanctions we might be able to impose as individuals?

I am Editor at propeace.net, and you can reach me directly by writing to susan@propeace.net. If you or anyone else who reads this Comment have this information available, I would appreciate it if you would send it to me, or go to the website, Register, click on Add Content and then Story, and post it yourself. Thank you in advance for your help.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: conomic Sanctions Posted by: Roverton
Very Patriotic! I'm passing it on as a 4th of July message!
Posted by: verdanteye@yahoo.com on Jul 1, 2005 12:23 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thank You! Very Well Written!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Economy and Freedom
Posted by: Lincoln fan on Jul 1, 2005 4:47 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The double curse that we are now under is that our economic well-being is controlled by corporations who by exporting jobs put us in competition with slave-shop workers. Our political freedom is at the mercy of these same monied interests that buy the allegiance of our elected officials with campaign funds.

While the overall benefit of having products produced wherever they can be produced the cheapest is irrefutable, there should be some restrictions. Cheapest should be defined in terms of efficiency not in terms of cheap labor, disregard for worker safety, and disregard for environmental damage. Also, the immediate benefit for the corporation should not be made at the expense of the workers. The increased profits to the company should be shared with the displaced workers to assure that they have the opportunity for a job that is up to their skill level and pay grade. This might require a gradual exporrtation of jobs. Unemployment and under-employment are not beneficial to the populace. For a solution to the campaign finance problem I recommend that campaigns be financed by the taxpayers and that the funds be controlled by the voters. For an explanation see:
http://www.lincolninitiative.org

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: conomy and Freedom Posted by: yesman
janetsal
Posted by: janetsal on Jul 1, 2005 5:58 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I've got an idea. How about we practice personal fiscal responsibility and get out of debt completely ourselves. You know. The old fashioned use it up, wear it out way of doing things. Then, if you need something, buy it used. Also, stop buying everything you think you want. Once out of debt, you're no longer contributing to the corporate power structure. Walk or bike to where you're going. It's healthier and doesn't burn any gas. If we stop living as if we're the only people on the planet, we might be able to stop these crazy guys who are ruining our country with their greed. Bush, Cheney, Rove and the gang wouldn't know what to do with a grassroots economic boycott. Remember George said after 9-11, "Go shopping." I say since Iraq and the innumerable lies, "Stop shopping."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Amen Posted by: Kanefire
Treason is the proper charge, not impeachment
Posted by: Crusader Rabbit on Jul 2, 2005 9:10 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Our unelected sitting junta puppet and his 'gang of many' all need to be arrested, imprisoned and found guilty of treason under the laws they created. They should be held incommunicado, without lawyers, at an unknown location, without court appearances or specific charges, and then summarily executed.
Upon their "legal" execution the country should properly celebrate by nullifying the entire USA PATRIOT Act and all the Presidential edicts, reversals of labor, economic, environmental welfare and health laws they changed into evil, and strictly out-lawing "patriotism".
"We have seen the enemy (aka "the Evil Empire"), and it is us," to paraphrase a famous, if comical, philosopher of the people.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Yep, that's it. Posted by: WhatNow?
We have become a colony of corporate management
Posted by: Sojourner on Jul 2, 2005 6:53 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Global capitalism profits most from colonizing the world. It makes money whether or not it inflicts suffering. The easiest way to make money is to start a war.

As most people would be happiest living in a zoo, with kind zoo keepers, freedom has become disposable. We vote for those who promise to be generous keepers of our cages. Riches can buy a way out of all similar consequences, so it has no need for democracy and freedom.

We do not even notice that the way they keep us quiet is by crying 'war, war' at every opportunity. Yes, outside our cages it is a jungle, so let's be obedient and grateful for what we have.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Good on ya
Posted by: Kanefire on Jul 2, 2005 6:54 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Good Rant

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Was it tea, or was it rum?
Posted by: jimvj on Jul 4, 2005 6:18 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The potion that spurred the colonists to rebel against Great Britain was rum, not tea. At least according to Ian Williams at Salon.com.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]