The Real Meaning of the Declaration of Independence

ByBrian Phillips

For most Americans, July 4th is a time to celebrate the nation’s independence from Great Britain. Certainly, that was the prominent aspect of the Declaration of Independence. But more fundamentally, the Founding Fathers declared the independence of the individual from the State.

Through human history, and even in most of the world today, the individual is subservient to the State. The Founders rejected this view, boldly declaring that all individuals possess certain unalienable rights. The purpose of government is to protect those rights.

Rights protect the freedom of individuals to act as they deem best, so long as they respect the same rights of others. This is the meaning of the Founders assertion that all individuals have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Sadly, a growing number of Americans believe that individuals should be subservient to the State. They believe that individuals should be forced to act contrary to their own judgment. They believe that individuals should seek the permission of government before engaging in certain professions through occupational licensing. They believe that government should control and restrict businesses, such as short-term rentals. They believe that money should be forcibly taken from producers to pay for the health care, education, and housing of others.

In each of the above examples, as well as countless others, the individual is forced to act, not as he thinks best, but as government officials dictate. The Founding Fathers were brave men who risked their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor in the defense of individual rights. If we wish to honor them, we must embrace the cause for which they fought–the independence of the individual from the State.

Similar Posts

  • By What Standard?

    ByBrian Phillips

    During the lockdown, businesses that were declared “non-essential” were prohibited from opening. In Texas, liquor stores were considered essential, but hair salons weren’t. By what standard was a business considered essential? Like many aspects of the lockdown, government officials weren’t very transparent regarding their criteria and standards. Instead, they issued dictates and expected the masses…

  • The Pseudo-independence of Being Anti-authority

    ByBrian Phillips

    Last week, a reader asked me to expand on a remark made in a post about those who are anti-authority: Many of those opposed to getting vaccinated call those who are getting vaccinated “sheeple”—mindless individuals who do as they are told by public authorities. The underlying attitude is one of anti-authority and pseudo-independence. In principle,…

  • Cascading Victims

    ByBrian Phillips

    In March, the government began forcing businesses to close in an effort to stop the spread of the coronavirus. Not surprisingly, unemployment has soared, and many businesses are threatened with extinction. Equally unsurprising is government’s response–throw money at the victims it created. Government will soon be sending individuals money and providing loans and other financial…

  • Deja Vu

    ByBrian Phillips

    In the last Texas legislative session, great controversy erupted over Austin’s attempts to reign in local governments. Bills were introduced to prohibit local controls over plastic bags, trees, short-term rentals, and more. Local governments claimed that these efforts by the state usurped their authority. A similar controversy has erupted in California. California State Senator Scott…