The motive behind the Declaration of Independence

Ala Rasheed 

The declaration of independence gave the nation a unilateral enemy (British), in which it united the people and functioned to mobilize certain groups of Americans, and ignoring others. It was  the declaration of independence that inspired a revolution, which was orchestrated by strong radical language like freedom, liberty and justice, but the underlying structure was slave vs. indentured servitude, and was created to keep the lower class in constant conflict, and remain in the status quo. An example of the extraneous circumstances that pitted indentured servitude and slave against each other is evident in this passage by Edmund Morgan: “Virginias ruling class, having proclaimed that all white men were superior to black, went on to offer their social (but white inferiors) a number of benefits previously denied them.” (Zinn 30).Morgan goes on to conclude that by giving a little, and prosper a little, ” he would become less turbulent, less dangerous, and would see his big neighbor not as an extortionist but as  a powerful protector of their common interest” (Zinn 30). The practice of maintaining order by the ruing elite is not supposed to be looked at broadly, but examined in the underlying context on how it affected society as whole. Its implications were apparent increasing a division of the lower classes to help stem rebellion. Economic motives are the main culprit, but physical, psychological abuse, and outright domination is what kept the ball rolling. Imperialism creates divisions in society in which classes and people are pinned against each other for individualist notions rather than greater good of the community. The bourgeois which are the affluent middle upper class controlled most of the wealth, in Boston alone the 1% of property owners owned 44% of the wealth. The bourgeois as they saw it felt threatened by the proletariat class which were restful and demanded better treatment and equality. By the 1760’s the elite classes found a new way to control and boost their power, in which they used the” language of liberty and equality, which could unite just enough whites to fight a revolution against England, without ending either slavery or inequality. 

Imperialism in essence created social classes which consisted of the upper and lower classes with strict divisions and the middle class was conjured up as a buffer zone between the upper and lower classes. Imperialism uses every object in its disposable to keep the elite status and at the same time gave enough concessions that there won’t be popular revolt.” The continental congress which governed the colonies through the war was dominated by rich men, linked together by factions and compacts by business and family connections” (Zinn 63). According to Zinn, the armed white population had to be wooed to fight the revolution. The revolution appealed to the ruling elite by making them more secure against internal trouble. Carl Degler says “No new social class came to power through the door of the revolution. The men who engineered the revolt were largely members of the colonial ruling class” (Zinn 65). John Hancock was prosperous Boston merchant, George Washington was the riches man in America, and Benjamin Franklin was a wealthy printer. As we see men behind the revolution are the socially elite, and not the common person.

The ruling elite which enjoyed prosperity under British rule were ready to secede and dealer independence strictly on the basis of expanding economic interest and to gain control of more resources. The revolution and the declaration of independence set forth the motion of a centralized government, with a constitution that guarantees freedom liberty equality and property to all citizens. The amendments that laid the foundation of the new nation, strengthened by the Bill of Rights were widely accepted and gave the necessary support to build the new nation. The pleasantries ended there in which the congress enacted laws that abridg freedom as stated in (Zinn 76). The constitution in fact was not there to guarantee freedom, but rather guarantee the legitimacy of the government. The most notable feature was the power to tax which was strictly enforced, while other amendments guaranteeing freedom were taken lightly. “ They(founding Fathers) did not want an equal balance between slaves and masters, property less and property holders, Indians and white”(Zinn 77).

The idea of a stable central government appealed too many, the middle class which broadly supported a strong central government to enact laws, and impose tariffs on foreign products to protect the price of locally made goods. A stable government as Zinn states “serves the interest of the ruling elite, but also does enough for small property owners, for middle income workers and farmers, to build a broad base of support. The slightly prosperous people who make the basis of support are buffers against the blacks, the Indians, and the very poor whites.

The constitution enabled democracy in the same way it works today. The nation then and now is divided between the extremely wealthy, the struggling middle class, and the poor. But being socially and economically polarized it creates a buffer zone for the wealthy. The middle classes though involved in the democratic government do not posses the time or effort to usher in significant changes. The same tactic is used during the governmental policy post revolution and in present day America. The middle class now and then are polarized in society. The socio economic boundaries are becoming more evident and the division of the classes is becoming more and more apparent. The wealthy elite gives enough to the people to stay appeased, but not enough to threaten the status quo.  

Zinn, Howard. A People’s History of the United States. Abridged Teaching

Edition. 1st Ed. The New York Press, New York, 2003. Print.  

Foner, Eric. Give Me Liberty! New York: W.W. Norton &, 2009. Print.

Declaration of Independence (http://www.archives.gov/national-archives-experience/charters/declaration.html)