Comments
THE VIEW FROM HERE - "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, . . . it expects what never was and never will be." (Thomas Jefferson Letter to Charles Yancey, 1816)
Noting that individual inalienable rights such as Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness are innate to each person was the easy part of the drafting Declaration of Independence. Nothing in the Declaration was novel. All its ideas had been hashed around among the educated for decades. The colony of Virginia was particularly active in writing about inalienable rights. The war began in 1775, and a year later, Second Continental Congress (1775-1781) chose a group of five to write the Declaration: Ben Franklin, John Adams, Roger Sherman, Robert Livingston, and Thomas Jefferson. Jefferson was selected to write the actual draft not only because he was an excellent writer, but also the others were impressed by his A Summary View of the Rights of British America. As was generally acknowledged, inalienable rights were innate to all human beings. Although the powerful may prevent a man from acting upon his rights, no power can “disjoin” a person from inherent inalienable rights.
These facts merit repeating today because 99% of Americans have lost touch with revolutionary times, leaving them vulnerable to so much nonsense that they are unable to recognize our foundational values. One gigantic myth shoved onto GenZer‘s is that protecting slavery was the purpose behind the Declaration of Independence. This monstrous falsehood exemplifies how ignorance is the enemy of liberty. In 1840 in Democracy in America Vol II, Alex de Tocqueville delineated how ignorance coupled with a passion for equality (equity) ends in slavery for all.
When the Declaration and the US Constitution were written, abolition was not politically possible. Jefferson’s original version of the Declaration had 168 words lambasting slavery. If those 168 Words had remained, then the six southern slave states would not have signed and there would have been no revolution. If only the 6 northern states signed and revolted, the southern five colonies would have been King George’s allies. The revolution was an all-or-nothing proposition.
Since Jefferson knew the southern states’ sentiments, he had no expectation that the southern states permit the 168 inflammatory words. The words were intended to be cut so that the slavery owners would be happy with their victory in defeating such obnoxious wording and would not notice or complain about the Declaration’s three anti-slavery aspects:
(1) "All men are created equal" included Blacks
(2) Jefferson added the emphatic word that each man's rights were "equal" to each other man's rights rather than assert that “all men have inalienable rights,” which would allow some to argue that like the British peerage system some men have more, better, or superseding inalienable rights. The insertion of the word, equal, meant that all humans despite race creed or color had the same and equal innate rights. Rights, inherent at birth, did not imply equality of outcome. Life + Liberty = Pursuit of Happiness.
(3) Jefferson changed Locke's triad “Life, Liberty and Property” to “Life, Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness.” Jefferson made this change so that no one could argue that slaves, who were legally property, could not have inalienable rights.
Had Jefferson’s original draft not included the 168 Words denouncing slavery, the pro-slavery factions would have more carefully scrutinized the Declaration and noticed how its structure guaranteed the end all slavery.
In 1776, the south was far wealthier than the north. In fact, New England was the poorest section of the county. Adam Smith published “Wealth of Nations” in 1776. The revolution was all-or-nothing matter. The poor northern states, who were most ardently pushing for revolution, could not militarily prevail over the British military while also fighting the wealthier southern states. Based on the reality of 1776 and not on the fanciful balderdash of the 2000's, the first issue was to establish a nation on innate inalienable rights like Liberty so that future generations could make them real for everyone.
Today, what we call Woke DEI rejects the Declaration of Independence’s inalienable individual rights as racist and instead promotes an alternate theory that society is divided between the Oppressors and the Oppressed where one’s rights are not based on an individual’s intrinsic worth but on the group to which one is assigned. Oppressors are classified as having no right to their wealth since it based on the stolen labor of the Oppressed. Thus, the Oppressed have the right to take whatever they desire. Of course, the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) and its ilk are the ones to decide which Oppressed person gets what and which one is not sufficiently loyal to get much.
What does the average Los Angeles voter know about America’s foundational values? Former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld pointed out that there “known unknowns” and “unknown unknowns.” The danger of the “unknown unknowns” is that one is unaware that they exist. When one realizes he lacks data, he seeks it out. Like Donald Trump, however, much of GenZer’s live in a world of unknown unknowns. Ignorance is bliss. Yet, they vote!
Thoughts precede actions and when Angelenos elect a government which monetizes housing (Wall Street) or one which disses individual rights (Wokers), don’t be surprised when Quality of Life declines. Because Wokers admitting their motivations would deter voters, the Wokers use misleading memes like Equity, Diversity and Inclusion (DEI) which means distribute wealth to various minorities. Woke DEI has three cousins: (1) The ward heeler system prevalent from 1870 to 1930's where people voted for the politico who gave them the jobs with no qualification requirements, (2) Woker Ideology is basically Soviet Marxism’s Oppressor vs Oppressed, where the wealth redistribution requires a totalitarian state, and (3) Wokeism is worse than run of the mill communism; Wokeism is closer to Germany racist Nazism. Like 1930's Germany, Woke DEI posit that Jews and Whites are the ultimate Oppressors, who merit extermination.
As long as Angelenos are unaware of whose ideology proposes what and why, they continue to support a medieval government of fifteen fiefdoms which have monetized housing to make Wall Street continually wealthier by driving up land values and driving down Quality of Life. Thus, Los Angeles and the State end up with America’s highest (adjusted) percentage of poverty.
None of the mayoral candidates evidences a clue how actually Los Angeles got in this mess. They’d rather pander to the ignorance of masses who prefer that elections be like WWE matches.
(Richard Lee Abrams is a former Los Angeles-based attorney, an author, and political commentator. A long-time contributor to CityWatchLA, he is known for his incisive critiques of City Hall and judicial corruption, as well as his analysis of political and constitutional issues. Abrams blends legal insight with historical and philosophical depth to challenge conventional narratives. A passionate defender of civic integrity and transparency, he aims to expose misuse of power and advocate for systemic reform in local government. You may email him at RickLeeAbrams@Gmail.com)
