Revolutionary Traditionalism

Revolution and political resistance to tyranny are included in the heritage of not a few nations. Still, there is one in which they hold a special place in history and in culture. This nation was a killer of kings and humbler of the royal. This nation, Britain, had some of the most developed and well-thought-out theological and philosophical ideas on the morality, justification, and rationale for resistance against government.

The American Revolution, which some view as a ‘liberal’ revolution, was highly conservative concerning the British Protestant traditions of revolution and political resistance. In this first part, the legal justification for political resistance and revolution within British Common Law will be explored. To follow will be part two on the history of British and American political resistance, and part three will be focused on the religious and moral justification for political resistance.

In 1689, the British Parliament made the English Bill of Rights law. This document contained a reiteration and strengthening of principles in the Magna Carta, which was made law in England in 1215. The Magna Carta, in points 12 and 14, “introduced a revolutionary innovation: the idea that the power to tax was in some way limited by general consent.”

The English Bill of Rights took this further in saying more explicitly that:

“The crown could not tax subjects without the consent of their representatives: ‘That levying money for or to the use of the Crown by pretense of prerogative, without grant of Parliament, for longer time, or in other manner than the same is or shall be granted, is illegal.’”

Suppose the Crown could not tax subjects without the consent of their representatives. In that case, the Crown must not have been able to tax colonial subjects. The political slogan “No Taxation Without Representation” came from this. By 1768, when this slogan became popular, Englishmen were not simply recognized as ‘subjects.’

Still, they were more appropriately termed ‘citizens’ if they were granted the rights that English law would afford them. Now the question is, “Were the American colonists considered English citizens?” If so, they should have had all the rights of Englishmen afforded them, including their right not to be taxed without representation in government.

Friedrich Von Gentz, an Austrian diplomat who was born in 1764 and later, in 1800, published an essay entitled, The Origin and Principles of the American Revolution Compared With The Origin and Principles of the French Revolution. In this essay, Von Gentz asserted:

“that the inhabitants of the colonies, in every sense of the word, were Britons, no man questioned; and the Parliament, which thought itself authorized to tax them, even in that, recognized them as fellow citizens.”

This was clear to many Americans that this was unjust, Europeans as well, and many of those living in Britain, including Edmund Burke, who gave a speech in Parliament in 1774 entitled, “On American Taxation,” in which he refers to a theoretical American colonist as “The Englishman in America,” emphasizing the fact that they are English.

The American agitation at taxes levied against them without any representation in Parliament was entirely in line with British law and tradition before and during the existence of the American colonies. Now, even with all of this information, it might be challenging to see how revolution and not just political resistance is an integral part of the British political tradition.

All of this is relevant to modern cultural, societal, and political discussions. Many people think that the American Revolution was a radical outlier in history and culture and that it was the result of liberal ideas flooding society. This, as seen above, has no basis. British Common Law is the basis for the American system of government, and it was partially British law that inspired the American colonists to act against their oppression.

The British, and therefore American, traditions of revolution and political resistance hearken back to the establishment of the Magna Carta and even all the way back to the Apostle Paul as well (which will be discussed in part 3). The foundation for the Revolution was much deeper than many people in the United States today were led to believe.