It frightens the Colonel more than just a little (and he ain't scared of much) that the future of our Republic rests today in the hands of power-seekers whose cynical use of the inherently tyrannical concepts of democracy (also known as government by mob rule) and socialism threatens the very foundations upon which the most free people in the history of mankind live and work.
Those who would aspire to leadership in the affairs of our grand Republic would do well to study the actions of a great leader 236 years ago this month.
Allow the Colonel to set the scene for you:
The main fighting force of the American rebellion against Great Britain was encamped at Newburgh, New York. They, with more than a little help from the French Army and Navy, had shocked the world with the defeat of a British expeditionary force at Yorktown a year and half earlier. The remainder of British forces were bottled up in New York City, and the Continental Army remained nearby at Newburgh to keep an eye on them while an American delegation negotiated a peace treaty and independence in London.
One of General George Washington's most difficult tasks as Commander in Chief of the Continental Army (the army of the American colonial rebellion against the British Crown) was keeping an army in the field. As long as a Continental Army existed, the rebellion existed. As long as the rebellion existed, hope of independence existed.
The Continental Army was a whole different animal than the local and colony (state) militias. The various militias were untrained, mostly poorly led, and only showed up to participate (usually with poor results) in battles. After a battle (often in the midst of one) the militia melted away and returned to their homes. Militias started the war for independence -- but it would take a continuously fielded army to win that war.
Keeping an army in the field requires material, leadership, and, most importantly, a steady supply of manpower. Manning an army, particularly in a relatively free society, is a tricky business. Most nations employ some sort of conscription or draft. Richer nations rely on a combination of a draft and volunteers (providing compensation and benefit inducements). The richest nations often do away with a draft altogether (in times of relative peace) and rely strictly on an all-volunteer (read: "recruited") force. (In the United States most young men and women do not seriously consider military service until contacted by a recruiter and sold on the benefits of serving.)
During the American rebellion, there was no central Colonial authority to draft or recruit personnel for the Army and fledgling Navy. The individual colonies were cajoled by the Continental Congress (and, in some cases, by direct communication from George Washington himself) to raise forces for extended service with the line of the Continental Army. Most enlistments were for only one year and often for only 6 months. While some soldiers committed to serving for the duration of the conflict, most of the army's manpower was in a constant state of flux.
A large part of the reason for this constant state of flux was the fact that compensation for service was often only promissory -- individual colonies promised to compensate (in one form or another) later for service now. The national government was really no government at all -- it had little to no power over the individual colonies who each considered themselves practically independent nations in their own right. Any compensation and provisions provided by the Continental Congress came mostly from whatever loans the individual colonies and foreign governments (primarily France, Holland, and Spain) voluntarily provided.
The Continental Congress, and the individual colonies, did initially rely on fiat currency (paper money not backed by precious metal or other collateral) but before long that currency was considered worthless and not acceptable for trade, and by the time of the occurrence about which this post is written (early 1783) the compensation for the officers and men of the Continental Army was seriously in arrears.
In fact, in 1782, the Continental Congress actually formally suspended all individual compensation for the Army, the intent being to settle up with the officers and men after the war was over.
So, with no battles to fight since the defeat of Cornwallis' force at Yorktown in 1781, the roughly 8,000 man Continental Army sat on its hands in camp -- under-equipped, under-fed, unpaid, and unhappy.
An army with time on its hands -- even a well-paid and well-fed one -- will soon turn its energies to complaint. Place a few unprofessional officers with personal agendas in charge and those complaints will turn to conspiracy. In camp at Newburgh, New York, the Continental Army was rife with conspiracy.
In early 1783, an anonymous letter circulated among the officers at Newburgh condemning the inaction and inattention of the Continental Congress to the plight and pay of the Continental Army, and proposing a march on the seat of that congress at Philadelphia to rectify the situation.
In the Colonel's not-so-humble and not-so-little-studied opinion, one of Washington's chief subordinates -- General Horatio Gates (a former British Army general and open rival of Washington for command of the rebellion) -- if not the actual author of the letter, was the power behind the hand behind the pen. Washington had left Gates in charge of the force at Newburgh while he dealt with larger matters of the entire force and the Colonel believes Gates saw an opportunity (with the preponderance of the American army at his back) to stage a coup and take personal leadership of the entire rebellion (or maybe even use his control to bargain with the British for his own personal gain).
At any rate, a conspiratorial meeting of the officers was called for the 11th of March, 1783.
It was democracy in action.
That's right, the Colonel says this mutinous conspiracy had democracy as its agent of creation and force of animation.
You see, in a democracy, one man can whip up and ride the passions of a majority to his own ends and to the end of the interests of the minority and eventually to the end of the freedoms of the whole. The leaders of the Newburgh conspirators intended to hold a democratic vote, get majority approval for their plan, and then stage a coup that would have defeated the entire purpose of the revolution -- the establishment of a (little "r") republican form of governance for the upstart American nation.
The founders of our great nation DID NOT intend to found it as a democracy. They were (for the most part) well-read and educated men whose study of historical examples of government forms informed them that a democracy was the least stable and ultimately most self-destructive form of government known to man. The written arguments (the Federalist Papers, and other public and private letters) for establishment of our current Constitutional Republic -- are replete with dismal of democracy, decrying that form of government as dangerous and wholly unsuited for the purpose of the grand republic (with minority State and individual rights protections) envisioned. Democracy leads to coups -- coups lead to tyranny.
Need further proof of the Colonel's assertion? Go read both the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution, and report back to the Colonel the number of times you find the actual word "democracy" or even discussion of the concept of democracy.
The Colonel will save you some time. "Democracy" does not appear anywhere in either document.
But, back to Newburgh...
Washington got wind of the called meeting, denounced the "disorderly" nature of the proposed meeting, and instead issued an order sanctioning a meeting to occur on the 15th. Washington ordered Gates to preside over the meeting and to prepare a report of the grievances to be made to the Commander in Chief.
Gates and the officers of the army did as commanded by Washington. Shortly after Gates gaveled the meeting to order, Washington, to the surprise and astonishment of all, strode into the meeting hall and took the stage.
His address to his officers denounced the conspiracy and its intentions, and appealed to their professionalism and patriotism, but seemed to fall on deaf hears. The army held Washington and his leadership in the highest esteem, but his exhortation at this point was no match for their exasperation.
The Colonel believes that study of Washington's Newburgh Address should be mandatory for all members and prospective members of the U.S. military's officer corps. It is a passionate plea, not for "democratic" ideals, but for a professional consideration of "republicanism" in which the rights and privileges of all are best promoted and protected.
A member of Washington's staff in 1783 -- David Cobb -- wrote in 1825, "I have ever considered that the United States are indebted for their republican form of government solely to the firm and determined republicanism of George Washington at this time.
But, at the end of his prepared speech to the officers assembled there at Newburgh in the cold, late winter of 1783, the passions of the majority still ran hot for action. Washington sensed his failure to sway the majority -- democracy was howling and ready to go on the prowl. He searched for the right words to add to his argument, and then remembered a letter from a member of the Continental Congress who had promised Washington that they were doing everything in their power to compensate and reward the sacrifices of the men of the Continental Army. Washington reached into the pocket of his coat, withdrew and unfolded the letter. He then realized that he couldn't focus on the writing.
Washington paused, and then did something then considered unprofessional for an officer to do in public and completely out of character for the Commander in Chief -- he donned a pair of reading glasses. Witnesses later said that the entire assemblage drew breath in an astonished gasp. Washington apologized humbly, saying, "Gentlemen, you will permit me to put on my spectacles, for I have not only grown gray but almost blind in the service of my country."
Whether or not it was intentional stagecraft on Washington's part will never be known. Washington's stature and character was such that no one ever thereafter dared ask him about the incident. And, no record exists that Washington ever mentioned it.
Washington's officers, unswayed by the words of his prepared speech, were thunderstruck instead by his example of personal sacrifice. They disbanded their democracy, and the future Republic was saved.
If any man were truly capable of pulling off the coup contemplated by the Newburgh conspirators it was Washington. He could have been the "democratically" approved King of America, had is character been so inclined. Instead, he was an honorable man. The indispensable man of his generation. The Father of our Republic.
The Colonel prays for our nation principled, Constitutional, (little "r") republican patriots like Washington. He also prays for republican enlightenment for those who would use democracy to gain socialist power by leveraging the material desires of the majority against the liberty and best interests of We the People.
