The picture posted below is the Gadsden Flag, a flag designed during Revolutionary America. From its design we see one of the major sentiments prevalent during the American Revolution. The rattlesnake and slogan best represent the idea of the government not encroaching on people’s rights, as before a threat approaches a rattlesnake always gives a warning with its rattle. If the aggressor is to proceed any closer, the snake bites. Coupled with the slogan “Don’t tread on me” it accurately warns the audience that only harm will come from injuring them. This connects with the Declaration of Independence in which it is stated that “Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.” In this statement we see that like a rattlesnake who has been given its warning and is ready to strike, the United States has already made fair warnings to Britain about its transgressions, and yet rather than heeding to them Britain has only added insult to injury, which has led America to finally revolt. Do think there are any other ways this sentiment is best expressed? How do you interpret the symbolism of this flag?
As most of us know, the California Primary Election is just around the corner which means we are all preparing to hear from our various relatives why we should vote for their candidate. Despite the annoyance of being told that “[Our] generation is a bunch of nitwits who are going to drive our economy into bankruptcy with [our] liberal stances”, elections such as these help to promote a healthy government with checks and balances.
One of the complaints made in the Declaration of Independence against the contemporary English Government is that King George III, “…has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries”. Because the king could not be kicked out of office nor could he be replaced through a regular process of voting, he was able to bend the justice system to his will with bribery and threats of expulsion. Instead of justice being the standard and measurement of the courts, the main ruling principle was the king’s bias.
With the election system in place, the President is unable to bribe or threaten the judicial system. If the President is caught doing so, he can be removed from office or, in the rare case that this would not happen, be voted out by the American People/Electoral College. The United States Constitution also allows for the judicial system to decide if executive orders are unconstitutional, placing yet another check on the Executive Branch.
Now some might say that the President still has control over the Judicial Branch as he nominates Supreme Court members. However, even if the President does attempt such a scandalous action, his maximum time in office of 8 years ensures that his control does not last forever.
Does the voting process help create a just judicial system or is the President still able to influence their decisions?
I took this picture at the Museum of Dream Spaces in LA.
This picture is something that I really thought represented the ideas of the Declaration of Independence. The background is dark and represents the shadowy past that the authors of the Declaration were trying to bring the USA out of. The lanterns that are coming towards the observer are softly lit, showing how there is this hope for the future.
To me — the lanterns, the hope for the future — really encase the ideas that are so central to the Declaration of Independence: “that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” Since, there is this hope that with the Declaration, that people would be able to come out of the darkness and have the right to life and liberty. The variety of colors of the lanterns overarching shows how the future Americans have the freedom to pursue their happiness. All people in America, whether it was 1777 or now in 2020, all have a different definition of what happiness means to them and the Declaration leaved the meaning ambiguous.
In modern times in America, we are still working on making sure all people have access to the right to pursuit of happiness because it is still being hindered because of societal issues with race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status, and many others. The ability to find happiness is something that I believe the authors of the Declaration wanted to for all people, but as the world changes, do you thing the meaning of “happiness” has changed? Do you think that the definition of happiness the authors used is still applicable now? Does it need to be updated to fit the modern world?
The Declaration of independence asserts people’s rights to choose their own government. Under the unfair treatment from the government of Great Britain, the colonies are unified and become independent from Great Britain. People clearly noticed a problem of equality and made this decision of asserting independence. In the Declaration, it says that “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” When I first learned about it, I was taught that it simply translates to “people are born equal”. One day, I saw this picture in one of my cogs classes where the professor used a picture of Abraham Lincoln as a demo. It reminded me of the civil war which happened after the publish of the declaration of independence. Clearly “all men” in the declaration of independence doesn’t include those who worked as slaves. It then also made me think that what about women, and learning about the rights of women during that time also refreshes the definition of “all men” for me. Furthermore, Thomas Jefferson actually drafted the declaration with the issue of slavery but it was removed later. Is it maybe that the people wrote Declaration of independence never take in consideration of people from other races? If it is the case, why were women excluded as well?
picture i found in one of my cogs classes, please ignore the irrelevant information
The Declaration of Independence is more than a declaration of intent – it was written to symbolize the both the extremely real difficulty of attaining freedom and the massive victory that it was envisioned to be (back when the document was written). Unjust rule was not just a “problem” that people had to deal with as peoples lives are totally jeopardized when there is government corruption. However, for a matter of life and death, until the Declaration was put forth, there simply wasn’t a strong action to combat this global problem. Locke’s Second Treatise similarly targets corruption in the ruling class as the problem to be combated, but it stands as merely philosophy (intellectual ideas). The Declaration was the opening move of a rebellion (or what is now definitively considered to be a revolution) against an unfair system of government that was not looking out for its people.
Before this critical action, there was nothing compelling people to try to make justice happen. People were living through constant wars where the victor got to do whatever they so desired until, once again, something bad happened. However, the DOI stands for much more than that. It specifically marks the corruption that drives this vicious cycle as the problem to be addressed. It details in length how this problem pervades lives, both on a governing level and on a human level. In the end, it declares that this is the problem that the American people freely choose to stand together to fight. Just because they are starting this confrontation does not mean they’ll win. However, this problem is the problem they are choosing to engage in conflict, not because they want power, but because they want what is good for the people.
I chose this picture to represent these ideals because I feel like it represents the sentiment of acting for a better future. I took this picture while on vacation, and I feel like the gorgeous backdrop really represents something to look forward to. Similarly, while the DOI isn’t the victory in and of itself, it so confidently represents freedom that attaining it seemed/seems inevitable. It’s description of attaining freedom as something to aspire and work for is like the flight itself, since you’re never going to get there unless you actually try to do it.
My question is: just because we’ve made many advances towards attaining the level of freedom that we currently have, are we there yet? There still seem to be many problems in terms of human liberty, so how do we stack up right now in terms of actually being independent?
A major reason that the colonies fought for independence was for being treated unfairly financially. Britain charged various taxes on the colonies to pay for wars, despite no say from tho colonists themselves. High taxes caused much retaliation from the colonists, including the Boston Tea Party. In the constitution, we see the desire for protection of property. Amendment 5 protects private property, while Amendment 8 prevents excessive fines. Along with this, by declaring there independence from Britain, Americans were freed from paying taxes to the king.
Tea played a significant role in the foundation of the United States of America. More specifically, the tax on tea helped to spur a revolution. This photo links very closely to the Declaration of Independence and our secession from the King of England. In this separation, the document declares that “All men are created equal” which holds true to enlightenment values, that then helps their cause against the King’s taxes. Thus, we come full circle from tea, to taxes, to grievances, and finally, to independence. But it doesn’t stop there. What other values could this tea bag represent? Is its revolutionary purpose isolated to that of America or does India also find some meaning in this image when they also fought British rule? It seems that even the biggest of actions and consequences can arrive from the smallest of causes.
