Brushfire of Freedom
The Armory
Note: Originally published on April 7th, 2009
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
The importance of the first amendment should be noted in the title of this blog. Four parts, just to review the first set of inalienable rights granted by our creator and protected by our founding documents.
Freedom of assembly is the right to come together with others of similar interest and express and defend common ideas and interests. It protects peaceful assembly, not a violent mob, because the founders wanted people to be able to gather, protest, and raise awareness, but did not want lynch mobs running the streets. Peaceful assembly has been demonstrated in the recent Tea Parties that have popped up across our nation. These gatherings of hundreds, and now thousands of people, are groups focused on heightening awareness of our eroding liberties. It is in the tradition, though not in the mold, of the original Boston Tea Party and Sam Adams, whose quote provides the name for our organization.
The founders knew that that an individuals free speech would be the “brushfire” that would continue to ignite the fires of freedom in the new United States. They knew that the individual spirit was needed to keep those fires burning. They also understood that a single flame could not sway a government, because the electorate would need to consist of many fires in order to carry the weight needed to shift government. This was all based in the fact that power corrupts, and the founders expected the people to control the government through free speech, press, assembly, and petition. For the republic to work, the majority would have to be informed and united to drive the changes away from the natural process of government growth, and toward the idea of controlled, minimal government of, by, and for the people.
When the government oversteps its bounds and takes action against the people, the people have under the first amendment the right to petition for a redress of grievances. This was not put in place so the people can collect signatures, but to ensure that the people could demand that the government correct its missteps without fear of punishment for that request. It is the ultimate “whistleblower” rule, in that it protects those who demand the government “get it right” from the possible reprisal of that government. It does not require the government to honor the request, or even listen to the petition. Thus it is necessary to place the weight of the electorate behind the petition to garner the action needed.
These last two rights protected under the first amendment are most critical when the government fails to act properly, or infringes on the other rights protected by amendments one through ten. A redress of grievances means to set things right, to correct the errors made and clarified in the list of grievances. The grievances are commonly listed in the petition, the redress is the required remedy, simple enough. But the government is not required to listen or honor the requests, so why are these two rights protected in the first amendment? The answer is in the numbers. A single person can petition the government for redress, but would mot likely receive a polite thank-you. However, a large protest of say 2,000 or more people in 2,000 cities across the country, on the same day, raising the same petition, that would attract the attention of those who are elected by a majority vote of the people. If the government could prevent those assemblies and petition through fear of retaliatory action, the issue could not be effectively raised, he voice of the people as a whole would be stifled.
The founders knew that assembly and petition were extensions of free speech and press, but necessary extensions to ensure the government could not exceed its bounds. The people, not a person, are responsible for electing our government. Our representatives are responsible for bringing the voice of the people, not a person, to the floor of Congress and the halls of government. It is the people, the assembled voices, who can make their grievances heard, demand redress, and expect to be heard. Failure of those representatives to hear the voices raised in petition would result in a change in the vote of the majority, and a change of leadership in the government. That is why the right to assemble and petition is protected in the first amendment, and why we as a people should exercise these rights as we should all others protected by the founding documents of this nation.
Contact Ramarious Brushfire Home
Copyright 2009. The published content is the sole property of the author. Any copy, use, or redistribution of any portion of the material without the written consent of the owner is a violation of international copyright laws.