Much has been written this year, especially in the last few weeks, about the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence.
Some items include a retelling of history, others provide critiques of the meaning behind the anniversary especially for various racial groups and women while others discuss the meaning of patriotism.
We saw many documentaries and reenactments on public access channels and streaming services. These documentaries and reenactments focused on many of the authors of the Declaration of Independence and the events surrounding the debate then eventual war.
Two of the most famous critiques of the Declaration of Independence are David Walker’s 1829 “Appeal to the Colored Citizens of the World” and the 1852 writing of Frederick Douglass, “What to the Slave is the Fourth of July.” Walker and Douglass challenged the meaning of the Declaration of Independence’s words and lack of fulfillment in deeds to all those living in the United States, especially the enslaved and Black people.
In recent weeks, the discussion of patriotism was highlighted.
What does it mean to a be a “real” patriot? Does patriotism mean full acceptance of government, the parts we agree with, without critique? Is patriotism about the swag of our nation’s colors? Or, living to the creed as set in the Declaration of Independence and U.S. Constitution?
While these discussions are interesting, the most interesting for me has been appreciating Georgia’s role as an original colony and signer to the Declaration of Independence.
Can you imagine? The stress, uncertainty and daunting nature of 13 small colonies deciding to gather and use strong, forceful language to rise up against a large and formidable empire.
Talk about David versus Goliath.
With the odds against them, the 13 Colonies banded together to put their grievances on paper and make a clear argument about what was unacceptable from their government. They accused King George III of refusing laws “necessary for the public good”; of blocking laws “for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of representation in the legislature”; and of dissolving “representative houses repeatedly” when they opposed his invasions “of the rights of the people.”
For these 13 Colonies to have the audacity to note the reasons for dissent, disagreement, and despair to King George, then to be prepared to physically pushback on their colonizer and government took grit.
This took bravery.
This is Georgia.
Before Georgia fought against the Union and for the Confederacy, Georgia fought to become a free state against tyranny, as the colonies noted in the Declaration of Independence.
Even with the limitations of who could be free from tyranny, Georgia stood from the beginning of these current United States. Georgia stood up for legislative representation. Georgia stood up for a fair leader. Georgia stood up for a functioning government working on behalf of the public good … for the people.
This took courage.
Georgia and the other colonies considered the political, economic and possible military consequences of going against their government.
All acted, seemingly, against their immediate best interest. All looked toward the future. The short-term impact was small in comparison to the future that could be.
This took vision.
Georgia and the other colonies considered what their government or lack thereof would look like after breaking with the British. Georgia and the other colonies then took the lessons learned from being governed under the British Empire to later create governing documents to address concerns noted in the Declaration of Independence.
This took leadership.
Georgia and the other colonies worked to place boundaries on government officials to reduce tyranny or government officials being too powerful and enriching themselves over the people.
This took self-awareness.
Every leadership book notes all these aspects of authentic leaders: bravery, courage, vision, leadership and self-awareness.
Therefore, Georgia is a leader.
Even though Georgia and other original colonies did not always live up to these leadership qualities after the Declaration of Independence, the muscle memory remains. The original states have the muscle memory to continue to do what is “necessary for the public good” instead of what is politically expedient.
We know this because the politically expedient reaction would have been to not sign onto the Declaration of Independence. To remain loyal to King George and the British Empire. To benefit from that loyalty — even while one’s neighbor will not benefit.
Because Georgia and the other colonies did not decide on the politically expedient action, our Republic was able to form and morph.
Obviously, we have not lived up to these leadership values.
As a state and country, we have had several internal conflicts — fighting among ourselves regarding civil rights and civil liberties. Expanding and deciding who benefits from the ideals noted in the Declaration of Independence. If “all men were created equal” and “endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”, have we indeed provided everyone the unabridged opportunity to achieve this standard?
Have we been selective in our approach to such fundamental ideas? Have we twisted ourselves in knots justifying who is worthy by our creator to have these natural rights?Have we agreed to natural rights for all people? Have we created a government for all to benefit or has government been selective of who benefits?
The grievances noted in the Declaration of Independence are not stale, stagnant. These grievances can be applied to various groups of people at various times in our history and present. Have we learned from the leadership of the colonies? Have we learned from the spirit of dissent and bravery to seek a better form of government for the greater good?
As we consider our future celebrations and upcoming elections, it will be curious if we elect individuals who have the leadership qualities that helped to create Georgia as one of the original states in our republic? Will we see officials work for the public good or pretend that enrichment of a few benefits all?
The Declaration of Independence is a reminder of the bravery, vision, courage, self-awareness and leadership — creating a promise to all of us in our republic.
I highly encourage each of us to revisit the Declaration of Independence for ourselves — without someone else’s interpretation or selective excerpts.
I encourage us to individually bear witness to the words and intentionality of the signers’ demands for legislative representation and government being accountable to the people.
Then, I encourage all of us to rise to the level of audacity by seeking the same active and responsive government to address our short-term and long-term challenges of all of our communities and the entire country.
Tammy R. Greer has a PhD in political science and teaches public policy.
