On Students On the Tea Party, Cont'd

What is interesting about this excerpt is that the student is engaged in meta-thinking--that the history we are studying is an opportunity to reflect on both what Nietzsche referred to as the usefulness of history, as well as the purpose of the Revolution itself:

"Many things that are said by members of the Tea Partiers display a lack of understanding of what happened.  For them, the revolution and events that led up to it are people that fought for “America,” and the important thing is what the imagined “America” is.  The tea party thinks “America” is a place without universal health care, and so that is what the tea party means to them.  It is irrelevant to the Modern Tea Party that the original Boston Tea Party was designed to promote smuggling of tea, and it was against the actions of the British that actually lowered the cost of tea in the Americas (although it is interesting to note that several studies have shown universal healthcare to lower the total cost to the federal budget, an unintended parallel). 

 "Previous groups alluding to the actions of the founding fathers have done similar things to the historical context of the revolution.  Except for them, “America” meant something different.  For the Tea Party of the seventies, “America” was a place that shouldn't engage in wars like the war in Vietnam.  Although it is perhaps a cause that can be sympathized with, the connection between the Vietnam War and the Boston Tea Party is tenuous at best.  Once again the actions of our founding fathers are being taken to mean the fighting for some imagined America.

"There is still the question of, if parallels for the meaning of the founding father's actions should not be allowed to go through the “America” gray area, how should the founding father's be used?  It has already been said that it should be thought of factually, but there is more meaning that can be taken.  The constitution has been in place for more than 200 years, it must have worked.  An analysis of that reveals both what it is about America that has worked and what “America” meant to the founding fathers themselves.  One such example can be seen in the bill of rights; the “people” are allowed several rights that are not to be violated.  Each one can be traced back to an attempt by the founding fathers to distance themselves from the actions of Britain that caused revolution, and this implies what seems to be the goal of the founding fathers.  The goal appears to create a nation as similar to Britain as can be without making the same mistakes.

"And yet, the supposed desire to be a “better Britain” isn't important to the modern day. If someone was taken from the street and asked what America is, nobody would say “It's like Britain, only better.”  It's not important what the founding fathers thought.  Many of them owned slaves, but that doesn't have any relevance whatsoever on the question of if slave owning is acceptable in America.  The revolution happened, it led to the country we have today.  But it isn't a justification for political, or other, ideas.  If the idea is to promote the ideal “America,” then that's what should be said; “America should be,” and not “The founding fathers wanted.”