What can Daniel Shays teach us about Iraq?

In 1783, the experiment began. The Revolutionary War had ended with a shocking victory for liberty and self-government over tyranny. Now that the Americans had their own independence, what were they to do with it? The answer was the Articles of Confederation, our nation’s first constitution. The Articles were, essentially, the anti-British government. There was to be no executive branch (too much like King George III), no taxation, and no national army. A tremendous amount of power was given to the individual states.

A few years after the treaty of Paris, our young nation was in severe debt. Each state was responsible for paying its own debt, with Massachusetts owing the most. The state raised taxes to an astronomical level on land, which greatly hurt many farmers. In 1786, Daniel Shays became one of these men.

A former colonial in the Revolutionary War, Daniel Shays now found himself bankrupt and disenfranchised (voting was tied to property ownership back then). In addition, many farmers were faced with the prospect of debtor’s jail if they were unable to repay their original loans. Shays and his fellow farmers made a decision that changed the course of history. After many meetings at Conkey’s Tavern in Pelham, Mass., they decided on insurrection.

Shays and his men were able to seize control of several governmental buildings, even several courthouses, and sustain their rebellion until 1787. Due to lack of funds, Massachusetts was unable to raise a militia to stop Shays. Without a standing army, or the power of taxation to raise one, the federal government could only stand and watch a group of angry farmers as they hijacked the nation for several months. Only after private Boston bankers could raise enough money could a militia be hired to stop Shays and his followers.

Shays rebellion taught the young nation a very powerful lesson. No democracy can survive without two things: Law and Order. When government does not have a monopoly on force, democracies crumble. When militias are able to use terror and violence to gain control of basic governmental institutions such as courts, then “liberty for all” is impossible.

Several weeks ago, President Bush ordered 21,500 troops into Iraq, in order to secure Baghdad from terrorists and militias. Shays Rebellion was the impetus for the U.S. Constitution, which “provides for the common defense” and “insures domestic tranquility”. Will the surge provide law and order in Iraq so that democratic institutions can flourish? Will this new addition of American forces stop all militias and terrorist groups from hijacking the young Iraqi democracy? Your answer to those two questions most likely depends on your feelings on the war and your level of faith in our current administration. However, if the surge does stabilize Iraq, perhaps then we can all agree that history has a funny way of repeating itself.