If Liberty Dies in Our Hearts, no Constitution Law or Court Can Save It: A Meditation on Independence Day in the Trump Era

Friends of Padre Steve’s World,

I have been contemplating the ideas of liberty and freedom this week. I intentionally did not watch the President’s speech at Mount Rushmore for after what he did at Lafayette Park and in front of St. John’s Church on June 2nd showed me that when he speaks of freedom, he speaks of his own, and when he speaks of liberty it is for the few, and servitude for the masses, and yes those masses include the bulk of the men and women that blindly follow him. So instead I read the official transcript today and look at images and videos as well.

Nothing I read in it surprised me. It was as scripted as Leni Reifenstahl’s Film of the Nuremberg rallies, right to Trump making a flyover in Air Force One. After a series of platitudes invoking the President’s whose images are carved on that mountain, and a brief mention of American greatness, which he promised would “soon be greater.”  He made a perfunctory reference to the Declaration’s words that “all men are created equal,” words that only serve to camouflage a life and presidency that denies them, the protections of the Bill of Rights, and the guardrails of the Constitution and our institutions that curb the ability of one man to violate the Constitution and our laws, and surrender our nation into the hands of an avowed enemy, Russia, in word, thought, and deed.

He then went into a diatribe against attacking statues and memorials around the country, without mentioning that the primary memorials were those to Confederates, Slave Owners, traders, as well as those that helped exterminate the vast majority of indigenous, or native peoples of this land including the ancestors of the people who protested outside the park, for the land had been ceded to their ancestors in the Treaty of Laramie of 1868, and was considered sacred to the Lakota, Nakota and Dakota Sioux, and Arapahoe tribes that agreed to that treaty with the United States. .I will come back to that later.

Interestingly, he mentioned the Battle of Gettysburg and other Civil War battles without mentioning why they were fought, at was as if the rebellion of the Confederacy a nation founded “upon the cornerstone of slavery,”  In Trump’s speech it was was if the cause of the Confederate rebellion never existed, and the lives shed to preserve the Union and in turn emancipate Black slaves didn’t matter. Like everything else in  his speech it was designed to camouflage and obscure his actions to disenfranchise Blacks, and to treat them as less than citizens, because for him the understanding is that Black Rights do not matter, and the rallying cry of many “Black Lives Matter” is uniquely anti-American and anti-freedom, that is his understanding that it is his freedom, and the liberty of the few that matter. No one else.

Of course  slavery, its continued existence where it was already legal as well is expansion by whatever means into new territories, reintroducing it to the Free States, and invading Cuba, and Central American nations to expand it, was the first reason cited in every Confederate State’s ordinance of Secession, and in Confederate Vice President Alexander Stephens’  Cornerstone Speech. 

In his speech, Trump never mentioned slavery, emancipation, of for that matter the evils committed in the name of racism against newly freed Blacks, Jim Crow, the thousands of Lynchings, the massacre of whole towns, or sections of cities by the terrorist paramilitaries of the White Leagues, Red Shirts, White Liners, and of course the Ku Klux Klan, of which Trump’s father was a member of, even being arrested at a Klan demonstration in New York in the 1920s.

He made no distinctions, but lumped anyone who disagreed with him into people who hated the United States and it’s history and were determined to overthrow America. It was a speech as vilifying as any made by Senator Joe McCarthy during the Red Scare of the 1950s. This should not be surprising, because Trump’s mentor was none other than McCarthy’s counsel when he was shot down in his crusade to accuse Army leaders of being communists, or supporting communism, Roy Cohn, in 1954.

In effect Trump declared over 60% of Americans were revolutionaries and traitors, with the implication that only he could stop them. It was about his authoritarian vision of Law and Order. It was Orwellian in structure. Based on his actions at Lafayette Park, I know what he will do if he feels threatened. His speech at Mount Rushmore was a prelude to what he will do if he gets the chance, and if the military follows his orders. As a historian I wanted to throw up.

But, back to that mountain and the land around it. As I mentioned, that land was ceded by treaty to the Lakota, Nakota, and Dakota Sioux, and the Arapaho in 1868. The treaty was to be observed by all parties. Instead in less than years, the treaty was revoked with the discovery of gold in the Black Hills  in 1877, though incidents of U.S. citizens violating the treaty went unpunished by the U.S. Government which also hamstrung and prevented the Sioux from punishing offenders. For Americans guided by Manifest Destiny it was only the latest action in a century of American crimes against humanity in the continued genocide of the indigenous tribes that began when Europeans colonized the Americas beginning in the 1500s, but in the British colonies beginning beginning at Jamestown in 1607, and the Plymouth Bay, later the Massachusetts Bay Colony a Little over a decade later.

Judge Learned Hand 

I will finish this article with an excerpt of Judge Learned Hand, of the 2nd Appeals Court, considered by many to be the greatest American jurist never appointed to the Supreme Court. In his I am an American Speech of May 21st 1944 in New York’s Central Park he addressed nearly a million and a half people, in a speech given at a naturalization ceremony for new immigrant citizens. In it he stressed that all Americans were immigrants who had come to America in search of liberty. Liberty, he said, was not located in America’s constitutions, laws, and courts, but in the hearts of the people.

In the most frequently cited section of the speech he said:

What do we mean when we say that first of all we seek liberty? I often wonder whether we do not rest our hopes too much upon constitutions, upon laws and upon courts. These are false hopes; believe me, these are false hopes. Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women; when it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can save it; no constitution, no law, no court can even do much to help it… What is this liberty that must lie in the hearts of men and women? It is not the ruthless, the unbridled will; it is not the freedom to do as one likes. That is the denial of liberty and leads straight to its overthrow. A society in which men recognize no check their freedom soon becomes a society where freedom is the possession of only a savage few — as we have learned to our sorrow.

What then is the spirit of liberty? I cannot define it; I can only tell you my own faith. The spirit of liberty is the spirit which is not too sure that it is right; the spirit of liberty is the spirit which seeks to understand the minds of other men and women; the spirit of liberty is the spirit which weighs their interests alongside its own without bias; the spirit of liberty remembers that not even a sparrow falls to earth unheeded; the spirit of liberty is the spirit of Him who, near two thousand years ago, taught mankind that lesson it has never learned, but has never quite forgotten; that there may be a kingdom where the least shall be heard and considered side by side with the greatest.

The interesting thing is that while Hand referenced Jesus in the speech, is that he had abandoned the Christian Faith while at Harvard, and became an agnostic and skeptic, that he at least hoped for some kind of cosmic justice where the least would be equal to the greatest. Likewise, his words as to what freedom really is stand in stark contrast to everything Trump and his loyal supporters who consider everyone else an enemy and traitor, as Hand so rightly predicted:

What is this liberty that must lie in the hearts of men and women? It is not the ruthless, the unbridled will; it is not the freedom to do as one likes. That is the denial of liberty and leads straight to its overthrow. A society in which men recognize no check their freedom soon becomes a society where freedom is the possession of only a savage few — as we have learned to our sorrow.

Sadly, we have seen that happen before our very eyes and it will continue for as long as Trump is in power or people who follow his  totalitarian beliefs, and perversions of history, overt racism, and denial of civil, voting, economic and religious rights of his opponents is practiced, be it at the Federal, state, or local level. Trump and his most committed followers are savage, with no understanding, appreciation, or respect of the culture, laws, and freedoms, they presume to defend.

Tonight, I watched the film Gettysburg. It is one of my favorites, even though it can cut though its errors, and somewhat mythologized depiction of some of the leaders portrayed in the movie. But in it there is an exchange between Colonel Joshua Chamberlain and an old Irish former Regular Army soldier named Buster Kilrain, who is more of a composite character than an actual historical character, but it is worth mentioning, because it contradicts everything that Trump shows in thought, word and deed on a daily basis. I can identify with Kilrain. As someone who is roughly 43% Irish by my DNA, and the son of a Navy Chief, educated in desegregated public schools and universities, I could not be considered a part of Trump’s sheltered rich, white elite. Likewise, as a Priest, career military officer and seminary graduate, there is much I can identify with in Chamberlain. The dialogue between the men is fascinating because it reveals my own inner struggle as a human being.

Col. Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain: Tell me something, Buster. What do you think of Negroes?

Pvt. Buster Kilrain: Well, if you mean the race, I don’t really know. This is not a thing to be ashamed of. The thing is, you cannot judge a race. Any man who judges by the group is a pea-wit. You take men one at a time.

Col. Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain: To me, there was never any difference.

Pvt. Buster Kilrain: None at all?

Col. Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain: None at all. Of course, I haven’t known that many freed men, but those I knew in Bangor, Portland, you look in the eye, there was a man. There was a “divine spark,” as my mother used to call it. That is all there is to it. Races are men. “What a piece of work is man. How infinite in faculties, in form and moving. How express and admirable. In action, how like an angel.”

Pvt. Buster Kilrain: Well, if he’s an angel, all right then. But he damn well must be a killer angel. Colonel, darling, you’re a lovely man. I see a great vast difference between us, yet I admire you, lad. You’re an idealist, praise be. The truth is, Colonel, there is no “divine spark.” There’s many a man alive no more of value than a dead dog. Believe me. When you’ve seen them hang each other the way I have back in the Old Country. Equality? What I’m fighting for is the right to prove I’m a better man than many of them. Where have you seen this “divine spark” in operation, Colonel? Where have you noted this magnificent equality? No two things on earth are equal or have an equal chance. Not a leaf, not a tree. There’s many a man worse than me, and some better, but I don’t think race or country matters a damn. What matters, Colonel, is  justice. Which is why I’m here. I’ll be treated as I deserve. Not as my father deserved. I’m Kilrain, and I damn all gentlemen. There is only one aristocracy, and that is right here. [taps his temple]And that’s why we’ve got to win this war.

Today, I find myself agreeing with them and Judge Learned Hand. President Trump has declared war on a majority of American citizens, including me. On June 2nd for the first time in my life I felt like a President of the United States was threatening me, as a Priest, a citizen, and Naval Officer. I felt that again in his Mount Rushmore speech. I will respect his office and obey lawful orders, but my oath is to the Constitution of the United States, and not political leader or party. I will not remain silent when he attacks the very foundations of the United States to protect the racist monuments of the Confederacy and the other sordid actions of Americans, and other people who enslaved and committed genocide in the name of race and religion.

Donald Trump is an existential threat to every American who values liberty and freedom, and a man who would destroy his country in order to enrich and save himself, although I wonder if there can be salvation for anyone like him.

So, don’t forget why Independence Day matters, what our history really teaches, and that those who oppose Trump do not want to overthrow the United States, but seek to uphold and advance its highest ideals while being absolutely honest as to where we have failed as individuals and a nation to do so. That is patriotism. What Trump proclaims is a toxic nationalism. Yale historian Timothy Snyder wrote in his book On Tyranny:

The president is a nationalist, which is not at all the same thing as a patriot. A nationalist encourages us to be our worst, and then tells us that we are the best. A nationalist, “although endlessly brooding on power, victory, defeat, revenge,” wrote Orwell, tends to be “uninterested in what happens in the real world.” Nationalism is relativist, since the only truth is the resentment we feel when we contemplate others. As the novelist Danilo Kiš put it, nationalism “has no universal values, aesthetic or ethical.” A patriot, by contrast, wants the nation to live up to its ideals, which means asking us to be our best selves. A patriot must be concerned with the real world, which is the only place where his country can be loved and sustained. A patriot has universal values, standards by which he judges his nation, always wishing it well—and wishing that it would do better.

Trump is a nationalist in the tradition of Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini, Putin, the Kims of North Korea, Erdogan, and so many other nationalists only concerned about their power over a state that can make their wishes come true.

So until tomorrow, with thoughts of true freedom, independence and the protections of basic human rights for all,


Padre Steve+


Filed under afghanistan, aircraft, alternative history, alzheimer's disease, anti-semitism, armored fighting vehicles, artillery, authoritarian government, Baseball, baseball, basketball, Loose thoughts and musings

21 responses to “If Liberty Dies in Our Hearts, no Constitution Law or Court Can Save It: A Meditation on Independence Day in the Trump Era

  1. Wow … what a great post, Padre! The words of both Judge Learned Hand and Timothy Snyder. Far too many in this nation have lost their values, replaced them with greed and arrogance, believing that they are somehow superior to the rest of us. And, Trump has given two speeches this weekend that reinforce their beliefs, has thrown gasoline on a simmering fire of rage in this country. I fear very much that we are on the wrong path, pointed in the wrong direction.

  2. Reblogged this on Filosofa's Word and commented:
    Our friend, Padre Steve, has done an excellent job in this, his musings about “liberty” … what it does and doesn’t mean, and how we in this nation have so often misunderstood what true liberty is. I hope you’ll take a few minutes to read this, for I think it has much value in relation to the state of this nation today. Thank you, Padre

  3. Stop! Although this post is not meant to be racist, Padre, it is, systemicly so. Please do not EVER use the word INDIAN unless you are talking about a person from India. Thanks to the racist Christofo Columbo, who wrongly addressed the people of the Americas by a blanket name that belongs to others, there are people here whose progenitors predated the arrival of Europeans (read white people) on the shores of the so-called Americas. And, about the statement “we are all immigrants,” unless you are talking about anyone whose ancestors came from Africa (as is our present understanding of the evolution of primates), native Americans are not immigrants to this land. In complete truth, we are not even Americans! Amerigo Vespucci has no connection to the Americas at all, except he was a friend to Columbo. WHY SHOULD WE, AS THE PEOPLE OF THE LANDS WEST OF AFRICA AND EUROPE, AND EAST OF ASIA AND OCEANIA, BE KNOWN BY WORDS THAT DO NOT EXIST IN OUR HISTORICAL LANGUAGES! We are not Indians, we are not Americans, we are merely The People, on The Land. And nor, by the way, are our Northern neighbours Eskimos.
    Like the nations of Europe, the Middle East, Asia, etc. we had many different nations in our homelands. We had names for the peoples of these nations. The time has come to either reclaim our own names, or to exchange them for names that have meaning to everyone who now lives here, not just those of white descent. If you are going to throw away the idolatry of slave owners, as is just, throw away the names of all Europeans, as they do not belong here. EVER!

    • padresteve

      I do apologize. It was not and was never meant to be racist. Not being a Native American I have been reading on the best ways to try to address the men and women who are descendants of the millions of indigenous Americans who were victimized by the systemic genocide of the English, Spanish, Portuguese, and of course Americans. Please accept my apology. I certainly did not mean anything that you stated. I recently read an article by a Native American in either the Times or Washington Post, or another paper that said that it was appropriate. I will remove that word in any place it appears in the article. As soon as I finish my response to you. I am honest enough to admit that I chose to use the word based on what I had recently read. I really do struggle with such terms. That being said, what word should I use to cover the vast number of tribes, each with their own unique languages, cultures, and even deities? Should I use Native American? I was criticized or that in an article a few years back. Should I use indigenous peoples, or indigenous Americans? I haven’t used that yet but it may be best. All I wanted was to point out the crimes committed by the American government and White Americans against your people. I am being completely honest here. If you can help me I want that help. To be accused of being part of the systemic problem grieves me, because that is not in my heart. I do thank you for pointing this out, and I will change the term to Native American for now. If you have a better term, please let me know so I can write without being part of the problem.



      • Hi Steve,
        Thank you for replying.
        In Canada we use the term First Nations, because each group is a nation unto itself, and first for obvious reasons. Languages can be similar over a broad area, as in the past they were one nation that split off when the families got too big to feed easily, or other reasons. However, few in the States know about this choice. You might get a lot of blank looks at times. Still, it is one that is non-judgmental and without attitude. Indigenous person or persons is equally acceptable, as is aboriginal American, but the movement away from _______American is pretty much still in its early stages, and generally only applies to people of native descent living in the US.
        As for the racist comments I pointed out, I know you are not racist, but that is where the systemic” adjective applies most. For many, “Indian” is the only descriptive they know, so they use it without thinking. Being as you are in America,think of all the words that are used to describe people of African descent. There are hundreds, and almost all are insulting. It is similar with First Nations people. Any reddish man is an Apache, or a Commanche, or Mohawk, the names are used interchangeably. But they are not interchangeable. It is best not to use such words unless you know 100% what nation a person is a part of, and have a respectful reason for using it. As slang, it is uncouth.
        In truth, to answer your question about what to call a person of native descent, the best words are person, people, men, women, boys, girls, etc. I cannot think of a good reason to use a racial descriptor unless you are describing a known criminal to a law enforcement officer, and the person’s race is relevent.
        Just noticed you added something to your reply, so I will end this one here, and if necessary pick up when commenting to your new0 reply. Otherwise, all I am really asking, is to be aware of your vocabulary. As a black person is not a nigger, we are not Indians. Thank you for listening.

      • padresteve

        Thank you again. I realize the differences between the tribes. As a child I grew up in the Pacific Northwest, then Southern, Central and Northern California. My anthropology professors in University introduced me to the Navaho, Hopi, and Apache. At California State University at Northridge I worked for a Nun from Wisconsin who was full blooded Chippewa. I know about many of the East Coast, Great Lakes, and tribes in Appalachia, the Virginia Tidewater, Florida, and the Northeast from my study of history. I appreciate the differences of each tribe and nation. I cannot claim to be an expert and would never present myself as one on these diverse people’s and cultures, because I know that there is no such thing as a generic White person. We of European ancestry are Irish, Scottish, English and Welsh Celts, French, Spanish, Portuguese, Dutch, Italian, Scandinavian, German, Russian, or any number of Slavic peoples, as well as others, many forced to flee their homelands, and who all too often when they came to the Americas acted no different than those who conquered them and drove them from their ancestral lands. Sadly, most White Americans, and to what I see in the Canadian Press, White Canadians of English, Scottish or Irish descent seem not to recognize such differences, in themselves or others.

        Thank you again, you taught me a lot tonight.

        Peace and blessings,


      • No, thank you for listening.

    • padresteve

      I changed the paragraph to this, please again accept my sincere apologies.

      He then went into a diatribe against attacking statues and memorials around the country, without mentioning that the primary memorials were those to Confederates, Slave Owners, traders, as well as those that helped exterminate the vast majority of indigenous, or native peoples of this land including the ancestors of the people who protested outside the park, for the land had been ceded to their ancestors in the Treaty of Laramie of 1868, and was considered sacred to the Lakota, Nakota and Dakota Sioux, and Arapahoe tribes that agreed to that treaty with the United States. .I will come back to that later.

      • Excellent, and thank you. The one thing you did not mention above was that whites stole the land back despite the treaty, because there was a gold rush in the Black Mountains. Greed was not a problem our ancestors knew much about. Even land that was well used by one nation still belonged to all, though “belong” was not a real concept in our cultures. Because “sharing” is what we knew, we were widely taken advantage of by the newcomers.
        Peace be with you.

      • padresteve

        Thank you again. I also contacted you via email.

        As far as the crime of taking the land back, I did mention it later in the article, but that was only the beginning, because over the next twenty years much more of the land ceded to these tribes was reclaimed by the U.S. Government in actions that included massacres such as what happened at Wounded Knee. What happened to the people of the Lakota, Nakota, and Dakota Sioux tribes, as well as the Arapahoe who signed the treaty of Laramie was an abomination, all about greed, which as you pointed out was alien to these tribes. The political-religious movements known as “Manifest Destiny“ was no better than the Nazis vision of Aryan Supermen conquering allegedly “sub-human“ inhabitants.

        Again I thank you and ask your assistance in correcting any future articles I publish dealing with what happened to the various tribes of indigenous peoples at the hands of European colonists and their American and Canadian conquerors.

        Peace be with you too.


      • One tiny change if you would, please delete “tribe(s)” and replace with “nation(s)” or “people(s),” or even just groups.

      • padresteve

        If I haven’t already, I will. Been a busy day.,

  4. maryplumbago

    Excellent post, as always..

  5. Jill brought me to you, and your post resides on my facebook page only because I had trouble re-blogging it. Well done, sir, very well done.

  6. Your thinking reminds me of my father’s classmate and friend, Andrew Greeley. Hopefully, you find that to be the compliment intended.

    • padresteve

      Fr. Greeley was in large part why I am still alive and a Priest. When faith began to fail as I began to experience the effects of PTSD and Moral Injury during and after my return from Iraq in 2008, his Bishop Blackie Ryan mysteries helped me not give up either to suicide or walking away from the faith and the priesthood. I never got a chance to meet him, but I know that he still prays for people like me.
      Thank you for your kind words and that wonderful compliment.
      Peace and blessings,

  7. Writing from the UK….(and thanks to Jill’s reblog)
    A very well thought out and a mature post, a timely reminder of what should be and it seems what, sadly is.
    When I read intelligent and thougtful words such as yours it is easier to apprecaite the difference in the cultures of the USA and the mix of European.
    Whereas in Europe we still bumbled along with our mix of calling for rights to do somethings as we wish and our rights to have the government do somethings for us, I see within the genuine patriots of the USA the urge to be free in a mature and responsible way. I guess trying to explain the difference in more detail would take pages and pages and become turgid at times and not a little contradictory.
    There is one place we meet though and that this…
    With liberty comes responsibility. It is not sufficient to squawk ‘I have the right to…’ for with any claim to ‘I have the right to..’ must come the solemn oath ‘I have to duty to protect the rights of others to….’ Otherwise it is the selective agenda of that plague of Europe ‘The Nationalist’ who excludes everyone else’s culture for their own instead of making their land a place for all to prosper.
    I belong to a side of politics which would be quite an anathema in the USA ‘Socialism’ ie hard real socialism which places what you might see as constraints as personal liberty but we view as protections of the individual (It’s not actually been perfected yet even in theory but don’t tell any socialist that their form is not perfect they to get annoyed…they tend to be short on humour).
    As one old hard-liner said to be about the UK back in the 1970s ‘Me-Me-Me’ culture ‘The trouble with people these days is Rog’ (Roger) everyone talks about their civil rights but no one talks about their civil responsibilities ‘
    Anyway I wish you all well, and may this passing freak of the voting system end up as a mere footnote for future historians to ridicule. It will be a long hard road, for your young nation stands at one of those crossroads in history.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s