Stepping Stone to Liberty

 

   Each one of us who steps into a voting both owes a debt of gratitude to the events of British New Model Army in 1645, one the major battles for liberty. Unlike previous fighting bands, this band of professional soldiers was not tied to any community. It had a national spirit. It was not an army of religion, nor an army of Christendom, or even feudal nobles personally sworn to the service of the king. It was comprised of men paid to defend the nation of England. The men of the British New Model Army was one of the first professional armies since the fall of Rome and in the aftermath of the English Civil war, what started as an objection about not being paid, and parliament's rejection their right to petition this grievance grew into a concern for individual rights.

    Originally, the New Model Army wanted only to settle grievances with Parliament, specifically, receiving payment for their services; however, it set into motion the foundations for modern government. After refusing parliament's orders to disband and stand down, the extremists of the Army, the Levellers (named for their views on leveling out the differences between rich and poor), realized that they were in a superior position, one not to dissimilar to the armies of Imperial Rome. The soldiers of the New Model Army came to realize their own part in the settling of the Kingdoms future, a role that involved delimiting the power of Parliament as well as monarch. They discovered that when the fighting men of the country make a political decision, who is left to stand against them? By today's standards this how a military police state operates, and often seizes power in an aggressive military coup. As with modern equivalents, the long term result was that the political process had been overcome by force of arms.

     The hardcore views of the Army were revealed in a series of extreme social and political radical debates at Putney, October 28, 1647, and at Whitehall, 14 December, 1648. These debates called for an “Agreement of the People", a social contract for a new government of the people and the abolishment of the aristocracy including both the British king and the House of Lords. There was to be a House of Commons, the members of which all freeborn Englishmen would elect every two years. Their strength of unity was strong enough that it was willing to fight the king of the land, Charles I, for freedom for the defense of liberty.

The main point of the debates was about extending the franchise to all adult males. General Ireton argued that the vote should remain with those who have "a permanent fixed interest in this Kingdom." Colonel Rainsborough countered and made the political views of the Levellers perfectly clear when he declared that: "The poorest he that lives hath as true a right to give a vote as well as the richest and greatest." In addition the Levellers also strongly believed in the importance of the modern concepts of private property, religious tolerance, and equality before the law, the abolition of tithes, the election of sheriffs, and the sovereignty of the people. By modern day standards these seem only common sense, but in their day, they were quite radical. This was a time of the divine right of kings. It was a time when the Sun King of France before the Estates General uttered "L'etat, c'est moi." The state, I am the State. For the common people to say that they had rights and that they could, and would, choose their own leaders, was vastly different from the feudalism of the middle-ages.

   The Levellers believed that government was formed by the people, not by the word of God. It is the foundations the separation between church and state.  The members of the New Model Army believed in the spirit of their organization more than any established state church. Members in the Army put forth the self-esteem derived from valor, unity, glory, and triumph over that of religion. The New Model Army was held together by military necessity, not religious zeal. The Army's religious radicalism held that religion might very well be based on whatever rules of conduct that can be immediately apprehended, or logically arrived at, by reason. The various religious beliefs of the Army had the same spirit of faith, but the differences between them took second place to the spirit of the Army.

    The political and religious radicalism of the New Model Army began with wanting a simple settlement of arrears, indemnity, and consideration for war widows and maimed soldiers. When parliament declared against these grievances, it raised doubts about the basic issue of a soldier's rights as a British citizen. In anger over parliament's refusal to address their grievances, the Army marched on London to succor and their settle their grievances. Fearing this armed force, Parliament ordered the army to disband. The Army refused until their grievances were heard. With no military force of their own to stand off its own military, parliament backed down. Leadership of the army seized the moment to push forward their own agenda. These views have become the foundation for modern government; religious freedom, ownership of private property and its protection, and most importantly a government elected by the citizens, not chosen by birth or by caste. In their day their views were very radical, but today we take them for granted as the foundation for liberty.

Reviews

[Coyote Poetry]

True history is a lot different then what we learn in school. Thank you for this story. I know very little of the beginning of the country that is fact. I would like to read the diaries of the(1600-1812) young USA Soldiers and leadership. A powerful story. Thank you.
Coyote