The Brits Argue America’s Declaration of Independence Illegal
It may be 234 years too late, but British legal scholars are resurrecting an old feud over the legality of America’s Declaration of Independence. But like narrow-minded statists always do, they sorely miss the point.
The question was never if The Declaration of Independence was legal, but if it was reasoned and moral. As John Locke claimed with The Right to Resistance, tyranny will find ways to legalize its oppression; but humankind has a universal, inalienable right to independence and liberty. No man can be a judge in its own case, as the British King feigned to be by denying the legitimacy of the colonists’ grievances.
There is something deeper at play in the mock trial exercise between British and American lawyers recalling an earlier period in history when Americans were in revolt against a domineering sovereign. As we citizens now face our own overreaching government, and summon up our own petitions demanding redress, it appears that our would-be overlords are trying to ideologically and legally strip us of our heritage, which gives the American people the right and the means to resist state oppression.
When British lawyers call into question the legality, and thus the legitimacy, of our Declaration of Independence, here on native soil in Philadelphia no less, the entertainment of the dead issue is meant to undercut the subjects’ authority in questioning their masters. By all means, I’m sure our own ruling class approves.
A replay of the clash of ideologies between the British and the Americans over the state of our independence is a fascinating exercise in rediscovering our roots. We can see in the paternalistic attitude of the effete British legalist the same essential drive to lord over us free people as the Washington bureaucrat has.
Old ideas die even more slowly than old empires. We should take that lesson to heart, and revive American civilization by restoring our ideals. We may not currently have an English king for a ruler, but the deconstruction of our Constitutional system will lead to the same effect, but only with an American master.
As posted on Political Crush.
Hate facts. Snark. Just a splash of derision.
Rogue Government 
You had it right in the second paragraph. At the time, the US was under the jurisdiction of the English Crown, so it was illegal. That is why it was a revolution, and not a disagreement. I am unsure of the rationale for resurrecting the issue. It was decided not in a court of law, but on the battlefields of the colonies.
Great post my friend and thank you for this link back. It is soooo appreciated.
So, when is secession justified? The civil war? Now? Pray tell…
Sure, states have the right to secede. If you would have read the citation to Locke, then you would know where I stand. Morality is the important thing, not law.
It is justified when the seceeding win. To the victors go the writing of history.
No, it is justified when it is morally justified. Sometimes the villains win, and sometimes they lose. History is not what is written in books; it is what it was in reality.