Whiskey Rebellion

George Washington reviewing the troops before marching to suppress the Whiskey Rebellion.

God, guns, and freedom U.S. Politics

Starting arguments over Thanksgiving dinner

Iran-Contra Paul LePage Dick Armey John Glenn Clean living movement Americentrism Ameriphobia

Persons of interest

Todd Akin Elbert Guillory Mike Lee Wayne Allyn Root Kamala Harris Chester A. Arthur v - t - e

The Whiskey Rebellion was a 1794 uprising of farmers and distillers in western Pennsylvania over a federal tax on whiskey put in place by the Administration of George Washington. The tax in question was done so the federal government would have some way to pay back the massive debt it had gotten during the Revolutionary War, and the tax was later repealed altogether during the presidency of Thomas Jefferson.

The event is most famous for Washington's decision to call on state militias in order to crush the rebellion, with the total number of soldiers used being estimated to be around thirteen thousand. The Militia Act of 1792 had given the President the power to take control of state militias in a time of crisis, and Washington had attempted to engage in peaceful solutions before this point. However, in spite of that, critics of Washington, specifically those of the more libertarian variety, have criticized his actions during this situation.

Betrayal?

Given that the United States government was founded because of a protest against taxes imposed by the British — most famously the Stamp Act and the Tea Act — many have trouble believing that the same people who fought against taxes would suddenly reverse course and become strident defenders of taxation. As Murray Rothbard wrote to defend the actions of the rebellion, "To the average American, the federal government's assumption of the power to impose excise taxes did not look very different from the levies of the British crown."

However, this ignores an important part of the puzzle: The issue the colonists had with the taxes imposed on them by the British was not merely that these taxes were being collected, but that the people of the colonies had no representation in the British parliament where these taxes were being passed. The phrase used was "No taxation without representation" for this very reason. In the same regard, the Declaration of Independence uses the phrase "imposing Taxes on us without our Consent" to refer to the actions of the British crown, including a qualifier that makes it clear that imposing taxation would be acceptable if the colonists were given some say in whether these taxes were to be passed. Although Gerald Ford was not someone who most would consider a constitutional scholar, he did sum up the issue with this point up perfectly when he said "The Declaration was not a protest against government but against the excesses of government."

The same cannot be said about the whiskey tax, which was imposed not through foreign decree but by a democratically elected legislative body, that being the United States Congress, with 62% of the House of Repersentives and sixty one percent of the Senate supporting the end result. Regardless of what one feels about the tax itself, it is undeniable that this is nothing like the system the colonists opposed when the British ruled over them.

The Constitution was written as it was specifically to allow the government authority for situations like this, specifically it was formed in response to a similar tax rebellion called Shays' Rebellion, which convinced the Founding Fathers they needed a stronger federal government that could force its citizens to pay taxes if the situation called for it. Hence why the Constitution specifically notes that "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises." Again, the legislation being protested met those requirements so, even if one finds it highly disagreeable, this cannot be viewed as the same as what the British did to the colonies.

However, there was no consensus on the nature of sovereignty in the former-colonies at the time. The rebels believed that the American Revolution established that the people had collective sovereignty, and therefore had the right to challenge or change the government if they felt it had become tyrannical. This sentiment was reflected in the Declaration of Independence.

Peaceful?

Another particularly dishonest talking point from those who are critical of Washington's actions is that these protesters were nothing more than peaceful demonstrators. Going back to Rothbard, he claimed, "The entire American back-country was gripped by a non-violent, civil disobedient refusal to pay the hated tax on whiskey." Of course, civil disobedience is already a touchy subject to say the very least, however that is far from all the opposition was doing. The rebels were actively burning down the houses of tax collectors and threatening those who offered them shelter. Even those who merely complied with the law could expect to be publicly harassed by those who opposed it, with one famous newspaper article from The Pittsburg Gazette seeing a man named Tom the Tinker threaten those who complied with damage to their body or their property.

The federal government never once attempted to stop people from criticizing the tax, nor did it truly crack down on people refusing to pay it (peaceful civil disobedience did continue after this one specific event in 1794), only engaging in violence until it was stopped by Washington.