On the 250th Anniversary of the Boston Tea Party, WaPo Calls it 'Terrorism' by 'a Horde of White Men' in 'Blackface'

CJ GUNTHER. Shutterstock Images.

The Boston Tea Party is more than just something Massachusetts kids learn about on a field trip while standing on a replica of a ship docked next to a shitty rusted bridge near the Children's Museum. It's the defining moment of our nation's birth. It announced our presence with authority and told the world who we are and what they'd be dealing with for the next several centuries. Which is to say, we were Massholes before the word was even invented. A bunch of goons who are as ungovernable as we are unruly. We're the first country in the history of the world who came into existence in an act of common vandalism. Flipping the State Bird of Massachusetts to the King we were bending the knee to five minutes earlier and telling him to kiss our pasty colonial arse. 

This is the 250th anniversary of the Tea Party. A point of pride so profound for most Americans that it's the reason Foxboro was chosen as the site of the Army-Navy game, which is perhaps as great an honor as area of the country can receive. 

But not everybody sees it that way. Take for example the editorial page of The Washington Post. Seriously, take it. It's pretty likely that Jeff Bezos is all ears, and no offer is too low:

It would appear The Post is not at all impressed with the original patriots legendary act of defiance. Not in the least:

Source - A new column in the Washington Post offered a deconstruction of one of the most iconic moments in America’s founding era, wondering if the Boston Tea Party was really an act of "terrorism" done by "White men" wearing an early form of Blackface.

Post contributing columnist Theodore Johnson speculated as to whether Americans’ heroic mythologizing of the rebellious act in Boston Harbor in response to the British Tea Act of 1773 is the correct interpretation of the actual events that day.

Describing how it’s seen in Americans’ collective cultural view, Johnson wrote, "… The Boston Tea Party has come to symbolize the revolutionary spirit that led to independence. It engraved the catchphrase ‘no taxation without representation’ on the country’s cornerstone and signified the embrace of democracy. …

"A horde of White men disguised themselves as Native Americans — coppering their faces and donning headdresses in the same tradition that would lead to blackfaced minstrel shows decades later — to commit seditious conspiracy and destroy private property," he wrote.

"The riotous mob trespassed on three ships and destroyed goods worth nearly $2 million in today’s money — all because they didn’t want to obey a duly passed law," he added.

An act of terrorism? Done by racist white men? Dressed as Native Americans? A seditious conspiracy? Destruction of private property? 

I'm no fan of The Washington Post. But it's good to see them get one right for a change. 

What this writer is missing though, is that all the things he lists as negatives were exactly the entire point of the operation. OK, not the bigotry. Which was such a part of the culture that Boston colonists celebrated an annual tradition called "Pope Night." From Nathaniel Philbrick's Bunker Hill: A City, a Siege, a Revolution:

Every November 5th, two rival gangs of boys and apprentices from the city's North and Sount Ends … marched behind carts that displayed the figures of the pope and the devil. The ultimate object of Pope Night was to seize the opponent's cart , and the inevitable battle resulted in untold broken bones and in 1764 even a boy's death. … Pope Night emphasized … Congregational New England's long standing hatred of the Catholic Church.

So yeah, if you're going to try to hold a bunch of 18th century colonials who'll risk life and limb just to celebrate a holiday invented mock people of a different faith than theirs by your current standard of civility, diversity and inclusion, you're going to find them lacking. One hundred percent of the time.

As far as the "rebellious act" against "a duly passed law"? You got that one right too. Right on the nose. According to Philbrick, the same people who organized all Pope Night festivities literally formed "A Committee for Tarring and Feathering." And this Party Planning Committee never saw a king's tax collector they weren't happy to turn into Big Bird in broad daylight for the entertainment of that "riotous mob" he mentioned. 

I'll go a step further and say the whole reason these Massholes were pissed off is because King George III and Parliament spent a fortune of their blood and treasure protecting the Colonies during the French & Indian War. Somebody had to help pay for it. The people who actually got protected seemed the logical choice. But one thing the Crown never considered is what a bunch of self-centered ingrates he was dealing with. 

Advertisement

As far as they were concerned, that war was yesterday's news. It was somebody else's job to pick up the tab for all those musket balls, cannons, and British widow's pensions. As it was their tax burden was a fraction of all the King's other subjects around the world. England included. But Bostonians had moved on and weren't interested in paying back old debts. And when the bill arrived in the mail anyway, they decided to burn the fucking place to the ground.

Which is how insurrections are supposed to work. John Adams can only write so many letters. Ben Franklin can only petition the Court of St. James so many times. After a while, you've got to do something to get someone's attention if you're going to start a fight. Which is exactly what those guys doing all that cultural appropriation were going for.

And it obviously had the desired effect. Though it should be noted that not all patriots were OK with the method. Franklin himself thought the Tea Party went too far and tried to smooth things over in London. George Washington thought that it was dishonorable and ungentlemanly to put on disguises and destroy private property. (Which actually sets him apart from the people who run every major city in America right now who don't regard property crimes under $1,000 worth prosecuting.) But the point was made loud and clear enough to be heard all around the world. And it was Game On. 

But however you look at it, whether The Tea Party was a justified act of rebellion or an uncivilized act of petty vandalism, there's no disputing what it led to. Which is a revolution that drove a despotic empire out of North America and a Constitution that protects liberties that never would've existed without it. Liberties to both individuals and institutions like The Washington Post. So that to this day, they can exercise their Freedom of the Press to shit all over the people who risked - and often sacrificed - their lives 250 years ago. And also to publish unethical hatchet pieces on the humble organizer of a Pizza Festival:

But sure, go ahead and feel all morally superior, Post. No one will remember you 250 years from now.