Corrente

If you have "no place to go," come here!

Shays' Rebellion and OWS

Submitted by Alcuin on Mon, 12/26/2011 - 6:12pm
Departments: 
Department of Eerie Historical Parallels

Thank goodness for holidays and vacation time! I'm reading a long-put-off book, Toward an American Revolution: Exposing the Constitution & Other Illusions, by Jerry Fresia. In reading his brief account of the Shays' Rebellion of 1786-1787 and how it, along with other uprisings, influenced what transpired at the Constitutional convention in Philadelphia, I was struck by parallels between Shays' Rebellion and the OWS movement. Curious, I went looking for books on the subject and found two, one by Leonard Richards and one by David Szatmary. I haven't read either one, but Fresia references Szatmary, so I'll hazard a guess that Szatmary's account is a Marxist one and I'll guess that Richards' account is more conventional. Since I've fairly recently started to consolidate the threads of my life experiences into a formal declaration of identity with socialism, I was naturally attracted to Szatmary's account and bought the book. That should be interesting reading. In the meantime, I'd like to share with you this article, which appeared on the In Defence of Marxism website, to see what others on Corrente might think of this analysis. How strong are the parallels with the OWS movement? I can certainly see one of the lessons to be drawn: violence only begets more violence. Any other lessons?

0
No votes yet

Comments

CMike's picture
Submitted by CMike on

That link to the Marxist site states:

At his trial, Shays denied being the leader of the movement, not because of cowardice, but because all decisions had been made democratically in popular assemblies. Several rebels were fined and imprisoned, and two of them, John Bly and Charles Rose, were hanged. But such was the sympathy the so-called Shaysites aroused in the population, that by 1788, Shays and most of the rest of his followers had been pardoned and released.

I'm pretty sure Shays never stood trial or, at least, was never at a trial where he "denied being the leader of the movement." Perhaps he made that case when he applied for a pardon. However, he, himself, fled the state when the rebels were first put to flight and, thereby, was beyond the reach of the law. (Then again, maybe I'm not remembering this correctly.)

Shays' Rebellion comes after the Revolution. If anything, OWS would be more like some of the coffee house activities where general sentiments of discontent in the colonies were first being expressed, apart from, though perhaps instigated by, the structured secret societies like the Sons of Liberty. These rumblings began five or ten years ahead of recognized movement leaders assuming their roles as members of the Committees of Correspondence. (Then again, maybe I'm not remembering this timeline correctly.)

Submitted by Alcuin on

From what I have read, you are right about a trial - there doesn't seem to have been one. Shays fled to Vermont and at some point, applied for amnesty. Reading that petition for amnesty (where would one find it?) would probably reveal the truth. But I suspect that you are correct - the Marxist site is wrong about a trial involving Shays. That fact doesn't reflect well on the author of that piece.

Trying to draw parallels between historical events and the OWS movement is perilous, to be sure. But what intrigued me was the recognition, by both movements, that the creditor class was the source of their troubles. It doesn't appear to me that the people involved in Shays' Rebellion wanted to over-throw the creditor class nor does it appear to me that OWS wants to do that,either. The rebels of Shays' days and the members of OWS today share a desire for fairness and justice.

I'm no historian, so I don't know about the timeline. But it does seem to me that OWS shares some similarities with the Committees of Correspondence. There is coordination and sharing of information across a wide geographical area. I wonder if there is a study out there that engages in a class analysis of the Committees of Correspondence. Were the members of the Committees of Correspondence representative of the population at large? Or were the members drawn from the business class? Maybe OWS is a mixture of the Committees of Correspondence and the rebels led by Daniel Shays, if that is possible.

Still, reading the story of Shays' Rebellion did point out for me that nothing has changed since those days - the 1% are still firmly in charge. Lincoln's army (4,000+ strong) was a private army financed by the Boston mercantilists.

Thanks for taking the time to respond with your ideas - I appreciate it!