One of Donald trump's most consistent and effective tactics is to believe that whatever he wants to be true, is true. But he did not invent this tactic. England's revolution of 1688 stands out here. I'm talking about the time when the english people refused to believe that their king had a son.
The king at the time was James the second. He was a staunch catholic and most of his people were protestants. At the time it was illegal for Catholics to hold government offices. James disregarded these laws, angering his people. But they were disposed out of loyalty to endure this behavior from him, since they believed that the next king would be protestant, James having no sons. All of this changed when the queen became pregnant. Then the prospect of a catholic dynasty loomed. By this time James was well embarked on his policy of filling high offices in the army, the church of England, and the rest of the government with Catholics, provoking conflict and unrest. The patience of the protestants of England had worn thin from these provocations. A catholic dynasty seemed intolerable to them, so when the queen gave birth to a son they simply refused to believe that it had happened.
But this was not easy or simple. As we have seen in our day, disbelieving obvious truths takes work. So they set about impugning all of the witnesses that were present at the birth. They were not sufficiently trustworthy. They were not sufficiently protestant. No matter how many Catholics or friends of the king had witnessed the birth, no matter how officially and solemnly they swore, their testimony could not be relied upon because these witnesses were not pure of heart and friends of the protestant religion. Official testimonies were taken, they were published, and then they were scrutinized and rejected with a show of learning. In short, doubts were raised about every fact and piece of evidence supporting the birth of the prince, making belief in this big lie acceptable to all those who could not bear to believe the truth.
This was not a minor episode in the revolution. The big lie of 1688 was widely believed and was given plenty of space in the official set of reasons given by William of Orange for invading England and taking the crown for himself. As you can see:
But, to crown all, there are great and violent presumptions inducing us to believe that those evil counsellors...have published that the Queen hath brought for[th] a son: though there have appeared, both during the Queen's pretended bigness, and in the manner in which the birth was managed, so many just and visible grounds of suspicion, that not only we ourselves, but all the good subjects of these Kingdoms, do vehemently suspect that the pretended Prince of Wales was not born by the Queen. And it is notoriously known to all the world, that many both doubted of the Queen's bigness, and of the birth of the child, and yet there was not any one thing done to satisfy them, or put an end to their doubts.
And so, despite all of the solemn depositions given by actual witnesses to the actual birth of this "pretended Prince", the official list of reasons given for the revolution states: "there was not any one thing done to satisfy them, or put an end to their doubts".
Sound familiar?
For a bit more detail Macaulay is interesting:
James informed this great assembly that he thought it necessary to produce proofs of the birth of his son. The arts of bad men had poisoned the public mind to such an extent that very many believed the Prince of Wales to be a supposititious child. But Providence had graciously ordered things so that scarcely any prince had ever come into the world in the presence of so many witnesses. Those witnesses then appeared and gave their evidence. After all the depositions had been taken, James with great solemnity declared that the imputation thrown on him was utterly false, and that he would rather die a thousand deaths than wrong any of his children.
All who were present appeared to be satisfied. The evidence was instantly published, and was allowed by judicious and impartial persons to be decisive. 493 But the judicious are always a minority; and scarcely anybody was then impartial. The whole nation was convinced that all sincere Papists thought it a duty to perjure themselves whenever they could, by perjury, serve the interests of their Church. Men who, having been bred Protestants, had for the sake of lucre pretended to be converted to Popery, were, if possible, less trustworthy than sincere Papists. The depositions of all who belonged to these two classes were therefore regarded as mere nullities. Thus the weight of the testimony on which James had relied was greatly reduced. What remained was malignantly scrutinised. To every one of the few Protestant witnesses who had said anything material some exception was taken. One was notoriously a greedy sycophant. Another had not indeed yet apostatized, but was nearly related to an apostate. The people asked, as they had asked from the first, why, if all was right, the King, knowing, as he knew, that many doubted the reality of his wife's pregnancy, had not taken care that the birth should be more satisfactorily proved. Was there nothing suspicious in the false reckoning, in the sudden change of abode, in the absence of the Princess Anne and of the Archbishop of Canterbury? Why was no prelate of the Established Church in attendance? Why was not the Dutch Ambassador summoned? Why, above all, were not the Hydes, loyal servants of the crown, faithful sons of the Church, and natural guardians of the interest of their nieces, suffered to mingle with the crowd of Papists which was assembled in and near the royal bedchamber? Why, in short, was there, in the long list of assistants, not a single name which commanded public confidence and respect? The true answer to these questions was that the King's understanding was weak, that his temper was despotic, and that he had willingly seized an opportunity of manifesting his contempt for the opinion of his subjects. But the multitude, not contented with this explanation, attributed to deep laid villany what was really the effect of folly and perverseness. Nor was this opinion confined to the multitude. The Lady Anne, at her toilette, on the morning after the Council, spoke of the investigation with such scorn as emboldened the very tirewomen who were dressing her to put in their jests. Some of the Lords who had heard the examination, and had appeared to be satisfied, were really unconvinced. Lloyd, Bishop of St. Asaph, whose piety and learning commanded general respect, continued to the end of his life to believe that a fraud had been practised.
Discuss this post here.
Published: 2022-07-22
Tagged: big lie Donald Trump truth history James II politics