Trump and the Border Reivers
The Statistical Inevitability of the Natural Liberty Cultural Blueprint
Tracing the cultural traits and political influence of the Border Reivers (known in America as the Scotch-Irish or North British Borderers) from the year 1775 to the present day is defined by the enduring transplantation of the Natural Liberty cultural blueprint.
The Border Reivers’ culture of autonomy, encapsulated in the philosophy known as Natural Liberty, profoundly influenced the development of both modern American populist and libertarian ideologies by establishing a cultural blueprint rooted in extreme self-sovereignty and intense suspicion of external authority.
This progression established the heartland of intense populist support in the American interior, whose traits continue to shape political life today.
I. Revolution and Post-Revolutionary Conflict (1775–1828)
The foundation of modern American political culture was laid by the sustained flow of North British Borderers who migrated to North America between 1717 and 1775, settling the mountainous interior, known as the Appalachian Backcountry or the Southern Highlands.
They carried a philosophy rooted in radical personal autonomy and a deep suspicion of centralized government.
The American Revolution and Early Resistance
The Borderers’ ingrained hostility to ordering institutions led them to become ardent supporters of the American Revolution.
They viewed it as a resistance against a tyrannical British government that had oppressed their religious and economic freedoms.
The conflict was even reportedly called “nothing more or less than a Scotch-Irish Presbyterian Rebellion” by a British Captain.
The Scotch-Irish “Overmountain Men” of Virginia and North Carolina helped win the Battle of Kings Mountain in 1780, an event some historians consider the turning point of the Revolution.
Following Independence, The Populist Struggle Was Reoriented Toward The New Federal Government
Anti-Federalism:
Figures representing this frontier ethos, such as Patrick Henry (famous for “Give me liberty, or give me death”), personified the ideal of Natural Liberty and the desperate need for “elbow room”, political space free from interference.
Henry led a “crusade against the oligarchical tidewater government”.
Several lesser-known individuals and groups articulated grievances against the elite and centralized power structures before Andrew Jackson’s ascent, effectively serving as proto-populists.
While They Lacked The National Political Machine That Jackson Built, Their Ideas And Movements Highlighted The Simmering Popular Discontent
Nathaniel Bacon (1670s):
Bacon’s Rebellion in Virginia demonstrated deep-seated class and regional tensions.
Backcountry planters and farmers, feeling ignored and unprotected by the aristocratic, tidewater-based colonial government in Jamestown during conflicts with Native Americans, rose in defiance.
The Paxton Boys (1763 to 1764):
A group of Scotch-Irish frontiersmen in Pennsylvania murdered a group of peaceful Susquehannock Native Americans.
They marched on Philadelphia to protest the Quaker-dominated colonial assembly’s perceived failure to provide military protection and representation for the western frontier settlers.
Daniel Shays (1786 to 1787):
The leader of Shays’ Rebellion in Massachusetts, Daniel Shays, mobilized disgruntled farmers and veterans suffering from high debt and taxes.
His movement directly challenged the governing elite’s economic policies and judicial system.
The Whiskey Rebellion (1790s):
Scotch-Irish frontier farmers in western Pennsylvania engaged in armed conflict against government taxes (the federal excise tax on whiskey).
William Findley and Hugh Henry Brackenridge:
During the Whiskey Rebellion in western Pennsylvania, these men were spokesmen for farmers who protested the federal excise tax on whiskey, seeing it as an unfair burden placed on rural producers by distant eastern commercial interests.
They channeled local frustration into organized political opposition, arguing against what they saw as unfair burdens placed on rural communities by the distant federal government.
President George Washington’s forceful suppression of this rebellion established federal power but reinforced the frontier’s distrust of the central government.
The “Old Republicans” (early 1800s):
A more ideologically driven faction within the Democratic-Republican party, figures like John Randolph of Roanoke, advocated for an extreme version of states’ rights and a minimal federal government.
They opposed the more nationalist drift of Presidents Jefferson and Madison, appealing to a strict, agrarian vision of America that distrusted the commercial and industrial development favored by eastern elites.
This deep-seated anti-elite frustration eventually found a national political home in the Jeffersonian Democratic Party, which championed the common farmer and westward expansion.
II. The Culmination: Jacksonian Populism and Enduring Cultural Legacy (1828 to 1900)
By the 1820s, the simmering populist energy culminated in the rise of Andrew Jackson, a man of Scotch-Irish ancestry and a self-made frontier hero.
Populism in Power:
Jacksonian populism represented a revolution in American democracy. Jackson skillfully fused the frontier’s distrust of centralized power with pro-farmer ideals, leading to the formation of the modern Democratic Party.
Charismatic Leadership:
Jackson exemplified the Borderers’ traditional preference for charismatic personal leaders over reliance on institutions.
Get James Greathouse’s stories in your inbox
Join Medium for free to get updates from this writer.
He appealed directly to the “common man,” notably in his War on the Bank (the Second Bank of the United States), which he successfully dismantled, arguing it was a tool of Eastern financial elites.
Legacy of Governance:
This cultural stream established by the Borderers became thoroughly woven into the fabric of American politics, having influenced the ancestry of at least eighteen U.S. Presidents, including Jackson, James K. Polk, James Buchanan, and Andrew Johnson.
Persistence of Borderer Ways:
The social order and governance established by the Borderers in the Southern Highlands and the Old Southwest retained features of their original lawless environment.
Self-Sovereignty and Justice:
Order was rooted in self-sovereignty, asserting that “every man should be sheriff on his own hearth”.
Justice relied on retributive justice (lex talionis, the law of retaliation), enforced by individuals or kin-groups.
Vigilantism and Violence:
Since formal institutions were lacking or distrusted, order-keeping was often done by self-appointed groups known as “regulators” or “vigilantes”.
The regions settled by this culture have retained an ethic of violence, linked to the highest homicide rates in the United States, in a pattern correlating closely with the culture of origin.
III. The Populist Thread Through the 20th Century (1900 to 1980s)
The “people versus the elites” narrative established by the Borderers remained a powerful constant, adapting through different political vehicles.
Agrarian and Progressive Populism:
Late 19th Century movements like the Populist Party (People’s Party) arose from economic grievances in the Midwest and South, demanding radical reforms like government ownership of railroads.
In the early 20th Century, progressive figures like Theodore Roosevelt (of Ulster-Scots ancestry) adopted populist rhetoric to fight “malefactors of great wealth” and regulate big business.
The New Deal Coalition:
Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal reforms were built on a massive populist coalition, absorbing many populist economic demands.
The Shift to Cultural and Right-Wing Populism:
In the post-World War II era, populism began to shift, taking on a more socially conservative, anti-elite character.
McCarthy, Wallace, and Nixon:
Figures such as Joseph McCarthy (fighting a hidden communist elite) and George Wallace (railing against “pointy-headed intellectuals” and federal overreach) harnessed this energy.
Richard Nixon (of Scotch-Irish ancestry) targeted the “silent majority” against cultural elites and government bureaucrats.
Ideological Realignment:
The Democratic Party’s move toward civil rights catalyzed a major demographic shift, moving many white Southern conservatives (in the Borderer heartland) toward the Republican Party.
Reagan and Anti-Government Rhetoric:
Ronald Reagan (of Borderer ancestry) successfully harnessed this energy with an optimistic, right-wing populism focused on combating “big government” and “tax-and-spend liberals”.
IV. Modern Populism and the Natural Liberty Legacy (1980s–Present)
Today, the heartland of intense populist support aligns with the cultural patterns established by the Borderers in the Southern Highlands.
The enduring “spirit of the backcountry Borderer” acts as a “powerful, permanent catalyst for populist movements”.
Contemporary Manifestations of Natural Liberty
The Core Tenets Of Natural Liberty, Anti-Institutionalism, And Personal Autonomy Translate Directly Into Modern Political Style And Ideology
Anti-Institutionalism and Anti-Insider Narratives:
The deep suspicion of centralized government makes this culture highly receptive to conspiratorial anti-collectivist narratives that allege “Insiders” are trying to hijack the national government.
This cultural terrain provides “fertile ground” for populist movements focused on charismatic leaders fighting against centralized power and “Insiders”.
Charismatic Leadership and Factionalism:
The border tradition promotes a preference for charismatic personal leaders (including those associated with the modern right, such as Donald Trump) rather than trust in institutions.
Political behavior is characterized by extreme loyalty to the chosen leader and intense antipathy toward opponents, sometimes manifesting as violent antipathy toward those who disagree.
“America First” Isolationism:
The radical anti-institutionalism inherent in Natural Liberty supports an isolationist, “America First” perspective.
Modern right-wing figures such as Tucker Carlson and Marjorie Taylor Greene align with this view by questioning U.S. foreign aid and entrenched global alliances.
Greene, for example, has opposed unconditional U.S. aid to Israel.
Ideological Blueprint:
The emphasis on individual freedom (autonomy) as the paramount political value and the suspicion of state power are most closely associated with libertarianism.
The philosophical core, demanding “elbow room,” directly translates into opposition to governmental restraint.
The fierce independence of the Borderers, expressed culturally as radical personal autonomy and the belief in absolute control over oneself, is the underlying cause of the intense hostility to ordering institutions and constraint that defines this persistent American political philosophy.
The persistence of the Border Reivers’ philosophy of autonomy can be compared to an open-source governance system.
Instead of trusting a closed, centralized “operating system” (the government or elite institutions) to guarantee security and freedom, the Borderers insisted on installing their own customized, personal security software (Natural Liberty) on every individual “hearth”.
This maximized the user’s absolute control (autonomy/libertarianism) but automatically armed the user for immediate conflict (lex talionis), setting up a permanent cultural firewall against centralized authority and external constraints, which is repeatedly triggered by populist leaders promising to defend the individual’s code against “Insider” threats.
