Washington Post Column Asks Whether Boston Tea Party Was 'Terrorism' Committed By 'Blackfaced' White Men

Exactly 250 years ago today, American colonists stuck it to the British Parliament by dumping 342 chests of tea into the Boston Harbor. It was an act of defiance that helped to kickstart the Revolutionary War and to form the free and powerful country the United States is today.

So how did The Washington Post choose to commemorate the men of the Boston Tea Party? By condemning them and calling them racists, obviously.

A columnist named Theodore R. Johnson wrote an op-ed this week, titled "Was the Boston Tea Party an act of terrorism? It depends."

Depends on what, exactly? The skin color of the perpetrators?

Yes.

(Photo by MPI/Getty Images)

See, Johnson paints a picture that symbolizes the revolutionary spirit. A group of brave patriots — yelling "no taxation without representation" — tosses crates of tea from the British East India Company into the water to lay the cornerstone of the democratic republic we enjoy today.

But that's not what really happened, he says.

No, the actual Boston Tea Party was much more nefarious. It was actually a horde of entitled white men wearing blackface and Native American headdresses to commit "seditious conspiracy and destroy private property."

"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," the column reads.

And so, according to the writer, the Boston Tea Partiers were terrorists.

First of all, were they wearing blackface or were they disguised as Native Americans? Because you can't claim both. And second, it's absolutely wild that the same people who defended the devastation caused by Black Lives Matter riots are suddenly concerned about the destruction of private property.

The Boston Tea Party Is A Myth?

The columnist then goes on to discuss American folklore and the way our history books heroicize our founding fathers as hard-working, honest, self-made men. Like the tale of George Washington confessing to cutting down a cherry tree. And we do it to "feed the idea of American exceptionalism — a shining city on a hill, the first thing the light touches."

This coming from a guy who is fully enjoying the freedoms (like free speech) that Washington laid the foundation for.

"But the heroes of these myths don't look like the majority of Americans today. Many of us descend from people labeled threats or, at best, sidekicks and free riders. It leaves us wondering when we'll get to be the protagonists in a core national myth."

Ah, there it is. The real problem with the celebration of American history: It's too white.

(Photo by Taylor Coester/The Boston Globe via Getty Images)

"Not because the lessons of the foundational myths are invalid, but because heroes should look like the nation they embody, the people they represent."

Interesting. You know who else doesn't look like a founding father? Me.

In fact, in the 1770s, women like me had no legal identity separate from their husbands and were unable to sign contracts, own property, obtain access to education, get divorced and gain custody of their children.

But 250 years later, I'm not complaining about the fact that Paul Revere didn't need to wear a bra to do his Midnight Ride. I can still acknowledge people for the feats they accomplished — even if it wasn't all about me.

Just for good measure, though, here's a picture of me throwing tea into the Boston Harbor.

I digress.

Theodore isn't talking about gender, though. He's talking about color. And he's also conveniently leaving out the Black heroes of the American Revolution.

There's Crispus Attucks, who many historians credit as the first man to die for American freedom in the 1770 Boston Massacre. There's Salem Poor, who was a hero at the Battle of Bunker Hill. And Phillis Wheatley, whose poems in support of the Revolution inspired George Washington so much he invited her to Cambridge.

Records even indicate there were men of African descent who took part in the Boston Tea Party.

Selective Memory, Maybe?

I remember learning about all of these people in school. Is Theodore intentionally leaving them out? Or is he so blinded by rage against white people that he forgot Black people also play a role in American historical lore?

(American Book Company; New York, Cincinnati, and Chicago)

The WaPo columnist specifically mentions Harriet Tubman, Rosa Parks and Thurgood Marshall as actual heroes who embodied the American spirit and should be admired for their work.

I'm certainly not disagreeing. But I have news for Theodore. All of those people, like the men of the Boston Tea Party, rebelled against "duly passed law."

Is Rosa Parks a terrorist?

Of course not.

But that's how stupid Theodore R. Johnson's argument is. So stupid, in fact, that I'm mad I just spent all this time refuting it.

But if nothing I just said resonated with WaPo and its readers, maybe this will: The Boston Tea Party was a rebellion against King George III, the monarchy and the British Parliament — also a bunch of white people.

Follow Amber on X at @TheAmberHarding or email her at Amber.Harding@OutKick.com.