Politics & Power Quote by Michael McCaul

McCaul is doing what politicians do best: laundering a messy, contested past into a clean origin story that flatters the present. By anchoring Texas independence in the “Steven F. Austin Colony” and labeling it “the first colony,” he frames history as an orderly sequence with an inevitable destination. The phrase “Texans first established a provisional government in 1835” is a quiet act of credentialing: it implies procedural seriousness and democratic legitimacy, as if the revolutionary impulse emerged from sober institution-building rather than fracture, opportunism, and escalating violence.

The real tell is “with the intention of writing a declaration of independence soon after.” That’s a teleology move. It turns a volatile political moment into a pre-planned script, suggesting independence was always the goal and only waiting on paperwork. In context, 1835 is exactly when the Texas Revolution begins to harden: clashes like Gen. Cos and Gonzales, growing resistance to Santa Anna’s centralization, and disagreements among Anglo settlers and Tejanos about autonomy versus full separation. “Soon after” skips those debates, compressing uncertainty into destiny.

The subtext is modern: Texas as a place where self-government is primary, secession-adjacent impulses are timeless, and sovereignty is almost a cultural birthright. It’s also selective. Calling them “Texans” in 1835 smooths over who counted as “Texan,” whose interests the provisional government served, and how slavery, land grabs, and displacement sat inside the independence project. The sentence isn’t just history; it’s a legitimacy claim with a border drawn around the inconvenient parts.