The truth about the Founding Fathers -- and how they would lead America today
WOW--- READ BELOW TO FIND OUT HOW THEY THOUGHT AND WHY....(these are excerpts from the book The Politically Incorrect Guide™ to the Founding Fathers )
* The Founders were conservatives by today's standards -- for gun rights, limited government, and religion in public life
* George Washington fervently believed that God Himself saved the Revolution
* Thomas Jefferson would have vetoed all federal domestic programs of the last one hundred years
* John Adams considered virtue, morality, and religion to the bulwarks of a free republic
* Alexander Hamilton did not believe in direct taxation or a large government debt
* John Taylor of Caroline County, Virginia, predicted the problems of modern state capitalism and central banking
* The Founders believed in states' rights -- including the right to secede from the Union
PC myths about our heroic Founders -- and the truth:
* How the Founders meant something very different by “all men are created equal” than most of us have been taught
* Why the Declaration of Independence did not refer to a “ United State” or even a “ United States” -- but rather to “ united States,” with each individual State having full power as an independent country
* How “national history standards” established in 1995 eliminated George Washington and many other Founding Fathers from curricula, replacing them with politically correct individuals and issues
* The U.S. a democracy? Why such a notion would have appalled the Founders -- who established us as something quite different: a republic
* Why the framers of the Constitution established the much-maligned and much-misunderstood Electoral College
* Did Thomas Jefferson father a child by a slave? How, if he were to stand trial with the current evidence in hand, an honest jury would find him “not guilty”
* How the Founders believed in religious liberty, but were not complete opponents of state-sponsored churches
* Samuel Adams: He predicted the Civil War and perceptively identified the weaknesses of a federal government -- weaknesses that are abundantly on display today
* The Founding Father who, although a slave holder, was an early proponent of the abolition of slavery, and is the antidote to the “politically correct” interpretation of the Founding generation (which is why he is so often ignored, forgotten, or misrepresented)
* The Founder who challenged the proposed Constitution, criticizing it for consolidating the states into one general government which could not, in his estimation, protect the lives, liberty, and property of the people
* The forgotten Founder who, when pressed about the powers of the central government, stated the only objectives of a Union of the states should be “first, defense against foreign danger; secondly, against internal disputes and a resort to force; thirdly, treaties with foreign nations; fourthly, regulating foreign commerce, and drawing revenue from it. ...All other matters, civil and criminal, would be much better left in the hands of the states.”
* Elbridge Gerry -- known for more than just gerrymandering: How he believed Congress should have little power and the other government branches even less
* The sense of conservatism that separated the American Revolution from the French Revolution that sought to create an entirely new politics and even a new religion
* The Founder who declared he was “a friend to a strong and efficient government” but warned “we may erect a system that will destroy the liberties of the people”
IF YOU LIKE THE ABOVE CHECK IT OUT HERE...
https://members.humaneventsonline.com/order.php?offer=1653
OR GET IT AT AMAZON...
Founding Fathers
1) Who are the "Founding Fathers"?
2) Who decides who they are?
3) Why do we assume those who supported the revolution all thought alike? If they led today would there be a concensus?
well...
this could be debated ..but perhaps the ones who signed the Declaration of Independence ..and the ones who signed the Constitution.
For they were putting their lives..and fortune at stake.. so we could have a free country!
as for who decides... just look at the signature lines..of those two documents...
and as for the last question... They did not .. but they did agree enough to form a nation....
A consensus? probably not.. but they would agree mostly on things -compared to what we have now? It would be like having a room full of Ron Paul men!! (no women, as there were no women who were considered founding "fathers"
..
So who is it that keeps electing people who do not believe as
our Founding Fathers did?
It is a public that does not fundamentally believe in freedom so their representatives reflect their views. We have a diseased population.
When the minority who do believe in freedom finally won't take it any more it will become a battle between those who support the present system of plunder and control and those who want to live free. Civil wars are between competing groups of people, not between government and the people.
"The deepest sin against the human mind is to believe things without evidence." Thomas H. Huxley
Herny: I agree and will take it up a notch
Voting -- The notion that you can abdicate your right to self-rule, consolidate that power into one representative, and then cry foul when he/she does not give it back.
Gov't should only do these things:
#1 Naval Oversight (not micromanagement either)
#2 Highway and Bridge Oversight
#3 Judicial Oversight (ONLY in regard to contract law)
All other forms of crime are handled by ever-increasing levels of self-defense.
No Prisons
Only a Sales Tax (no other forms of taxes or penalties)
--Just to cover "oversights"
One Term in Office (ONLY)
The question is can we get that level of individual-liberty by-way of ballot box abdication?
Octobox
*&^ Constitution --- Constitutional Rationality
No, he was just a central banking agent of the Euro bankers
* Alexander Hamilton did not believe in direct taxation or a large government debt
=======
"The consolidation of the states into one vast republic, sure to be aggressive abroad and despotic at home, will be the certain precursor of the ruin which has overwhelmed all those that have preceded it."
- Robert E. Lee, 1866
=======
RON PAUL 2012
Has anyone read the book yet?
Just curious to know what you thought of it. I'll be buying it soon. Anyone interested can listen to a lecture from the author at mises: http://mises.org/Controls/Media/MediaPlayer.aspx?Id=4395
That statement about
That statement about Hamilton is misleading. He might not have believed in a big debt, but he certainly wanted the federal government to adopt outstanding debts incurred during the Revolution by the states, which served to strengthen the federal government and force the states to give up some of the sovereignty they had just bought with blood.
Let's not also forget what Hamilton was: "the father of the central bank" (I am quoting Thomas DiLorenzo).
Hardly an angel of American history. You caught me merely skimming your post; how could I have missed such an inexpert effort at gilding Hamilton's contributions?
Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.
Thomas Jefferson
Malo periculosam libertatem quam quietam servitutem. ("I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude"). Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 30 January 1787.
Correct...
but it is suprising that he was, or seems to have been, such an asset during the war. My readings on Hamilton are limited, but his contributions to leadership, tactics and directly to Washington seem to have him in high esteem during the war. Unfortunately, his love of the English banking system lead him, and us, down a terrible, terrible road.
Assert Your Authority
Assert Your Authority
Agreed...he was a military
Agreed...he was a military genius. And Adams and Jefferson both believed that he threatened to become an American Napoleon. Adams disbanded the Continental Army not only because he opposed the concept of a standing army, but specifically feared how Hamilton would use that power if Hamilton became its leader--and that was Hamilton's special ambition.
Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.
Thomas Jefferson
Malo periculosam libertatem quam quietam servitutem. ("I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude"). Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 30 January 1787.
The little tyrant...
he screwed us over good with the First National Bank...and you know who lately has sounded like Hamilton (although in a much less educated way) - Joe "We Gotta Spend Our Way out of Bankruptcy" Biden. Will it ever end.
Assert Your Authority
Assert Your Authority
They were all
well bred, well wed, well fed, and well read. In other words, they were the elite.
I still wonder why, if they all were for State's rights, than why did they want a central government anyway? They had the same desires of today's elite globalists. They wanted a central government that could tax the peeps. I appreciate much of what I read of them but it just reminds me to much of what is happening today.
because the articles of
because the articles of confederation hadn't worked well.
Ventura 2012
Well...
You certainly make a good parrot.
biggest flaw of
biggest flaw of libertarians. They never assume that maybe there was a reason at the time why radical change occured. Everything is a conspiracy and should be approached with extreme revisionism.
Ventura 2012
And how many of these white land owning males...
Also thought that slavery was just fine? How many of them thought that women ought to be able to own property, enter into contracts, or have a voice in how they were governed?
We will never move forward until we learn how to avoid the mistakes of the past. All of the points you mention above are valid, but don't make the mistake of ignoring the whole picture.
None
Okay, one more time. I tried to post and it got lost.
A book recommendation for you. Right now I am reading "The Radicalism of the American Revolution," by Gordon Wood, and it has changed my thinking about the issues you have raised in your post.
The rights of the disaffected--slaves, women, non-landowners--were not immediately won through the efforts of the Founding Fathers and the American Revolution, but the anti-monarchical, anti-paternalistic, republican ideals of the Revolution put into motion the societal change that made these freedoms possible. And some of this change, or at least hints that it was underway, happened very early in the history of this country.
Benjamin Franklin argued for the abolition of slavery in the First Congress. Jefferson wanted it abolished for the western territories; indeed he actually considered buying and then freeing the slaves, but decided against it because the estimated cost was 900 million dollars (yes, you read right). True, the problem was that the slaves were property, but this is the issue in embryonic form.
Not long after the Revolution, many states adopted laws that allowed women to inherit and own property outright. This was a dramatic change from a more paternalistic view that women were dependents who could own nothing.
According to Wood, by 1825 most states allowed non-landholders to vote. The changed concept of property in the new republican society was what made suffrage for these men possible--property no longer was considered to be part of a person's identity, it was a commodity that could be bought and sold.
It would be wrong to call these examples "mistakes of the past;" rather, the Founders, through the ideals expounded in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, set in motion changes that they could not have fully envisioned. I know this argument sounds evolutionary and suspiciously "progressivist," but what modern-day Progressives believe has little to do with early republican ideals, based as they are on the sovereignty of the individual and the ideals of the Enlightenment. Change is not the same as evolution, and if I believed in some "progressive" reinterpretation of the Constitution, I would not have voted for Ron Paul and would not be posting to a website like this one.
BTW I am passing this book recommendation on to you...as it had been passed on to me by another Daily Pauler.
Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.
Thomas Jefferson
Malo periculosam libertatem quam quietam servitutem. ("I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude"). Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 30 January 1787.
Don't forget Thomas Paine...
he was not into slavery either...Maybe some of these men had really radical social ideas that they could never have tried to enact as slaves to a king. Sometimes history is more suprising than one might first assume it to be. Good book recommendation for this discussion. Score one for Woods and the founders.
Assert Your Authority
Assert Your Authority
Your logic...
is flawed. You are trying to argue that since the founders were wrong (although socially they were of their time) that ALL other thoughts they had are wrong too. Well, that is wrong. You are as bigoted in your assesment as they were in their assessment, but at least they have the excuse, slight as it might be, that their considerations on slavery and equality of the sexes were contemporary. Your assessment is simply regressive.
The inhabitants of central and south america invented the concept of zero long before the western world, but they engaged in tyranny, child sacrifice and genocide. Should we dismiss the concept of zero simply because they had some serious social problems?
Ghandi grew up Hindu, was a vegeterian, and I am neither of those. Should I dismiss his priceless doctorines on civil disobedience?
I get your general idea that we should not idolize the founders as men, but to toss away their ideals and practical political philosophy - which was indeed world changing - is to me cutting your nose off to spite your face.
Poor premises lead to poor conclusions and I think your conclusion is poor indeed. Debate the message, not the messengers.
Assert Your Authority
Assert Your Authority
Actually, it's quite logical to look at the entire picture.
OK, here's something for you to consider. What if I were to start a post that highlighted all the positive things Hitler did for the German people? I could cite facts, not opinions, about how under his administration the economy improved. I could cite facts about how employment figures rose. Would those facts in any measure mitigate or diminish the significance of the atrocities also committed under his administration? This is not to say that the group of men known collectively as the founding fathers were anywhere near as bad as Hitler. It's simply to illustrate the point that one can not simply cherry pick the positive aspects of certain historical figures impact on history while ignoring the negative impact that their choices made as well.
Nor can you just...
cherry pick the bad...that's allI am saying. Kettle and pot here. By the way I've read that Woods book too. You just might find it very interesting. It is an excellent recommendation.
Edit: By the way our founders did tell us that without vigilance and strict oversight that the system they helped create would turn bad. I don't really think Hitler warned the Germans or the world what he had in mind until well after he had set his trap.
Assert Your Authority
Assert Your Authority
None, to own the truth, I
None, to own the truth, I used the examples I did because they were the examples of repression that you used in your post. If you read Wood's book, you would see that he does not use examples of the "positive things" the founders did in order to justify their greatness. Instead, he describes vast forces of societal change that were already underway well before the beginning of the Revolution. He describes profound changes in the concept of family, of the individual, of work, of monarchy, of political authority, of the concept of property....the list is long because he describes nothing less than a complete change in paradigm. He does not spend much time discussing ideologies stated by the Founders, but I expect that he would believe that the Founders were people who are now seen as influential because they were articulate people situated in the right place at the right time, perhaps not as responsible for change themselves, but rather were the ones who described the irresistable forces at work around them. This is not to minimize their efforts...perhaps it was their explicit statement of principles, coupled with the very real impulse for armed revolution, that precipitated the inevitable. And yes, to repeat myself, what they put in motion did in fact result eventually in the emancipation of the slaves and increased rights for women, among other things. So what about Hitler and his ideals? If they are at work today, have Hitler's ideals produced anything you consider to be of value?
Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.
Thomas Jefferson
Malo periculosam libertatem quam quietam servitutem. ("I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude"). Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 30 January 1787.
Thomas Paine
Is my favorite patriot http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Paine
WE ARE GOING TO WIN!
___.---.___
.' ( ) '.
) /)' '( )
',_( ';-;'\_,'
|-|
(")
I love Tom Paine too. If I
I love Tom Paine too. If I could write like anyone in the world, it would be him. Tongue of a poet, heart of a scoundrel, and a brilliant mind to boot. Nowadays people only quote the pretty thing he said, but read the Crisis. He says such delightfully outrageous things: "It is remarkable that the whole race of prostitutes in New York were tories; and the schemes for supporting the tory cause in this city, for which several are now in jail, and one hanged, were concerted and carried on in common bawdy-houses..." (Crisis III). To General Howe: "But how, sir, shall we dispose of you? ...In a balmage, sir, of humble tar, you will be as secure as Pharoah, and in a hieroglyphic of feathers, rival in finery all the mummies of Egypt. As you have already made your exit from the moral world [note the pun..."moral" not "mortal"]...what remains of you may expire at any time. The sooner the better."(Crisis V).
Whorehouses and death threats. Now *that* is a literary model to emulate.
Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.
Thomas Jefferson
Malo periculosam libertatem quam quietam servitutem. ("I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude"). Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 30 January 1787.
someone send that to Lew
someone send that to Lew Rockwell, who said that the american revolution was not justified.
Ventura 2012
OMG, LOL!!! I love that quote from Paine!!
I would love to send this quote to our Congress critters!! LOL!!! Yes, I adore the scoundrel in him and the way he writes.. I'm going to get that bookll
"In a balmage, sir, of humble tar, you will be as secure as Pharoah, and in a hieroglyphic of feathers, rival in finery all the mummies of Egypt. As you have already made your exit from the moral world [note the pun..."moral" not "mortal"]...what remains of you may expire at any time. The sooner the better."
*****
"I truly wish that real life would no longer surpass the worst excesses of my nightmarish imaginings... Arthur Silber **
"I think we are living in a world of lies: lies that don't even know they are lies, because they are the children and grandchildren of lies." ~ Chris Floyd
There's a lot more to the
There's a lot more to the quote than that; I exerpted it because it is very long.
If you send that one to your Congress critters, I recommend you do that online and not in writing. Under the Communications Decency Act, 47 USC Section 230: "No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider." That way, if you wanna tar, feather, and hasten anyone's exit from this mortal coil, you are covered.
Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.
Thomas Jefferson
Malo periculosam libertatem quam quietam servitutem. ("I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude"). Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 30 January 1787.
Your Jefferson Quotation Signature...
"Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.
Thomas Jefferson"
This is Yuri Bezmenov, an ex (defected) KGB agent, giving a step-by-step breakdown of one of the many such "operations" subtly imposed upon this country. If you invest the time to understand it you'll likely find yourself noticing new things all around you in your daily life.
Seven-part series:
Part 1.
Part 2.
Part 3.
Part 4.
Part 5.
Part 6.
Part 7.
If you invest the time to watch the series but do not understand it, or think you understand it but do not notice new things in your world, then here's some alternative viewing:
American Idol YouTube videos.
:)
I think these quotes speak to your signature:
"There are more instances of the abridgement of the freedom of the people by the gradual and silent encroachment of those in power, than by violent and sudden usurpation.
– James Madison"
"Since I entered politics, I have chiefly had men's views confided to me privately. Some of the biggest men in the U.S., in the field of commerce and manufacturing, are afraid of somebody, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it.
- Woodrow Wilson"
I'd recommend you listen to...
Dr. Stuart Crane at this link:
http://www.resist.com/DrStuartCrane.htm
Also G Edward Grifin at this link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qdt46Uk61UY&feature=related
the above Griffin link is part 1 of 8. Watch them all.
Your links and these expose a serious threat still growing and now growing openly, worldwide.
Assert Your Authority
Assert Your Authority
Exactly.
"Your links and these expose a serious threat still growing and now growing openly, worldwide."
Exactly. The KGB methods described are a nation-to-nation relationship (designed for one nation or government to subvert another). By globalist standards, such methods are merely a subset of a much more vast, clever and complicated system. Those who engage in the bigger system are not bound by geography. They do not operate on behalf of one government or nation; rather, they operate on behalf of ALL governments and nations. Their domain is the entire globe and even the space surrounding it. They believe that it is their divine right to own the earth and that they are part of bloodlines who are "privileged" to control the globe through war and famine.
I just put those links out there so that people can see that it's not just "conspiracy theory" - that there are actually systems and sciences behind it, and that it IS happening right under their noses. I've heard far too many people say, "Heh - you can't just take over the planet!" so those links are mainly for them.
I will definitely have a look at your links.
Your links...
are enlightening as well. I'm going to re-listen to them tonight so that I can take notes. I appreciate this contribution and look forward to more.
Assert Your Authority
Assert Your Authority