posted on Aug, 26 2011 @ 03:08 PM
reply to post by Rockdisjoint
That quote is a well known fake.......
I don't know why people keep reposting it.
As John Adams once said "Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot
alter the state of facts and evidence."
'Argument in Defense of the Soldiers in the Boston Massacre Trials,' December 1770
This is NOT a well known fake. This quote was a combination of many from his book "The New Freedom" which sought to achieve this vision by attacking
what Wilson called the TRIPLE WALL OF PRIVILEGE — the tariff, the banks, and the trusts.
It would have been nice of you to elaborate on your "this is fake" thesis but since you didn't I'll help you out.
I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country
You are right this does seem to have been made up entirely but whoever wrote it was spot on. And this is the ONLY line of that quote that was made
A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all
our activities are in the hands of a few men.
Taken out of context the entire quote is below:
A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is privately concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore,
and all our activities are in the hands of a few men who, even if their action be honest and intended for the public interest, are necessarily
concentrated upon the great undertakings in which their own money is involved and who necessarily, by very reason of their own limitations, chill and
check and destroy genuine economic freedom. This is the greatest question of all, and to this statesmen must address themselves with an earnest
determination to serve the long future and the true liberties of men.
The New Freedom, Section VIII: “Monopoly, Or Opportunity?”
We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the civilized world no longer a
Government by free opinion, no longer a Government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion and duress of a small
group of dominant men."
This is just abbreviated from this quote:
We are at the parting of the ways. We have, not one or two or three, but many, established and formidable monopolies in the United States. We have,
not one or two, but many, fields of endeavor into which it is difficult, if not impossible, for the independent man to enter. We have restricted
credit, we have restricted opportunity, we have controlled development, and we have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely
controlled and dominated, governments in the civilized world — no longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the
vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and the duress of small groups of dominant men.
The New Freedom, Section IX: “Benevolence, Or Justice?”
So this quote is indeed misleading but the message behind the quote is still true. And yes it was true he was not speaking directly about the
establishment of Federal Reserve as this book was published in early 1913 while the Federal Reserve Act passed the Senate on December 19, 1913. So
this quote obviously cannot be talking about the Federal Reserve. But throughout the "The New Freedom" he illustrates his strong opposition to the
concentration of power in the hands of the few. Some argue that this book merely consisted of his opposition to monopolies and the wealthy elite, but
he makes it plain that there is a group of individuals who have the reins of the American political system even before the establishment of the
His views outlined in this book stand in stark contrast to his actions after he was elected to office. The guy who wrote the book doesn't seem to be
the same man who took office does it? I have added a few more quotes from the book to further illustrate my point.
One of the wonderful things about America, to my mind, is this: that for more than a generation it has allowed itself to be governed by persons who
were not invited to govern it.
Since I entered politics, I have chiefly had men's views confided to me privately. Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the field of
commerce and manufacture, 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.
The masters of the government of the United States are the combined capitalists and manufacturers of the United States. It is written over every
intimate page of the records of Congress, it is written all through the history of conferences at the White House, that the suggestions of economic
policy in this country have come from one source, not from many sources. The benevolent guardians, the kind-hearted trustees who have taken the
troubles of government off our hands, have become so conspicuous that almost anybody can write out a list of them. They have become so conspicuous
that their names are mentioned upon almost every political platform. The men who have undertaken the interesting job of taking care of us do not force
us to requite them with anonymously directed gratitude. We know them by name.
Suppose you go to Washington and try to get at your government. You will always find that while you are politely listened to, the men really consulted
are the men who have the biggest stake,—the big bankers, the big manufacturers, the big masters of commerce, the heads of railroad corporations and
of steamship corporations. I have no objection to these men being consulted, because they also, though they do not themselves seem to admit it, are
part of the people of the United States. But I do very seriously object to these gentlemen being chiefly consulted, and particularly to their being
exclusively consulted, for, if the government of the United States is to do the right thing by the people of the United States, it has got to do it
directly and not through the intermediation of these gentlemen. Every time it has come to a critical question these gentlemen have been yielded to,
and their demands have been treated as the demands that should be followed as a matter of course.
But I do mean to suggest this: That the wealth of the country has, in recent years, come from particular sources; it has come from those sources which
have built up monopoly. Its point of view is a special point of view. It is the point of view of those men who do not wish that the people should
determine their own affairs, because they do not believe that the people's judgment is sound.
I, for my part, don't want to belong to a nation, I believe that I do not belong to a nation, that needs to be taken care of by guardians
For my part, I am very much more afraid of the man who does a bad thing and does not know it is bad than of the man who does a bad thing and knows it
is bad; because I think that in public affairs stupidity is more dangerous than knavery, because harder to fight and dislodge. If a man does not know
enough to know what the consequences are going to be to the country, then he cannot govern the country in a way that is for its benefit. These
gentlemen, whatever may have been their intentions, linked the government up with the men who control the finances. They may have done it innocently,
or they may have done it corruptly, without affecting my argument at all. And they themselves cannot escape from that alliance.
That is what I mean when I say, "Bring the government back to the people." I do not mean anything demagogic; I do not mean to talk as if we wanted a
great mass of men to rush in and destroy something. That is not the idea. I want the people to come in and take possession of their own premises; for
I hold that the government belongs to the people, and that they have a right to that intimate access to it which will determine every turn of its
I am not afraid of the American people getting up and doing something. I am only afraid they will not; and when I hear a popular vote spoken of as mob
government, I feel like telling the man who dares so to speak that he has no right to call himself an American.
If there is nothing to conceal, then why conceal it? If it is a public game, why play it in private? If it is a public game, then why not come out
into the open and play it in public?
Of course, the chief triumphs of committee work, of covert phrase and unexplained classification, are accomplished in the framing of tariffs. Ever
since the passage of the outrageous Payne-Aldrich Tariff Act our people have been discovering the concealed meanings and purposes which lay hidden in
it. They are discovering item by item how deeply and deliberately they were deceived and cheated. This did not happen by accident; it came about by
design, by elaborated, secret design. Questions put upon the floor in the House and Senate were not frankly or truly answered, and an elaborate piece
of legislation was foisted on the country which could not possibly have passed if it had been generally comprehended.
I am willing to admit that if the people of the United States cannot get justice for themselves, then it is high time that they should join the third
party and get it from somebody else.
I don't care how benevolent the master is going to be, I will not live under a master. That is not what America was created for. America was created
in order that every man should have the same chance as every other man to exercise mastery over his own fortunes.