Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

What did the Founding Fathers want?

page: 4
6
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 21 2012 @ 10:37 AM
link   
reply to post by frazzle
 


I have to say, I've found this whole thread refreshing. It's not often I see someone around here dare to question the motives of the founding fathers. Americans worship the founders much like the Romans worshiped their emperor. I agree with the previous poster who stated they revolted for their own interests. It really is that simple. Looking at the revolutions of Europe, they were led by the poor. While they had mixed results, most of the time what happened was to punish the upper classes. The American revolution was much different in that regard. Most of the public didn't even hold an opinion on it for most of it's duration. It was a top-down revolution.

Moving on to the founders themselves, it's hard to take a man seriously when he speaks of equality and owns people. People even argue the founders "saw the future". Yeah right, the idea they saw the future and prepared for the environment we live in 200 years before is just laughable. Considering how Jefferson gave speeches against interracial marriage (while boinking his slave), I doubt they would be comfortable with what this country is today.

Someone else mentioned Thomas Paine, it should be noted he was rode out on a rail after the conflict as he chastised the founders for their racism, sexism and classism. When he died none of the founders came to his funeral, only a Quaker and a freed black man. He was a radical to the end.
edit on 21-10-2012 by antonia because: opps




posted on Oct, 21 2012 @ 11:07 AM
link   
reply to post by antonia
 


Thank you, Antonia, its refreshing to see more people shaking off the fantasies and looking at the facts. Its hard to unlearn ideas and ideals that have been pounded into our heads since infancy and really, if not for the hero worship of these men, what else would Americans have to be proud of?

I guess that's what spurs my threads and commentary about our sordid beginnings, just because we don't know something doesn't make it not true.

On the sexism thing, one of the problems the tribes had in negotiating with the whites was that their women weren't allowed to participate and they couldn't understand why because their clan mothers were so revered for their wisdom in making vital decisions.



posted on Oct, 21 2012 @ 11:57 AM
link   
reply to post by frazzle
 


I think what really underpins this is the dirty word-Class. Americans refuse to acknowledge it and if you dare to you are lambasted for inciting "class warfare". There has always been class war and the American Revolution was a part of that. Bread riots, Flour riots, people breaking into jails to free people who had not paid their debts, mutiny within the Army against the paid officers by unpaid privates, class warfare has been with this country since it began and it continues. Americans need to stop being stupid and acknowledge it exists.



posted on Oct, 21 2012 @ 12:19 PM
link   
I think the FF were very clear about what the wanted. They called it the Bill of Rights.



posted on Oct, 21 2012 @ 02:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by antonia
reply to post by frazzle
 


I think what really underpins this is the dirty word-Class. Americans refuse to acknowledge it and if you dare to you are lambasted for inciting "class warfare". There has always been class war and the American Revolution was a part of that. Bread riots, Flour riots, people breaking into jails to free people who had not paid their debts, mutiny within the Army against the paid officers by unpaid privates, class warfare has been with this country since it began and it continues. Americans need to stop being stupid and acknowledge it exists.


I don't think any of the signers of the constitution made class distinction clearer than Jonathan Dayton who is quoted as saying, "most Americans believe that the average citizen should defer to the views of his "betters".

Well, no, that's not what the people thought, that's what HE thought and although many of the other signers toned down their rhetoric, the same opinion is apparent in many of their writings.

And still today, people with money and letters behind their names and degrees hanging on the wall think they know what's best for those who have less money and no letters or degrees and that they should be deferred to by the lesser people. Superiority complexes abound and its accepted as the norm.

One of the greatest frauds today, I think, is encouraging young people with no sense at all about the ugly world of finance to borrow tens of thousands of dollars they will never be able to repay to get a degree so they, too, can become rich and superior. Their lives are being ruined at breakneck speed by loansharks.



posted on Oct, 21 2012 @ 02:56 PM
link   
I think many of you are confusing the Old World with the New World.

There was a time when most men were honorable. Yes, there was class division, then as now, but honor meant a whole lot more back then. A man's word was everything to him, his integrity was currency.

Today, honor is largely dead. Integrity isn't valued as much. We can do anything and say we're sorry and people will walk away with a smile on their face.

We are pathetic shadows of our ancestors.



posted on Oct, 21 2012 @ 02:56 PM
link   
reply to post by frazzle
 


I stated in a previous post the American Revolution was led by the elite to benefit the elite. I think you concur ?



posted on Oct, 21 2012 @ 02:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by PrplHrt


We are pathetic shadows of our ancestors.


Um no, we are exactly the same. That is the whole point, you are deifying a group of people who have no claim to it. many of these men didn't have much in the way of honor and lied to the poor who fought in the revolution. They promised them land and didn't even freaking pay them.



posted on Oct, 21 2012 @ 03:00 PM
link   
And while we're on the subject of debt and the founders, Jefferson wrote this to William Henry Harrison regarding the "indian problem":

To promote this disposition to exchange lands, which they have to spare and we want, for necessaries, which we have to spare and they want, we shall push our trading uses, and be glad to see the good and influential individuals among them run in debt, because we observe that when these debts get beyond what the individuals can pay, they become willing to lop them off by a cession of lands.


Should've been a law group, "Dewey Cheatum and How".



posted on Oct, 21 2012 @ 03:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by PrplHrt
I think the FF were very clear about what the wanted. They called it the Bill of Rights.


Many of them didn't want that at all. It was only added because of the pressure of the anti-federalists.



posted on Oct, 21 2012 @ 03:02 PM
link   
reply to post by antonia
 

I addressed this problem in another thread. Succeeding generations have rewritten history to suit their socialist agendas.

Nice try. Not all of us have been brainwashed by Papa Lenin's converts.



posted on Oct, 21 2012 @ 03:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by alldaylong
reply to post by frazzle
 


I stated in a previous post the American Revolution was led by the elite to benefit the elite. I think you concur ?


I absolutely do concur. That was the purpose of the thread, to show their "eliteness" and it expose it for what it was.



posted on Oct, 21 2012 @ 03:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by PrplHrt
reply to post by antonia
 

I addressed this problem in another thread. Succeeding generations have rewritten history to suit their socialist agendas.

Nice try. Not all of us have been brainwashed by Papa Lenin's converts.


In what way was history rewritten? Did the founders not lie to get the poor to fight in the revolution? Did they give them the promised land? Did they not make promises to the public they did not keep? And you pull out the red baiting rather quickly. Prove it didn't happen or admit what is really going on here: You don't like people are questioning the motives of the founders.



posted on Oct, 21 2012 @ 03:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by PrplHrt
reply to post by antonia
 

I addressed this problem in another thread. Succeeding generations have rewritten history to suit their socialist agendas.

Nice try. Not all of us have been brainwashed by Papa Lenin's converts.


You're absolutely right, history was rewritten to suit the lofty goals of the wealthy elite, but socialism wasn't ever part of it, nor were the best interests of the people. History was rewritten to catch you in a web of deceit while the powerful few were setting themselves and their posterity up to rule the world, including you. Good job, you're in the web. Now what?



posted on Oct, 21 2012 @ 03:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by antonia

Originally posted by PrplHrt
reply to post by antonia
 

I addressed this problem in another thread. Succeeding generations have rewritten history to suit their socialist agendas.

Nice try. Not all of us have been brainwashed by Papa Lenin's converts.


In what way was history rewritten? Did the founders not lie to get the poor to fight in the revolution? Did they give them the promised land? Did they not make promises to the public they did not keep? And you pull out the red baiting rather quickly. Prove it didn't happen or admit what is really going on here: You don't like people are questioning the motives of the founders.


I will agree with PrpllHrt that there has been a great deak revision in the stories, but mainly for the purpose of making the founders seem larger than life in their heroic efforts to free the people. I think if you asked most high schoolers today to name the founders they couldn't come up with more than one or two, the text books are altogether too boring to make much of an impression ~ is that by ommission or commission?



posted on Oct, 22 2012 @ 10:13 AM
link   
Rather than letting this thread slide into the memory hole, there's another thing I'd like to bring up about the years following the establishment of the US government. How much do we know about the succession of congressmen and the congressional records between the seating of the first US House and Senate in 1785 and 1814 when the British burned it all to the ground?

The burning of the Capitol in 1814
August 24, 1814
In the most devastating blow suffered by the U.S. during the War of 1812, British forces overran the capital city on this date setting fire to most major public buildings, including the U.S. Capitol.

Thomas Jefferson’s library
October 10, 1814
On this date a joint resolution to purchase Thomas Jefferson’s library for the new Library of Congress was introduced in the House of Representatives.

artandhistory.house.gov...

The first capital city was in New York and was also demolished in 1814.

In 1790, the United States capital was moved to Philadelphia and what had been Federal Hall once again housed the New York City government until the war of 1812 when the building was razed by the British as the final act of that war.

So somebody correct me if this is wrong, but it seems that all we have to account for the first 29 years of federal rulemaking is via "Thomas Jefferson's personal notes of nearly 7000 volumes, which he sold to the nation for $23,950." www.llrx.com...

Serendipity?



posted on Oct, 22 2012 @ 10:24 AM
link   
reply to post by alldaylong
 


John Adams was not wealthy by any stretch of the imagination, and he pretty much carried the majority of the revolution and government building.

But many of them were rich. Which means that they were willing to sacrifice their income, their land, everything, for the revoution. in fact, eight of them went bankrupt after the Constitution was signed.

Remember, the only way to be rich was land holdings. There was no central bank, there was no set system of currency, and no stocks.So your money could go as quickly as it came, even with one year of bad crops.

If you look at the fortunes of about the first 15 presidents, you will see that their incomes drastically rose and fell.



posted on Oct, 22 2012 @ 10:26 AM
link   
reply to post by PrplHrt
 


I see what you are saying, but that wasn't necessarily true. Franklin spent almost 20 years in France, getting paid by a broke new country, to party and hang out with prostitutes. He was hardly noble.



posted on Oct, 22 2012 @ 10:37 AM
link   
reply to post by antonia
 


Yea, because they didn't have any money. The whole beginning of America was about being strapped for cash.

The debt of the REvolution was 40% of the GDP, and no way to pay for it.

Washington is touted as being rich, but was poor.He losted half of his worth during the revolution, a raid took his livestock and slaves during the revolution. And though he funded his own presidnecy, he was only compensated with 100k. And he put a lot of soldiers on his 30,000 acres but they couldn't pay rent.

He would sell fish to barter.

After the revolution, British merchants refused to accept American currency.

The reason that many of the signers didn't stay for the whole convention, was that they couldn't AFFORD too.

edit on 22-10-2012 by nixie_nox because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 22 2012 @ 10:47 AM
link   
reply to post by frazzle
 


The British, and other European countries, are going to have records to go by too. In fact, one of the original copies of the DOI was found in Britain.
The only record keeping was just done by the Americans.
Not to mention. that Jefferson's one value was his penmenship. He did write the Constitution after all. What he has to say is of importance.






top topics



 
6
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join