Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2
DeWitz

Jefferson, Slavery & the USA

12 posts in this topic

Posted (edited)

On this day when the Supreme Court has altered the playing field on the Voting Rights Act and civil rights in general, it behooves us to ask: Was there a chance to erode, if not eradicate, slavery at the birth of our nation? Was a bloody Civil War the only way to resolve this issue? I've been in the forefront of condemning Jefferson (Washington and other 'Founding Fathers') for being hypocritical slaveowners. Then I discovered this:

www.vindicatingthefounders.com/library/jefferson-draft/html

What say ye?

Edited by szentgyorgy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

should have and could have been avoided i personally think there was no need for a civil war

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I already knew what that link said. When you dont listen to the proaganda you learn our founding fathers were not horrible people.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What say ye?

If we insist upon moral perfection from our leaders, you tell us, which ones do we follow?

Throwing mud on the Founders for living in a different era is a trivial pursuit that has nothing to do with the rule of law anymore. Credit where credit is due: It's also thanks to them that the Constitution gets Amended.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I already knew what that link said. When you dont listen to the proaganda you learn our founding fathers were not horrible people.

No, but when viewed through a modern lens it's very clear they're quite 18th century thinkers. But that's the thing, they're from the 18th century, so that's not a problem.

Edited by Sir Wearer of Hats
4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I understand Jefferson was in debt most of his life and was unable to free his slaves. For their time they were pretty cool guys.

Although the thing that bugs me about the worship of the Founding Fathers is the suggestion that they were possessed of a unique brilliance that doesn't exist these days. I think it does, it just isn't held by those running for public office it seems.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I understand Jefferson was in debt most of his life and was unable to free his slaves. For their time they were pretty cool guys.

Although the thing that bugs me about the worship of the Founding Fathers is the suggestion that they were possessed of a unique brilliance that doesn't exist these days. I think it does, it just isn't held by those running for public office it seems.

Well then that isn't doing us any good now is it?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I understand Jefferson was in debt most of his life and was unable to free his slaves. For their time they were pretty cool guys.

Although the thing that bugs me about the worship of the Founding Fathers is the suggestion that they were possessed of a unique brilliance that doesn't exist these days. I think it does, it just isn't held by those running for public office it seems.

if you did have that brilliance and ran for public office which party would you choose or more importantly which would except you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if you did have that brilliance and ran for public office which party would you choose or more importantly which would except you?

Well I doubt either major party would accept such a candidate. Unless of course they managed to drastically alter the party from within. If I had to pick I would say a return to the pre-Nixon & Reagan Republican party could foster such a candidate quite nicely. I think Obama could have been pretty good if he stuck to his word and his pronounced convictions. One of the major campaign points Obama made was that McCain was 'Bush version 2.0'. Well what better way is there to describe Obama's tenure as president other than 'Bush version 2.0'?

Well then that isn't doing us any good now is it?

Just gotta find them, man. They're not at Democratic or Republican conventions, or Occupy or Tea Party rallies. In fact the people best for the job probably steer clear of politics because it's so filthy. Find em and drag them kicking and screaming into office if need be. Lock and bar the door until they come up with good ideas if that'll help. :P

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

NM, I accidentally hit post before finishing.

I always thought "All men are created equal", was left in the document to serve as a maxim for future generations of Americans.

They knew how hypocritical it was to have such a statement in the declaration, but also knew that it was such a revolutionary statement for the time that it had to be included, regardless of how hypocritical it sounded.

"All men are created equal" is the core philosophy of every civil rights movement since the revolution of 1776. Without it being enshrined in a political document, I think most civil rights successes would have been a lot harder to achieve.

Probably talking out of my behind but that's how I've always seen it.

Edited by Walter White
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just gotta find them, man. They're not at Democratic or Republican conventions, or Occupy or Tea Party rallies. In fact the people best for the job probably steer clear of politics because it's so filthy. Find em and drag them kicking and screaming into office if need be. Lock and bar the door until they come up with good ideas if that'll help. :P

I couldn't agree more. These career politicians are the problem. We need some fresh blood in Washington. Maybe we should start choosing our Congressman by lottery. That would shake things up.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The American founding fathers were not elected in the way politicians are elected today. They were men of considerable wealth, usually also of considerable land. Delegates to conventions were in their turn elected by state convention delegates who generally were just the leading citizens of communities.

These elections by small groups of men of similar status and education caused a natural vetting of the best toward the top, as all the individuals knew each other personally. Few voters nowadays know the candidates more than the PR about them.

This sort of system is not democracy and is not subject to the failings of democracy, where trivial things like positioning on the ballot make a difference, and the timing of the election, and of course big city corruption where many vote early and often.

It is, instead, an oligarchy where rule is carried out by an elite. The big problem with such oligarchies, of course, is that it lacks legitimacy in the eyes of most people and tends to be selfish and self-perpetuating (although this plainly was not the case with the American founding fathers).

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.