---Gordon S. Wood, Revolutionary historian, Pulitzer prise winning author and Brown University Professor.
Tuesday, January 04, 2011
Completely Agree
"We can recognize the extraordinary character of the Founding Fathers while also knowing that those 18th-century political leaders were not outside history. . . . They were as enmeshed in historical circumstances as we are, they had no special divine insight into politics, and their thinking was certainly not free of passion, ignorance, and foolishness."
---Gordon S. Wood, Revolutionary historian, Pulitzer prise winning author and Brown University Professor.
---Gordon S. Wood, Revolutionary historian, Pulitzer prise winning author and Brown University Professor.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
14 comments:
I agree that they did not have any "special divine insight into politics".
What they did have was an education. They were widely read and as a result, they knew and understood the lessons of history. Furthermore, they paid attention to those lessons.
Those exact same insights are available to us today (and then some) if only we are willing to avail ourselves of the opportunity. Sadly, far too few are willing to do so, with most preferring to wallow in ignorance and give credence to those attempting to undermine the lessons of history.
That they were correct is reflected in the results of the system of government they designed; a design which is being actively undermined by those on the left and RINOs (that means guys like McCain and Bush).
I think it's a nice opinion to say that the FF would've been far right or libertarians but it's not grounded in fact. As Mark has pointed out many times on here, there were debates from the very beginning regarding the role of government. These were rooted in historical circumstances, as Wood has accurately stated, and aren't always relevant to today.
Their system of government was brilliant for the time and is still fairly brilliant for today but it's not fool proof in addressing many of our challenges today. Again, as Mark has stated, the word "economics" wasn't even in use then so how can you say that the RINOs and the left are undermining anything? You don't get to have the corner market on what is right for government via the FF, Speaking Truth. Ironically, neither did they which is the point of the quote.
I am officially unhijacking your thievery.
I think it's a nice opinion to say that the FF would've been far right or libertarians but it's not grounded in fact.
I am officially unhijacking your thievery.
You can't "unhijack" it, because it wasn't "thieved" in the first place, because "the FF would've been far right or libertarians" isn't what was claimed. What was claimed was that the system they put in place, the left and the center are actively working to dismantle.
Care to argue the accuracy of what was actually said?
Unhijack...I love it.
DT, but that is essentially what ST is saying. The left and the center are actively working to dismantle it. Who does that leave that is "preserving it?" It's quite logical, after all:)
I also love how ST brings up RINOs. I think that means everyone to the left of ST who is currently sitting at the one yard line on the right side of the field. Perhaps purity tests should be administered. But let's make sure that it's not like the Nazis did it! No scarlet Ls, Ps, or RINOS being branded here, right?
I think it's a nice opinion to say that the FF would've been far right or libertarians but it's not grounded in fact.
Well, libertarians are considered somewhat radical these days, and the FF were definitely radicals for their day. Not that the two are the same. Nor that either were[/are] infallible.
Any time you want to amend the Constitution they laid down, feel free to propose. Just don't expect me to take your unamended redefinition to be equivalent either.
Oh and daniel - be sure to share with us sometime just how the rich have fucked you over.
I think there's plenty of evidence listed on this blog site. I lost money in my business from the BP spill last year. I have yet to see a check from them and their former CEO was worried about getting his life back. I think that says it all.
what a weak response
> DT, but that is essentially what ST is saying. The left and the center are actively working to dismantle it.
I now give you Exhibit A) from Markadelphia's very own keyboard:
> From where I stand, the United States Government attempts to do these greater works. They aren't perfect but think of what our country has accomplished over the years regarding aid to people less fortunate both at home and around the world. Indeed, our founding document declares that our Congress shall provide for "the general welfare" of the United States.
— http://bit.ly/g95iIk , the 89th (currently last) comment
Now compare that to what the Architect of the Constitution, James Madison had to say about this idea:
"If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare, and are the sole and supreme judges of the general welfare, they may take the care of religion into their own hands; they may appoint teachers in every State, county and parish and pay them out of their public treasury; they may take into their own hands the education of children, establishing in like manner schools throughout the Union; they may assume the provision of the poor; they may undertake the regulation of all roads other than post-roads; in short, every thing, from the highest object of state legislation down to the most minute object of police, would be thrown under the power of Congress.... Were the power of Congress to be established in the latitude contended for, it would subvert the very foundations, and transmute the very nature of the limited Government established by the people of America."
— James Madison (http://bit.ly/ghYJ8m)
Here's a clue for the clueless:
sub·vert
–verb (used with object)
1. to overthrow (something established or existing).
2. to cause the downfall, ruin, or destruction of.
3. to undermine the principles of; corrupt.
—Synonyms
1. upset, disrupt, undermine, overturn, sabotage.
— http://bit.ly/htAd3C
You cannot "unhijack" something when you're the one attempting to hijack it in the first place. No amount of protestations to the contrary cannot change that simple fact.
> DT, but that is essentially what ST is saying. The left and the center are actively working to dismantle it.
I now give you Exhibit A) from Markadelphia's very own keyboard:
> From where I stand, the United States Government attempts to do these greater works. They aren't perfect but think of what our country has accomplished over the years regarding aid to people less fortunate both at home and around the world. Indeed, our founding document declares that our Congress shall provide for "the general welfare" of the United States.
— http://bit.ly/g95iIk , the 89th (currently last) comment
Now compare that to what the Architect of the Constitution, James Madison had to say about this idea:
"If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare, and are the sole and supreme judges of the general welfare, they may take the care of religion into their own hands; they may appoint teachers in every State, county and parish and pay them out of their public treasury; they may take into their own hands the education of children, establishing in like manner schools throughout the Union; they may assume the provision of the poor; they may undertake the regulation of all roads other than post-roads; in short, every thing, from the highest object of state legislation down to the most minute object of police, would be thrown under the power of Congress.... Were the power of Congress to be established in the latitude contended for, it would subvert the very foundations, and transmute the very nature of the limited Government established by the people of America."
— James Madison (http://bit.ly/ghYJ8m)
Here's a clue for the clueless:
sub·vert
–verb (used with object)
1. to overthrow (something established or existing).
2. to cause the downfall, ruin, or destruction of.
3. to undermine the principles of; corrupt.
—Synonyms
1. upset, disrupt, undermine, overturn, sabotage.
— http://bit.ly/htAd3C
You cannot "unhijack" something when you're the one attempting to hijack it in the first place. No level of protestations to the contrary can change that simple fact.
daniel, Why did you lose money? Was it because drillers were (and still are) out of work? If that's the case, it's not BP's fault.
Besides, whatever happened to those billions of dollars that Obama forced them to set aside to give to people like you? If you lost money solely because of BP's neglect which led to the accident, then you have a legitimate claim and should sue them.
If BP is not solely at fault for your losses, then you cannot legitimately pretend that they were the only ones who harmed you. Remember, BP was not the only entity which was negligent.
ST, it's hard for me to discuss an issue like this with you because you seem to have little rationality when it comes to the federal government. I refuse to coddle your paranoia.
Now, I would agree with you to a certain degree if you asserted that the federal government is cumbersome, bloated, and wasteful...even incapable of performing some simple tasks. But that would imply a oafish, behemoth like entity not Emperor Palpatine and Darth Vader which your description above suggests. Your theory, sir, is ridiculous. Barack Obama is not King George and that is what is meant by Madison's "historical circumstance."
Recall that Madison and Jefferson argued against a national bank for the very reason you listed above. Yet Hamilton and Washington knew it was a good idea and did it anyway...EVEN THOUGH IT WAS NOT IN THE CONSTITUTION AT ALL. In our 200 year + history there have been other ideas like this as well. Social Security is an example of this. Just because you don't like them doesn't mean that the "design in being undermined"...undermined by a group of people that (surprise, surprise) you also don't like.
knew it was a good idea and did it anyway
Funny how that worked out, isn't it? It was such a good idea, that it died.
If only every "good idea" met the same fate.
Post a Comment