What do you think of the Declaration of Independence?
Do you believe it was written by hypocrites - Slave owners saying all men are created equal?
Or, do you believe that it was written by some well meaning men, though that's not to say all of them had honorable intention - the only reason I say that is because in every barrel of apples there's always at least one that's rotten to the core?
(And for those of you who want to get hung up on details, Thomas Jefferson was indeed the man who originally transcribed the Declaration of Independence, however lets keep in mind that 50 men signed it. And each one of these men had different ways of thinking, and different visons for what America should be.)
Personally, I believe that at least some who signed it really did want freedom for all men. And who honestly did want to bring about a better world then has ever been seen.
The only problem is is that they were fighting, and I'm talking about the real fight, and that is against the evil side of human nature. And unfortunately it is one that transcends both time and national barriers.
But I do think that at least some of the men who signed it were genuine in wanting to make things better for humanity.
What do you think?
Comments
I mean, they were racist, and elitist, at the very least for the most part. Hardly one of them saw a day of real work in their lives. That's without question. But their message was honest and true, for those that they considered human. Overall, it's a good document, that's helped us made the progress we've made so far.
I've once disproved a woman that was mislead and was a Harvard teacher on this subject. The founding fathers all practiced a different form of slavery than one you might think. It was a rehabilitation program that was designed so that the slaves would not try to kill or hurt White people out of anger if they were freed immediately after they had endured years of being in captivity. I've read Jefferson's thoughts on this subject and he very much was upset that slavery had to be done, yet on the other hand he realized that it was necessary to change the opinions of the people. Heck Jefferson was half English/Iroquoi and half English and African.
From logbooks of the slaves, we can see that their lives weren't that different from a customer service job of today. They were expected to complete a job within a certain time, they had holidays off, they had every Sunday off, and they were allowed to spend time with their families. Whipping a slave was only reserved for a slave that had been stealing or one that had killed someone.
Basically slavery was supposed to end by 1828, yet the successors of the founding fathers had other ideas. It's a shame as that's why we have racism against Whites today, something that both Franklin and Jefferson feared would happen one day if the rehabilitation program wasn't completed in a timely manner. Slavery had been going on for many years to many different cultures by this time. It happened and honestly who cares. People once traveled everyday on horses and people used swords and shields on a daily basis, move on from the past. Heck, the first slave owner in the South was Black, there were a good number of Black slave owners as it was common back in Africa. Heck, that's how slavery of Blacks happened in Europe and the United States. Black Africans sold their rival tribes to Europeans for money and territory
Thomas Jefferson had African American ancestry? Because from what I have heard, Thomas Jefferson had Middle Eastern ancestry, according to DNA testing.
If I was an American at the time, I'd likely be a loyalist. I would of viewed the Declaration of Independence as Treason. I and I think over half the population of the 13 Colonies as well.
My Opinion of it?
To me the Declaration of Independence is a piece of paper barely worth the Ink and parchment it's written on. It was created as feel good medicine by Colonials who wanted something official to rally behind. Something they could hold in their hand and read to justify their treason.
I take it you're not an American.
People are clearly mixing up the Constitution with the Declaration. All the Declaration did was declare independence from England - the Constitution gave people (though not colored people at the time) rights. Jefferson did argue against slavery in the Continental Congress but the racist Southerners wouldn't have signed the Constitution if slavery was abolished so they had to compromise and just accept slavery would be a thing, at least for a while.
My answer to your question? I love it. It's one of the greatest documents ever written in the history of man (right there next to the Constitution). Sure, white rich males with land were the only ones at the time to have all rights but people change and you can see that today: racism is no longer mainstream, every minority have all of their rights, and Americans are the freest humans in the history of the world.
Eh...I suppose they were hypocrites, by that standard. But it's important to note that "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" were only part of the motivation for revolution, though it's the only part that many of us are taught about. Some of those behind the revolution had ulterior motives; in this case (and most others) it came down to land and money, rather than grand ideals.
Many of the founders and their friends owned stakes in various frontier companies, that were chomping at the bit to grab land west of the Appalachians that had been won by Britain during the French & Indian War. Problem was, the area already had residents, the Native Americans. The Brits didn't want to start a war with the Indians and therefore forbade expansion into that area. To be fair to the founders, some of them fought in the war and were promised tracts of land in that area, only to be denied it. The public at large, was also furious at the King's intervention, so this wasn't some shadowy conspiracy where the wool was pulled over the colonists' eyes
After the revolution, these companies got what they wanted. The new American state moved in, did some good ol' fashioned ethnic cleansing and opened the land to private interests. Liberty, woo!
As for the Declaration itself, I like it. It's a very lucid document that recognizes that there comes a time for the masses to stop taking orders from a government that no longer represents their interests Much better than the Constitution, which was more counterrevolutionary than anything.
Really, the entire revolunary era is fascinating, especially from a libertarian/anarchist perspective.
I think I'd write a better one.
Really cool handwriting, loved the illustrations too. 10/10 would read again
Well, I haven't read Howard Zinn, but I highly imagine the declaration was signed by both wide-eyed idealists, dreaming of a world in which all people could live a decent living, and those who were completely out for self interest. As to traditional American hypocrisy:
On the lighter end:
On the heavier:
You have to understand, at the time people were very ignorant and hypocritical. Killing natives to claim land? Forcing Africans onto a boat so they can forcibly work for someone with no benefit? Women not allowed to have a say in politics?
Like, are they just trying to say you need to have white skin and a dick to be successful in life?
What's perceived to be a note of retaliation and courage was really just a death warrant. Honestly I think if we had stayed under England's banner we'd have been better off
Jefferson's dad was a mulatto. I don't know who told you that he was of middle eastern ancestry, but they are wrong.
Until Brexit...
I agree with just about everything you said! It's pretty spot on, though I do have to point out, the founders were obviously racist bastards, but that was just the time they lived in (not making an excuse for their racist intentions at all). If we take that into account, for the most part, their idea of government was revolutionary (obviously) but not just in a sense of "No more kings!" but in a sense of freedom; this is because of the basic freedoms American's have. It's pretty damn incredible to realize that a so-called racist form of government created the greatest amounts of equalities any "common man" has ever had in human history.
There were many factors that gave birth to the drive for independence. Not just land grabs...but also the disillusionment of being controlled by a people who really did not understand the colonies.
We're the founders saints...oh hell no. But they did have some valid reasons for independence.
Tough times call for tough measures. By this time, England owned almost all of the known world and France and her would regularly fight for control. Alliances and treaties were constantly on shaky ground due to marriages being really the only treaties. George III wasn't really a nice guy or a nice leader. He became obsessed with North America and treated Americans as second class citizens. English soldiers could throw out an American family to use their house anytime that they wanted. Harsh taxes were made so that England could have more treasury money against France. English soldiers regularly stole items and horses from Americans and they bullied them constantly. The founding fathers were genius men.
I wished that people would stop creating political threads on this website. It just angers me some of the replies to politics by some people. I couldn't decide who to reply to so I just posted this so that everyone can see it.
"They killed natives for land." No they didn't. Actually Washington studied Native American life and war tactics as a young man. Washington lived with an Iroquois tribe for a long time and was a good friend to the chief. Washington, as a young officer to the English, advised the English not to fight in the traditional fashion as Natives used guerilla tactics. It's one of the reasons that Washington was a well respected officer to England. Washington respected natives and was fascinated by their lifestyle. Jackson was Irish/Cherokee and Black. Jefferson was English/Iroquois and English and Black. In time natives were forced to assimilate as the Gauls and European tribes were expected to do in Rome. That was the ultimate goal and it did happen.
"Forcing Africans on a boat." Thanks for ignoring my above comment as usual Fancies. African tribes became allies to Europeans and would ambush their rivals to sell them off to get more territory in Africa and to be given gifts by the magic White men as they called them. There were many Black slave owners so are they bad too ?
"Women had no say in politics." Actually Dolly Madison, Martha Washington, and Sally Jefferson were well respected. The first ladies were very well respected as they were viewed as queens. Women at the time did have a say in politics as a queen to England or France was just as important as a king. First ladies were listened to by their husbands.
4."You must be a man with a white penis to be well respected." Here we go with racism again, I hear this constantly and I'm annoyed. I deal with it on a daily basis cause my fiancé is Irish/Scottish and African. Here's some facts. It is false that Obama was the first Black president. John Hanson actually was the first president and he was fully Black. He was the Ben Carson of his time and people loved him. The founding fathers wanted him to stay as president, yet after a year, more and more slave revolts were happening. He stepped down and said that no monuments be made in his honor to avoid further violence. Thomas Jefferson had a mixed dad, Jackson was half Black, Lincoln had a Black dad, Eisenhower had a White and Black mom, etc.
Read my post.
I am actually. I know what I said was extreme. But to be honest, I told it like it is in my opinion. I don't have a very positive opinion of the Founding Fathers, haven't for almost twenty years.
I wanna steal it!
I personally love the ideals described into it, the writers may have been hypocrites to us today but in their time it was fairly rare to be an abolitionist even though a fair amount of the Founding Fathers were abolitionists. They were brilliant men, set the beginning of the Revolution that leads to the Articles of Confederation and Constitution. I find it unfair to judge a document by its writers sometimes, especially if we judge the men based on todays standards.
While it can be debatable if it was fighting for better morals or just a different preferable system of control over their own lives, it was something that lead to a lot of great things .
Of course, but people tend to assume that dissatisfaction is the only reason. That's how I was taught, as a kid.
At the same time, it was less about hate and prejudice and more about economics, with racism being the pretense. Land in the colonies was cheap enough for everyone to afford and capitalists suffered a labor shortage as a result. Captured/traded Africans and transported British vagrants filled that gap. When the two groups started working together, the slave acts were passed, formalizing the black slaves' status as property rather than people.
it it was revolutionary, but not the revolution many had hoped for. I'm. Speaking less in terms of ideals and more in terms of the concrete situation. A radically decentralized society is what the people were promised and a centralized federal government is what they got. That was counterrevolutionary. Of course, our revolution laid the groundwork for the liberal revolutions in Europe.
I disagree with American exceptionalism. There have been freer societies and there will be freer societies. We've come a long way, but there's plenty of room for improvement, particularly in economics. We Americans love to talk big about democracy and self-ownership, but that goes straight out the window as soon as we clock in at work. Liberty and equality are replaced by a culture of hierarchy and bootlicking.
You live in a very magical world my friend.
That might be true but obviously, the Articles of Confederation were a damn mess. They clearly need a stronger centralized government or a federal government that exists, at the very least.
No country that has come before has been freer than us at any time in history. I do believe it to be a possibility for a freer country after us. For now, though, we are the best you'll get.
Of course, there is. There always will be. You're right about that. My view on economics? I do actually agree, though probably in a different way: we just need to get rid of crony capitalism and replace it with the original capitalistic intent, then we'll be golden.
As for everything else, I agree with you.
Yay, treasure hunt!
It's real research. It goes a long way.
Well, the constitution did deliver its promise, just towards the white man that is (not so much for the women and minorities). I don't see the Founding Fathers as bad people, but i do think that a lot of Americans tend to put too much credit on them as if they were perfect and even godlike when they were just as flawed as any other man. I have seen that there are some cases where some Americans in July 4th say that if the founding fathers were in charge, all of the current issues the US have would be fixed (let's not get too far here). While the Founding Fathers did change the world (well, the French Revolution did, but it was inspired by the American Revolution) and were impressive individuals, the founding fathers weren't perfect. Slavery, for example, was one thing that they weren't able to agree on, and that ended up causing a destructive civil war.
Anyway, I'm not really an American, at least in the sense of one from any of the 50 states, so I'm mostly neutral about the American Revolution and the founding fathers, but the world would have been very different today, so i guess they created a good thing.
"John Hanson actually was the first African-American and he was fully Black." Did my research after reading this, and that's actually a hoax. There was a John Hanson that was president of the continental congress, but he was white. The one who was black was a senator, associated with the American Colonization Society promoting to bring African-Americans to Liberia.
This is the John Hanson who was president of the continental congress.
This is the one that the hoax has mixed up with.
They created a rehabilitation center for slaves as England had given them a sense of Stockholm Syndrome, so they had to be shown that not all Whites and Blacks were bad. Jefferson's plantation could be considered a addict rehabilitation center by today's time. They did want it to end by the late 1820's, yet their successors were a holes that saw free labor. Now the Civil War had little to do with slavery, that was just a driving force into tricking people into believing that Lincoln was a good guy. I think that Lincoln was ashamed of being the son of a Black slave, it haunted him for years as he was refused schooling due to him being Black in Kentucky. He moved to the North and sought revenge slowly. When he became a high ranking politician he abolished slavery in the North as further proof that the South was bad. Then he pushed high taxes in the South and did everything that he could to make life hard there. That's the real reason that the Civil War happened. Lincoln had become the next George III. Many European countries couldn't give a bleep about the North as most of their imported products came from the South. Sherman and his men blocked off aide from Scotland and England which really hurt them due to cotton and tobacco exporting was shut down. Lincoln caused millions to die for no reason at all. He could have stopped all of it at any given time, yet this was all part of the plan to him. What caused his killing was due to the fact that he was going to export every slave back to Africa, yet some were worried that Free Black people in the South would also be carried off. This caused Lincoln to be killed just one week before the paperwork was done. In reality the Civil War didn't need to happen as slavery would have ended eventually anyway.
Many people I grew up idolizing turned out to be bad when I grew up to do real research of my own.