7 ms·

Jefferson changed 'subjects' to 'citizens' in Declaration of Independence

40 points by zeynel1 16y ago

jackfoxy 16y ago
The article fails to mention Benjamin Franklin and John Adams were the other two members of the committee charged with drafting the document. Producing a hard copy in those days was a real chore, and probably only done in order to present a working document to the full committee. So did Jefferson make this change on his own, and take the extra care in changing the words so the rest of the committee wouldn't notice? Or in discussions with Adams and Franklin did they all recognize how momentous the change was and expunging "subjects" was a kind of ritual?
- sili 16y ago
  I guess it would be hard to make that change on a completed document where ink has already dried. I believe they used to have special rollers that would sock up fresh ink if one wanted to make a change.
- michael_dorfman 16y ago
  So did Jefferson make this change on his own, and take the extra care in changing the words so the rest of the committee wouldn't notice? Or in discussions with Adams and Franklin did they all recognize how momentous the change was and expunging "subjects" was a kind of ritual? I don't think there's need for either alternative. The most parsimonious explanation, it seems to me, is that he wrote "subjects" out of habit, and then (quickly, I imagine) realized that it was no longer appropriate. No hiding, no ritual-- just a correction.
CulturalNgineer 16y ago
On a similar note: I'd like to see an effort to eliminate the word "consumers" from our leaders lexicons. Cows are consumers... Hogs are consumers... Consumers are commodities that are fattened until they're slaughtered! Words have significance on both conscious and subliminal levels. Beware a government AND a corporate elite that has come to think of you as a 'consumer'... a 'subject'. 'Citizens' are a nuisance! Jefferson, Franklin and Adams knew that words were important. Personal Democracy: Disruption as an Enlightenment Essential http://culturalengineer.blogspot.com/2010/06/personal-democracy-disruption-as.html http://culturalengineer.blogspot.com/2010/06/personal-democr...
- SkyMarshal 16y ago
  Have an upvote. I just clicked this thread to say the same thing. You are a Citizen, not a Consumer!
- michael_dorfman 16y ago
  Cows are consumers... Hogs are consumers... Consumers are commodities that are fattened until they're slaughtered! Words have significance on both conscious and subliminal levels. How about "Bunnies are consumers. Kittens are consumers. Consumers are cute and fluffy!" Actually, consumers are, umm, those who consume things. As opposed to producers. If you've got some subliminal association between consumption and livestock, well, that's you.
  - sp332 16y ago
    "Consumer" is a useful term in economics, but it has negative stereotypical meanings in everyday use.
    - jamesbritt 16y ago
      "negative stereotypical meanings in everyday use." For whom? And when does it come up in "everyday use"? I mean, aside from being used by economists or businesses when talking about economics or business?
      - SkyMarshal 16y ago
        You should read up on the historical development of the use of language and linguistics to shape culture and society, both from the advertising industry and from the feminist movement. The contemporary labeling of citizens as consumers is no accident, and not just an artifact of the mainstreaming of the economics field.
  - deleted 16y ago
    [deleted]
  - gruseom 16y ago
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
thebigshane 16y ago
Instead of arguing the politics over this, I am more interested in the discovery of the revision. How cool is that we were able to peak into amateur version control of over 200 years ago? Imagine the possibilities of all of the online stored version control of documents and code today. I bet it won't too long before the government publicly version-controls laws (it could already exist for all I know). Then think about some junior congressman who wanted to change the wording of some clause 10 years from now and how in 20 years from now the populace can look back in amazement of how much might have changed if that changeset was never merged and tagged as HR_123. Headlines in 2030: "Researches searching through git histories from 2020, find that Congressman Santos is to 'blame' for the 'Google-Monopoly Loophole'"

40 points by zeynel1 16y ago

The article fails to mention Benjamin Franklin and John Adams were the other two members of the committee charged with drafting the document. Producing a hard copy in those days was a real chore, and probably only done in order to present a working document to the full committee. So did Jefferson make this change on his own, and take the extra care in changing the words so the rest of the committee wouldn't notice? Or in discussions with Adams and Franklin did they all recognize how momentous the change was and expunging "subjects" was a kind of ritual?

sili 16y ago
I guess it would be hard to make that change on a completed document where ink has already dried. I believe they used to have special rollers that would sock up fresh ink if one wanted to make a change.
michael_dorfman 16y ago
So did Jefferson make this change on his own, and take the extra care in changing the words so the rest of the committee wouldn't notice? Or in discussions with Adams and Franklin did they all recognize how momentous the change was and expunging "subjects" was a kind of ritual? I don't think there's need for either alternative. The most parsimonious explanation, it seems to me, is that he wrote "subjects" out of habit, and then (quickly, I imagine) realized that it was no longer appropriate. No hiding, no ritual-- just a correction.

CulturalNgineer 16y ago

On a similar note: I'd like to see an effort to eliminate the word "consumers" from our leaders lexicons. Cows are consumers... Hogs are consumers... Consumers are commodities that are fattened until they're slaughtered! Words have significance on both conscious and subliminal levels. Beware a government AND a corporate elite that has come to think of you as a 'consumer'... a 'subject'. 'Citizens' are a nuisance! Jefferson, Franklin and Adams knew that words were important. Personal Democracy: Disruption as an Enlightenment Essential http://culturalengineer.blogspot.com/2010/06/personal-democracy-disruption-as.html http://culturalengineer.blogspot.com/2010/06/personal-democr...

SkyMarshal 16y ago
Have an upvote. I just clicked this thread to say the same thing. You are a Citizen, not a Consumer!
michael_dorfman 16y ago
Cows are consumers... Hogs are consumers... Consumers are commodities that are fattened until they're slaughtered! Words have significance on both conscious and subliminal levels. How about "Bunnies are consumers. Kittens are consumers. Consumers are cute and fluffy!" Actually, consumers are, umm, those who consume things. As opposed to producers. If you've got some subliminal association between consumption and livestock, well, that's you.
- sp332 16y ago
  "Consumer" is a useful term in economics, but it has negative stereotypical meanings in everyday use.
  - jamesbritt 16y ago
    "negative stereotypical meanings in everyday use." For whom? And when does it come up in "everyday use"? I mean, aside from being used by economists or businesses when talking about economics or business?
    - SkyMarshal 16y ago
      You should read up on the historical development of the use of language and linguistics to shape culture and society, both from the advertising industry and from the feminist movement. The contemporary labeling of citizens as consumers is no accident, and not just an artifact of the mainstreaming of the economics field.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
- gruseom 16y ago

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]

thebigshane 16y ago

Instead of arguing the politics over this, I am more interested in the discovery of the revision. How cool is that we were able to peak into amateur version control of over 200 years ago? Imagine the possibilities of all of the online stored version control of documents and code today. I bet it won't too long before the government publicly version-controls laws (it could already exist for all I know). Then think about some junior congressman who wanted to change the wording of some clause 10 years from now and how in 20 years from now the populace can look back in amazement of how much might have changed if that changeset was never merged and tagged as HR_123. Headlines in 2030: "Researches searching through git histories from 2020, find that Congressman Santos is to 'blame' for the 'Google-Monopoly Loophole'"