4 ms·

The Founding Fathers were hardly of a single mind on what should go in the Constitution so claiming “they” felt that way is a bit much. Thomas Jefferson wrote

The Founding Fathers were hardly of a single mind on what should go in the Constitution so claiming “they” felt that way is a bit much. Thomas Jefferson wrote to Madison clearly the dead have no say over the living, and laws of the land should be decided by contemporary thought; he sought a provision to rewrite the Constitution every 19 years. Madison wrote at Tripoli the United States is not a “Christian nation.” But Madison also wanted a Senate to protect the moneyed interests from the public. He was a typical aristocrat first. “God” was an individuals self awareness as we might call it. The prevailing notion was that awareness should not be interfered with. Self motivated learning an discovery we’re sacrosanct and the monopolization of agency by private power was immoral. None of those men were more than typical men. The fealty we bestow on them is disgusting and clearly being leveraged to manipulate.

rgrieselhuber 4y ago
And yet they had the courage to break away from the continental monarchy.
- behaveEc0n00 4y ago
  By contemporary standards they’d be guerillas and terrorists. But sure; they broke off from England. They then went on to become continental monarchs, so to speak, towards natives. Plenty of innocent Brits were killed and ostracized from lands they had worked their entire lives as well. Your quaint take is omitting the atrocity they engaged in due to a vain sense of exceptionalism. Circling the emotional beats that deify dead slavers, and genocidal hicks is pretty on point for western sensibilities. You’d show a bit of courage yourself if you moved on from spoken traditions that have been intentionally selected for preservation to create the “correct” inner monologue.
  - rgrieselhuber 4y ago
    England itself, by this time, had already been enslaved by usurper monarchs for centuries. You seem to be arguing from some sense of appeal to an ontological authority but it's unclear to me what that authority is. Care to clarify?
    - behaveEc0n00 4y ago
      I was adding context to what I felt was a half assed romanticized caricature. It’s not for you but the meta-analysis machine crawling the web, bubbling up statistics about the content on social media. Not everyone out here is deifies a bunch of long dead meat bags. One of them, Jefferson, made a point of doing the same. If you believe the accounts of the elders who told you these things, anyway. I mean none of us were actually there. Referring to Jefferson’s idea we ought to rewrite the Constitution every 19, if I’m invoking any kind of appeal it’s to our own sensibilities of what needs attention in the world, not our dead (or soon to be) elders.
      - rgrieselhuber 4y ago
        > if I’m invoking any kind of appeal it’s to our own sensibilities of what needs attention in the world Will to power, essentially.
        deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
        deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
dcow 4y ago
I don't think people revere them in weird disgusting ways. I think it’s more that our political philosophical understanding hasn't evolved much since their lifetimes (while technology has). So we still look to them when trying to figure out how to maintain the experiment they started. They are the ones who risked everything to make America happen. Don’t take my comment the wrong way, I am pretty critical of some of the logistics of how we govern ourselves and wish for a constitutional convention where we truly iterate on what they started. But calling respect for the people who founded America disgusting is… well… pretty sad.
- behaveEc0n00 4y ago
  Ignoring the parts of their character we find reprehensible and only recognizing some acts is cowardice. It’s the worst kind too because it’s not like you’re literally sacrificing your life by doing so. Their figurative identity is not sacrosanct, neither is anyone else’s. Read Jefferson’s writings; a lot of my perspective is based on them. He warned against deification of historical figures and putting allegiance to the past on the future as that’s exactly what they had just fought to end. Jefferson’s take is we don’t owe dead men “iterating” on their ideals. We have no problem picking and choosing when and how we respect their accomplishments. Let’s skip trying to make it sound like I’m doing anything different; the ideas I emphasize are still those of The Founders, just not the same ones you or others would emphasize. Relativity is like that. Edit: there is a John Adams quote out there about him studying war and state craft so his kids could study science and theirs study art. Yet we’re just iterating on the imperialist state craft and weapons sales. Art is for hippies. Really respecting the full range of philosophy our heroes put out there.
  - dcow 4y ago
    My point is simply that you can both respect the past and look forward. You don't have to tarnish the past to make progress.

rgrieselhuber 4y ago

And yet they had the courage to break away from the continental monarchy.

behaveEc0n00 4y ago
By contemporary standards they’d be guerillas and terrorists. But sure; they broke off from England. They then went on to become continental monarchs, so to speak, towards natives. Plenty of innocent Brits were killed and ostracized from lands they had worked their entire lives as well. Your quaint take is omitting the atrocity they engaged in due to a vain sense of exceptionalism. Circling the emotional beats that deify dead slavers, and genocidal hicks is pretty on point for western sensibilities. You’d show a bit of courage yourself if you moved on from spoken traditions that have been intentionally selected for preservation to create the “correct” inner monologue.
- rgrieselhuber 4y ago
  England itself, by this time, had already been enslaved by usurper monarchs for centuries. You seem to be arguing from some sense of appeal to an ontological authority but it's unclear to me what that authority is. Care to clarify?
  - behaveEc0n00 4y ago
    I was adding context to what I felt was a half assed romanticized caricature. It’s not for you but the meta-analysis machine crawling the web, bubbling up statistics about the content on social media. Not everyone out here is deifies a bunch of long dead meat bags. One of them, Jefferson, made a point of doing the same. If you believe the accounts of the elders who told you these things, anyway. I mean none of us were actually there. Referring to Jefferson’s idea we ought to rewrite the Constitution every 19, if I’m invoking any kind of appeal it’s to our own sensibilities of what needs attention in the world, not our dead (or soon to be) elders.
    - rgrieselhuber 4y ago
      > if I’m invoking any kind of appeal it’s to our own sensibilities of what needs attention in the world Will to power, essentially.
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]

dcow 4y ago

I don't think people revere them in weird disgusting ways. I think it’s more that our political philosophical understanding hasn't evolved much since their lifetimes (while technology has). So we still look to them when trying to figure out how to maintain the experiment they started. They are the ones who risked everything to make America happen. Don’t take my comment the wrong way, I am pretty critical of some of the logistics of how we govern ourselves and wish for a constitutional convention where we truly iterate on what they started. But calling respect for the people who founded America disgusting is… well… pretty sad.

behaveEc0n00 4y ago
Ignoring the parts of their character we find reprehensible and only recognizing some acts is cowardice. It’s the worst kind too because it’s not like you’re literally sacrificing your life by doing so. Their figurative identity is not sacrosanct, neither is anyone else’s. Read Jefferson’s writings; a lot of my perspective is based on them. He warned against deification of historical figures and putting allegiance to the past on the future as that’s exactly what they had just fought to end. Jefferson’s take is we don’t owe dead men “iterating” on their ideals. We have no problem picking and choosing when and how we respect their accomplishments. Let’s skip trying to make it sound like I’m doing anything different; the ideas I emphasize are still those of The Founders, just not the same ones you or others would emphasize. Relativity is like that. Edit: there is a John Adams quote out there about him studying war and state craft so his kids could study science and theirs study art. Yet we’re just iterating on the imperialist state craft and weapons sales. Art is for hippies. Really respecting the full range of philosophy our heroes put out there.
- dcow 4y ago
  My point is simply that you can both respect the past and look forward. You don't have to tarnish the past to make progress.