U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-14-2016, 07:22 PM
 
1,098 posts, read 1,312,962 times
Reputation: 1194

Advertisements

I wouldn't say it was all that revolutionary. They tweaked existing systems a little. Rejecting a monarch was probably the most revolutionary thing we did, but it was the culmination of over a hundred years of well-established political feeling in Britain and the New World. It's not as if some revolutionary leader stood up and tried something radically different.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-14-2016, 10:22 PM
 
4,456 posts, read 3,915,846 times
Reputation: 3115
Re: 'It's not as if some revolutionary leader stood up and tried something radically different'

I'd suggest if we look at our founders it would be apparent to see that they were quite a bit different than their opposition back in England who held and drove power through its society.
Those 'gentleman of Enlightenment virtue' namely Washington, Jefferson, Adams, Hamilton etc in the colonies did not get their lofty positions from titles, nobility and blood. It was more from a drive of contributing unselfishly to the creation of a new political social and cultural entity different than what Europe was while incorporating new nation organizational philosophies such as democracy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2016, 06:59 AM
 
1,274 posts, read 1,006,086 times
Reputation: 1413
Well, England had already done it over a hundred years previously, although the reasons were different and, of course it didn't last, so I guess it wasn't unprecedented.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2016, 06:30 PM
 
8,548 posts, read 7,602,758 times
Reputation: 4081
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dd714 View Post
ABSOLUTELY yes!!!!

I mean, revolutions are and were then nothing new, but what was accomplished and written in those two documents were...and still are by the way.
For the first time in history, you had a document that dictated human rights, as not a right given by a governing body, but as a God-given right (or, just "a human dictated" right if you will) - with a constitution designed to, not dictate the powers of government, but to LIMIT the powers of government.

Essentially, it was an experiment...and it was successful! We can see the warped mess that the French Revolution turned into for an example of a revolution gone wrong.

Yes constitutions of representative government exist before this, and of course are common now...but I still submit that there is still no other structure of government or document guarding the powers of individual citizens and limiting government such as exists in the US. And it's one thing that the "social democracies" of Europe (and even some American politicians) will still not understand today - the unaliable right of individual citizens in the US over the "mass collective" rules of even a benign "nanny state" type government is the general concept of the founding fathers.
Didnt English common law has some built in human rights too? Plus the Brits did abolish slavery before we did.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2016, 06:32 PM
 
8,548 posts, read 7,602,758 times
Reputation: 4081
Quote:
Originally Posted by travric View Post
Re: 'It's not as if some revolutionary leader stood up and tried something radically different'

I'd suggest if we look at our founders it would be apparent to see that they were quite a bit different than their opposition back in England who held and drove power through its society.
Those 'gentleman of Enlightenment virtue' namely Washington, Jefferson, Adams, Hamilton etc in the colonies did not get their lofty positions from titles, nobility and blood. It was more from a drive of contributing unselfishly to the creation of a new political social and cultural entity different than what Europe was while incorporating new nation organizational philosophies such as democracy.
Are you sure they did not inherit their positions? I dont think any of those were poor from the beginning.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2016, 07:38 PM
 
4,456 posts, read 3,915,846 times
Reputation: 3115
Re: 'Are you sure they did not inherit their positions? I dont think any of those were poor from the beginning'

To that I'd suggest that men like Washington and Jefferson were nowhere near the eminence
of the British fellows they were dealing with. The latter if they were in power or in Parliament came from a hereditary nobility going back centuries in Great Britain. Britain had an entrenched aristocracy of insiders who held the reins of power.

While it is true that Washington and Jefferson were perhaps American 'aristos' due to their lands and slaves they rose through talent, drive and merit into the highest political echelons of their society. Nothing really was waiting for them. They freely went after a very public life in American government where they would be at odds with their previous benefactor.

It must have been off kilter for those in the British government to meet with those fellows. Talking with a 'lawyer' like Hamilton? With their pedigree they no doubt felt aggrieved having a conversation with him , a man of the American 'elite'. who obviously came from a lower level of society than them.

All that had to be a 'world upside down'. It would get worse when the vision came up again at Yorktown. By then the British certainly knew they dealing with much different men that American revolutionary 'aristocracy' with different mind sets.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-24-2016, 02:07 AM
 
12 posts, read 9,705 times
Reputation: 39
No, the founding fathers were a bunch of punks who got lucky, they didn't want high taxes so they seceded. The USA as a country was fundamentally built on a lie.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-24-2016, 08:17 AM
 
13,516 posts, read 19,630,894 times
Reputation: 22388
Quote:
Originally Posted by peppermintcandy88 View Post
No, the founding fathers were a bunch of punks who got lucky, they didn't want high taxes so they seceded. The USA as a country was fundamentally built on a lie.
LOL...ohhhhhkayyyyy
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-24-2016, 08:19 AM
 
Location: Texas
38,545 posts, read 21,331,516 times
Reputation: 24457
Quote:
Originally Posted by peppermintcandy88 View Post
No, the founding fathers were a bunch of punks who got lucky, they didn't want high taxes so they seceded. The USA as a country was fundamentally built on a lie.

Not the first time you've been wrong, I'm certain.

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-24-2016, 08:29 AM
 
13,516 posts, read 19,630,894 times
Reputation: 22388
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJ Brazen_3133 View Post
Didnt English common law has some built in human rights too? Plus the Brits did abolish slavery before we did.
Yes true...the Declaration of Independence was influenced by the English Bill of Rights, and also on some of the Philosophy of John Locke. But England remained a constitutional monarchy. The US did not have these rights added on, but was found on these principles, a country built around these principles...not the other way around.
And yes indeed, "all men are created equal" was hard to explain when certain class of citizens were considered property. That issue was simply tabled by the founding fathers - and took a bloody civil war to resolve 80 years later. England abolished slavery in the late 18th century indeed, but a cynical person may say that they no longer financially benifited from slavery, losing the agricultural economy based colonies in North America. If they retained it's southern colonies, no doubt they would have had retained the institution of slavery for some time.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top