IGX

A long read but I found it fascinating. If you're a fan of Jefferson this won't be to your liking.

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history-a ... c=y&page=1

Great read. Thanks.

Ol' Jeff was quite the entrepreneur. I saw a documentary a few years back depicting much of what's written in this book. Do as I say, not as I do, as they say.

Only an idiot actually believes that all people are equal.

Fat Cat wrote:Only an idiot actually believes that all people are equal.

^^^^^^^ This^^^ They should be equal under the Law unless found not so be actions judged by his peers against the law.

The rest of us reserve the right to judge and call each other stupid mother fuckers.

I've seen the critiques of the book they're pulling this from. It features a lot of using the worst interpretation possible along with omissions of any info that contradicts the angle so as to make as negative a portrait as possible.

Controversy sells books.

The last page of the article, for example, features a flat out lie- the story about the will contains a huge lie by omission that completely changes things. Now, I'm not saying the slaves got free ice cream and puppies, the reality was bad, and yes, hypocritical. Jefferson had plenty of faults. Doesn't mean the book isn't also a hatchet job.

Schlegel wrote:I've seen the critiques of the book they're pulling this from. It features a lot of using the worst interpretation possible along with omissions of any info that contradicts the angle so as to make as negative a portrait as possible.

Controversy sells books.

The last page of the article, for example, features a flat out lie- the story about the will contains a huge lie by omission that completely changes things. Now, I'm not saying the slaves got free ice cream and puppies, the reality was bad, and yes, hypocritical. Jefferson had plenty of faults. Doesn't mean the book isn't also a hatchet job.

I'd be interested in actually seeing a relatively balanced perspective on TJ-- I've never read one.

Great Southerner:

http://takimag.com/article/miscegenatio ... z2EFGKy6rb


TJ was probably my least favorite founding father growing up. However, over time he has grown on me.

Schlegel wrote:I've seen the critiques of the book they're pulling this from. It features a lot of using the worst interpretation possible along with omissions of any info that contradicts the angle so as to make as negative a portrait as possible.

Controversy sells books.

The last page of the article, for example, features a flat out lie- the story about the will contains a huge lie by omission that completely changes things. Now, I'm not saying the slaves got free ice cream and puppies, the reality was bad, and yes, hypocritical. Jefferson had plenty of faults. Doesn't mean the book isn't also a hatchet job.

The founding fathers must be discredited. Otherwise people might cling to that worthless rag called the Constitution. You know, that fucking document that has stood in the way of our eanointed ones from totally subjugating us.

Is a new critical history really going to challenge the general perception of Jefferson? Feel like it's been "Thomas Jefferson, slave fucker" rather than "benevolent slaveholder" since the mid-90s.

Batboy2/75 wrote:You know, that fucking document that has stood in the way of our eanointed ones from totally subjugating us.

It's adorable that you think words on a piece of paper mean something.

We haven't been "totally subjugated" because no one's rallied enough of the population to do it. (By we, of course, I mean white men.) Plenty of subjugation over the last two centuries, Constitution ain't done shit to stop it.

milosz wrote:

Batboy2/75 wrote:You know, that fucking document that has stood in the way of our eanointed ones from totally subjugating us.

It's adorable that you think words on a piece of paper mean something.

We haven't been "totally subjugated" because no one's rallied enough of the population to do it. (By we, of course, I mean white men.) Plenty of subjugation over the last two centuries, Constitution ain't done shit to stop it.

You're a fucking poof and ignorant to boot.

The Constitution is an anti slavery document you fucking dolt.

He's my favorite of the founders.

Slave fucker just has a poetic ring to it.

Also, Steven Seagal is my favorite actor.

HEY GUYS LETS SIMMER DOWN. It's the holiday season and our hearts should be filled with joy. I obviously haven't kept up on my American history and I was aware there was some revisionist history going on about TJ but didn't realize to what extent. I don't know why there's all this controversy. Our esteemed elder IGx statesman Andy1776 was probably pals with TJ and he'll weigh in soon and settle this shit.

baffled wrote:Slave fucker just has a poetic ring to it.

Somewhere there's a successful porn producer who agrees with you.

Batboy2/75 wrote:The Constitution is an anti slavery document you fucking dolt.

Sure it is, from December 1865 onward. The previous 76 years, not so much.

How did the Constitution protect Japanese Americans from 1942 to 1945-6? As always, words and paper don't mean shit. Rights exist only so long as enough people haven't amassed enough power to decide that those rights no longer exist.

milosz wrote:How did the Constitution protect Japanese Americans from 1942 to 1945-6? As always, words and paper don't mean shit. Rights exist only so long as enough people haven't amassed enough power to decide that those rights no longer exist.

They were interned IAW the Constitution.

milosz wrote:As always, words and paper don't mean shit. Rights exist only so long as enough people haven't amassed enough power to decide that those rights no longer exist.

The Constitution has done a fair job of restraining overbearing gov't, just not a perfect job.
Numerous Congressional & Bush admin moves, for example. And one SC vote shy of overturning Obamacare.

Convince us we'd be better off without a Constitution.

milosz wrote:

Batboy2/75 wrote:The Constitution is an anti slavery document you fucking dolt.

Sure it is, from December 1865 onward. The previous 76 years, not so much.

How did the Constitution protect Japanese Americans from 1942 to 1945-6? As always, words and paper don't mean shit. Rights exist only so long as enough people haven't amassed enough power to decide that those rights no longer exist.

You're a dumb ass. Read some Frederick Douglas you cock holster.

Those words and paper are the foundation of our Republic. The Statist elites have been bemoaning the "negative" rights, i.e. limits on Government power of the Constitution for over 150 years. For over 100 years they have been circumventing the Constitution and talking about "Positive" rights, i.e. what Uncle Sugar can do.

johno wrote:The Constitution has done a fair job of restraining overbearing gov't, just not a perfect job.
Numerous Congressional & Bush admin moves, for example. And one SC vote shy of overturning Obamacare.

Convince us we'd be better off without a Constitution.

I've never suggested any such thing. The Constitution is a fine document and a useful guide, but I'm amused by people who believe that the Constitution has power in itself, that 'it' has protected us.

Rights and liberties extend as far as your neighbors (and their guns - and yours) are willing to let them extend, no words on paper will ever change that.

baffled wrote:He's my favorite of the founders.

Slave fucker just has a poetic ring to it.

Also, Steven Seagal is my favorite actor.

Steven Seagal as Thomas Jefferson

Chuck Norris as George Washington

David Straitham as John Adams

Arnold Swarzenagger as Von Steuben

Jean Claud VanDamn as Lafayette

Will Smith as some educated negro who did'nt really exhist but is in the movie to make everyone feel better and to get black people to watch it.

FOUNDING FATHERS:King George is going to get his ass kicked!

A Golan-Globus Production!

Yeah, you hypocritical bastards.

If any one of us owned good looking negress slaves, you bet we'd be fucking them.

Shafpocalypse Now wrote:Yeah, you hypocritical bastards.

If any one of us owned good looking negress slaves, you bet we'd be fucking them.

Damn straight.

Sally Hemmings was a Quadroon. Hardly some girl that just got off the boat from Africa.

milosz wrote:

johno wrote:The Constitution has done a fair job of restraining overbearing gov't, just not a perfect job.
Numerous Congressional & Bush admin moves, for example. And one SC vote shy of overturning Obamacare.

Convince us we'd be better off without a Constitution.

I've never suggested any such thing. The Constitution is a fine document and a useful guide, but I'm amused by people who believe that the Constitution has power in itself, that 'it' has protected us.

Rights and liberties extend as far as your neighbors (and their guns - and yours) are willing to let them extend, no words on paper will ever change that.

Absolute bullshit. Plus, nice strawman argument you've erected there. I never said that e document has power unto itself.

However, without that document, our slide toward tyranny would have ended years ago. Why have a Constituation at all? why have contracts? We'll just let the majority decide. Might makes right etc. that has work out peachy throughout history.