toldailytopic: Liberals or conservatives? Whose values closer resemble the spirit of

[Son of Jack]

Libertarians. The founding fathers were evil men who wanted to keep the poor farmer brotha down. The constitution represents the interests of bankers and businessmen.

You've never studied any Jeffersonian political theory.:nono:

 

[Traditio]

You've never studied any of Jeffersonian political theory.:nono:

I have not. I'd like to point out, however, that the constitution wasn't written by a single man. The constitution ultimately finds itself as the outcome of a concrete history, not an embodiment of one man's abstract theoretical principles. That history is one of exploitation.

 

[Son of Jack]

I have not. I'd like to point out, however, that the constitution wasn't written by a single man. The constitution ultimately finds itself as the outcome of a concrete history, not an embodiment of one man's abstract theoretical principles. That history is one of exploitation.

What you fail to recognize, or recognize and fail to admit, is that there were, even in that day, various ways of interpreting the Constitution. In particular, there were loose constructionists and strict constructionists. It was the loose constructionists who used (abuse) the Constitution in order to extend the power the federal government over that of the state governments.

 

[kmoney]

On the whole....conservatives, because conservative are supposed to be for a limited government and I think that is mostly what the FF had in mind. Of course, as was mentioned, there were conflicts back then just like there are now. The FFs weren't in total agreement.

So conservative, in general, to answer the OP. However I'd probably say libertarian is the closest.

But I would question bringing the founding fathers into arguments too frequently. Saying, "The founding fathers would want it this way", doesn't seem like a very valid argument. Times change and countries can change with it. Arguments should be made that are independent of what the founding fathers would say (or what we speculate about what they would say).

 

[Cracked]

But I would question bringing the founding fathers into arguments too frequently. Saying, "The founding fathers would want it this way", doesn't seem like a very valid argument.

I tend to agree with that--it can be a silly and out of place argument and people do it all the time.

 

[Traditio]

What you fail to recognize, or recognize and fail to admit, is that there were, even in that day, various ways of interpreting the Constitution. In particular, there were loose constructionists and strict constructionists. It was the loose constructionists who used (abuse) the Constitution in order to extend the power the federal government over that of the state governments.

SoJ, the above doesn't make sense in the context it was posted. What's at question is the very origin of the constitution. Why was it created?

 

[Persephone66]

Conservative libertarians.

I agree.

Neither modern liberals nor conservatives really hold to all the same ideals as the founding fathers. I would be rather hard pressed to say which of those were closest.

 

[TomO]

Neither "movement" as we know it today resemble the spirit of the founders.

Ditto lain:

 

[MrRadish]

As someone from the UK, I find the degree of veneration - political deification, almost - for the Founding Fathers that exists in the USA as peculiar as it is quaint. Why should a nation should be run to serve its long-dead historical figures, rather than its living inhabitants?

We Brits have our quirks too, of course, but all I'm saying is that you don't see us asking "Whose values more closely resemble those of George III?". :chuckle:

 

[bybee]

As someone from the UK, I find the degree of veneration - political deification, almost - for the Founding Fathers that exists in the USA as peculiar as it is quaint. Why should a nation should be run to serve its long-dead historical figures, rather than its living inhabitants?

We Brits have our quirks too, of course, but all I'm saying is that you don't see us asking "Whose values more closely resemble those of George III?". :chuckle:

Just as I would not presume to judge what makes a Brit tick I do not give half-a-rat's-tail what a Brit thinks makes an American tick!

 

[MrRadish]

Just as I would not presume to judge what makes a Brit tick I do not give half-a-rat's-tail what a Brit thinks makes an American tick!

Hey, there's no need to be like that. I wasn't trying to be offensive. I'm not saying that all Americans think that way, or even that the situation is as simple as that. I'm just saying that from an external perspective, constantly asking 'What would the Founding Fathers think?' seems a bit weird, that's all.

I've noticed that you frequently get upset when I try and present a foreign perspective on aspects of America's culture. Why is this? People often remark about British ideosyncracies - our tendency to be polite in queues yet incredibly brusque when serving customers, our appalling excuses for national dishes, our habit of moaning about certain laws and regulations while never actually doing anything about them - and I always tend to find it quite amusing, and usually true. Why does it make you so angry when it's done about the USA?

 

[bybee]

Hey, there's no need to be like that. I wasn't trying to be offensive. I'm not saying that all Americans think that way, or even that the situation is as simple as that. I'm just saying that from an external perspective, constantly asking 'What would the Founding Fathers think?' seems a bit weird, that's all.

I've noticed that you frequently get upset when I try and present a foreign perspective on aspects of America's culture. Why is this? People often remark about British ideosyncracies - our tendency to be polite in queues yet incredibly brusque when serving customers, our appalling excuses for national dishes, our habit of moaning about certain laws and regulations while never actually doing anything about them - and I always tend to find it quite amusing, and usually true. Why does it make you so angry when it's done about the USA?

Perhaps because I am me and you are you?
America/Americans receive so much criticism that my teeth are set on edge.
I realize that your comments were simply an observation. No harm done.
I am, after all, by heritage, half English!:chuckle:

 

[warren clark]

I have a new thought with this.

Was it not a liberal idea to declare our independence and create a constitution and secularize it?

I guess I would say liberal is most true to the constitution.

 

[bybee]

I have a new thought with this.

Was it not a liberal idea to declare our independence and create a constitution and secularize it?

I guess I would say liberal is most true to the constitution.

Wow! You gave me "neg rep" and asked me if I am "crabby much" because I dared to speak my mind?

 

[warren clark]

Wow! You gave me "neg rep" and asked me if I am "crabby much" because I dared to speak my mind?

Not just for being "crabby" but for misrepresenting us Americans. We actually do care about how we portray ourselves.
We want to be someone other countries look up to.
Right now, with your attitude, it represents us Americans as shallow and uncaring for our neighbors.

I won't be represented that way.
You don't speak for all American's.

I've gotten bad reps for no reason other than a "loser" comment before but I don't complain, I just shrug and move on.

 

[bybee]

Not just for being "crabby" but for misrepresenting us Americans. We actually do care about how we portray ourselves.
We want to be someone other countries look up to.
Right now, with your attitude, it represents us Americans as shallow and uncaring for our neighbors.

I won't be represented that way.
You don't speak for all American's.

I've gotten bad reps for no reason other than a "loser" comment before but I don't complain, I just shrug and move on.

I was doing exactly what you are doing, speaking for myself. I didn't attach your name to my statements.
I don't give "neg rep's". I try to address differences face to face, so to speak.

 

[Rusha]

Wow! You gave me "neg rep" and asked me if I am "crabby much" because I dared to speak my mind?

Not just for being "crabby" but for misrepresenting us Americans. We actually do care about how we portray ourselves.
We want to be someone other countries look up to.
Right now, with your attitude, it represents us Americans as shallow and uncaring for our neighbors.

I won't be represented that way.
You don't speak for all American's.

I've gotten bad reps for no reason other than a "loser" comment before but I don't complain, I just shrug and move on.

I was doing exactly what you are doing, speaking for myself. I didn't attach your name to my statements.
I don't give "neg rep's". I try to address differences face to face, so to speak.

:doh: Of all the individuals on this forum to neg rep ... Bybee? Seriously?

Warren, if you are a long time participant on TOL, you will soon find out that Bybee is one of the sweetest ladies to ever grace TOL with her presence.

Positive rep to Bybee to counteract the the negative rep (and just cuz I like her!)

 

[warren clark]

I was doing exactly what you are doing, speaking for myself. I didn't attach your name to my statements.
I don't give "neg rep's". I try to address differences face to face, so to speak.

I saw it as rude.

I didn't fully agree with his opinion... but it was reasonable and understandable.

I think the Founding Fathers had the best intentions and they made a living document because they knew it would need to have changes as we grew.

It wasn't that you disagreed, it was the manner in which you disagreed.
I have nothing against you and I don't mind hearing other's opinions.
But knocking the brit for making the comment was generally rude.

 

[Buzzword]

As someone from the UK, I find the degree of veneration - political deification, almost - for the Founding Fathers that exists in the USA as peculiar as it is quaint. Why should a nation should be run to serve its long-dead historical figures, rather than its living inhabitants?

We Brits have our quirks too, of course, but all I'm saying is that you don't see us asking "Whose values more closely resemble those of George III?". :chuckle:

That's actually a very good point, and several Americans on this thread have pointed it out as well.

Just about every nation tries in some way to venerate its glorious past, whether that manifests as Shakespeare's historical plays, the Roman myths of Romulus and Remus (tying back to the Trojan War), Homer's Illiad (same thing), the Shinto myths tying the Japanese royal line back to the goddess Amaterasu, etc.

Americans also do this in our tall tales, even while recognizing that they are factually false.
We treat them as symbolic of attributes we value and thus attribute to ourselves.

The legendary status given the "Founding Fathers" demonstrates the universal good-ol'-days mentality, to the point that the group as a whole (and the actual membership varies depending on whom you ask) is treated as a think tank of divinely inspired hypergeniuses.

Where Americans differ from the rest of the world, which has mostly come to regard its glorious past as either a product of art or a product of arrogance, is in the fact that a large part of our population BELIEVES THE MYTH.

Since most Americans are conditioned from day one to believe the legend, it naturally follows that we hold ourselves in high regard as the heirs to its glorious legacy, that being the United States itself.

Treating free education, high-paying jobs, nice homes and possessions, and early and easy retirement as our right is simply the natural outgrowth of such a mentality.
As a result we are seen as arrogant/greedy and stupid by much of the rest of the world.

We essentially believe our own hype.

 

[warren clark]

:doh: Of all the individuals on this forum to neg rep ... Bybee? Seriously?

Warren, if you are a long time participant on TOL, you will soon find out that Bybee is one of the sweetest ladies to ever grace TOL with her presence.

Positive rep to Bybee to counteract the the negative rep (and just cuz I like her!)

I don't rep anyone based on the person but by the post.

If a friend dear to me posted something that I find offensive, I would post a neg rep.

Both you Rusha and Bybee share similiar views to mine on some topics and opposite views on others I am sure.
It isn't the opposing view that I have a problem with but the misinformation and negative conotations that go with remarks being said.
When telling someone that you don't "...give half-a-rat's-tail what a Brit thinks makes an American tick!", it is completely undermining their opinion as if it has no worth.
Now if an argument was made to support an opposing view, it wouldn't undermine the opinion but recognize it and possibly start an intriguing discussion.
That is after all the point of this forum isn't it?

In the end, no one's opinion should be deemed unworthy.
If there is misinformation, correct it.
If there is a substantiated reason to oppose it, then state so and the reasons, but don't tell the person their opinion doesn't matter because they're not American.