Political Liberty and The Right of Popular Rebellion Against Tyranny

[georgephillip]

So more big government. Again NOT A LIBERAL. Thanks for playing.

So now why don't you explain how to administer a big country without big government?

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Is that the plan? Is that individual liberty? Is that limited government?

You're advocating for an individual right to commit control fraud?

WTF are you yammering about here?

 

[TakeAStepBack]

So more big government. Again NOT A LIBERAL. Thanks for playing.

So now why don't you explain how to administer a big country without big government?

Start a thread and we can do that. This about liberal or progressive. Or what liberals are not. Liberals are not big government advocates. Making you, a progressive authoritarian. Just like your clear wish for "public" utilities. We should nationalize, huh?

 

[georgephillip]

WTF are you yammering about here?

Bailed out bankers working for banks that were too big to fail (or jail) were allowed to keep the bonuses, remember?

 

[hipeter924]

Political Liberty and The Right of Popular Rebellion Against Tyranny: It is a liberal concept. So is democracy as well as republicanism. Conservatives in the USA come out of the liberal tradition.

We are all liberals. We're liberals of different stripes.

Sane, rational, and reasonable people know tyranny does not exist in the USA today. Why? We have representative government with open and free elections. The ultimate power resides in the vote, not money or political power.

Only a small percentage of Americans want a government and corporate restrained America. Very few of them are in the GOP or Democratic Party.

A truly free America in terms of classical liberalism, would be one where most of these are the case:
- The government doesn't regulate most aspects of morality, including marriage.
- The governments focus is maintaing infrastructure and restraining corporations from establishing monopolies
- Taxes are voluntary and government services are on a use it you buy it principle.
- Everyone is taxed the same percentage.
- Property rights supersede utilitarian attitudes.
- Private healthcare, and no restrictions on operations like abortions, or stem-cell research. This goes with the government staying out of people's lives.
- Financial regulations are mostly removed, but there are no bailouts or subsidies. Just pure rise or sink capitalism.
- No government subsidies of any kind.
- Secular society where religion is a private sphere matter with no interference from the government.
- No welfare system, and obviously no food stamps.

That isn't the GOP platform, because it doesn't want small government any more than the Democratic Party. Without corporate donors and lobbyists, most US political parties wouldn't exist.

Most government legislation in America contains clauses that create subsidies or tax loopholes for a few corporations. This is not about building a free market, but using the government as a means to disadvantage other corporations or businesses.

There is no such thing as a 'small government party' in America, with the exception of the libertarian party. Only a few rebel factions exist in the two major parties - and like Ron Paul, they are ignored.

Does the USA precede the advent of what we now describe as 'classical liberalism?'

hipeter924

'Classical liberalism' dates back to the 19th century, but liberalism as a political movement dates back to the enlightenment: Classical liberalism - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Depends on whether you identify with the liberal philosophies of the 18th century or the 19th - the US Constitution having been ratified in 1788, and before that the Articles of Confederation in 1777. The earlier shaped the initial beginnings of America, and classical liberalism came to hold a place in US politics after that.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

WTF are you yammering about here?

Bailed out bankers working for banks that were too big to fail (or jail) were allowed to keep the bonuses, remember?

Yeah, sure. Has nothing to do with how Jill the Progressive authoritarian would pay living wage. But fine.

 

[hipeter924]

Political Liberty and The Right of Popular Rebellion Against Tyranny: It is a liberal concept. So is democracy as well as republicanism. Conservatives in the USA come out of the liberal tradition.

We are all liberals. We're liberals of different stripes.

Sane, rational, and reasonable people know tyranny does not exist in the USA today. Why? We have representative government with open and free elections. The ultimate power resides in the vote, not money or political power.

Only a small percentage of Americans want a government and corporate restrained America. Very few of them are in the GOP or Democratic Party.

A truly free America in terms of classical liberalism, would be one where most of these are the case:
- The government doesn't regulate most aspects of morality, including marriage.
- The governments focus is maintaing infrastructure and restraining corporations from establishing monopolies
- Taxes are voluntary and government services are on a use it you buy it principle.
- Everyone is taxed the same percentage.
- Property rights supersede utilitarian attitudes.
- Private healthcare, and no restrictions on operations like abortions, or stem-cell research. This goes with the government staying out of people's lives.
- Financial regulations are mostly removed, but there are no bailouts or subsidies. Just pure rise or sink capitalism.
- No government subsidies of any kind.
- Secular society where religion is a private sphere matter with no interference from the government.
- No welfare system, and obviously no food stamps.

That isn't the GOP platform, because it doesn't want small government any more than the Democratic Party. Without corporate donors and lobbyists, most US political parties wouldn't exist.

Most government legislation in America contains clauses that create subsidies or tax loopholes for a few corporations. This is not about building a free market, but using the government as a means to disadvantage other corporations or businesses.

There is no such thing as a 'small government party' in America, with the exception of the libertarian party. Only a few rebel factions exist in the two major parties - and like Ron Paul, they are ignored.

That's never been this country or any other.

The two in bold already do, at least according to the intent of the US Constitution - and don't forget the monopoly that the British Empire had on America (not just the tax and duties) before the war of independence.

 

[georgephillip]

Liberals are not big government advocates.

Liberals aren't afraid of democracy, are you?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Political Liberty and The Right of Popular Rebellion Against Tyranny: It is a liberal concept. So is democracy as well as republicanism. Conservatives in the USA come out of the liberal tradition.

We are all liberals. We're liberals of different stripes.

Sane, rational, and reasonable people know tyranny does not exist in the USA today. Why? We have representative government with open and free elections. The ultimate power resides in the vote, not money or political power.

Only a small percentage of Americans want a government and corporate restrained America. Very few of them are in the GOP or Democratic Party.

A truly free America in terms of classical liberalism, would be one where most of these are the case:
- The government doesn't regulate most aspects of morality, including marriage.
- The governments focus is maintaing infrastructure and restraining corporations from establishing monopolies
- Taxes are voluntary and government services are on a use it you buy it principle.
- Everyone is taxed the same percentage.
- Property rights supersede utilitarian attitudes.
- Private healthcare, and no restrictions on operations like abortions, or stem-cell research. This goes with the government staying out of people's lives.
- Financial regulations are mostly removed, but there are no bailouts or subsidies. Just pure rise or sink capitalism.
- No government subsidies of any kind.
- Secular society where religion is a private sphere matter with no interference from the government.
- No welfare system, and obviously no food stamps.

That isn't the GOP platform, because it doesn't want small government any more than the Democratic Party. Without corporate donors and lobbyists, most US political parties wouldn't exist.

Most government legislation in America contains clauses that create subsidies or tax loopholes for a few corporations. This is not about building a free market, but using the government as a means to disadvantage other corporations or businesses.

There is no such thing as a 'small government party' in America, with the exception of the libertarian party. Only a few rebel factions exist in the two major parties - and like Ron Paul, they are ignored.

Did the founders when they framed and ratified the US Constitution intend of having a free market economy as we understand it today and did they even know what a small government party is?

1) They didn't intend for there to be a Federal Reserve or a surveillance society, some were opposed to allowing slavery, and some opposed the concept of a Federal government itself.

Nor was the constitution meant to be an economic rule book. It's fairly easy to argue what the founders didn't want, but the constitution they established doesn't necessary show their beliefs of how America should be - rather it was a messy compromise.

However, they did put forward the concept of limited government, rather than an overreaching one.

The US constitution changes according to the amendment process, and was never meant to be set in stone to the point it could never be amended by an elected government.

1) The Fed evolved out of Hamilton's and Washington's (among others) concept of a national bank which they did helped put into effect. So nothing grandly unconstitutional there now, is there? Surveillance state? Comes with technological advances. They didn't expect a national highway system either. Slavery? Far more nuanced beliefs than your ignorance is aware of.

They did have beliefs in how America should be, but provided for amending it all.

Limited in this are cannot mean small. Limits on a huge government? Limits on a medium sized government? How about limits on a small sized government? They did argue about the role of a national government. The ones who wanted a STRONGER role won out: Federalism.

The Constitution can be amended by the people

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Liberals are not big government advocates.

Liberals aren't afraid of democracy, are you?

Stop making shit up. Liberals wouldn't advocate democracy because it is mob rule. Using democracy in this regard is the hallmark of a serious progressive authoritarian statist.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Political Liberty and The Right of Popular Rebellion Against Tyranny: It is a liberal concept. So is democracy as well as republicanism. Conservatives in the USA come out of the liberal tradition.

We are all liberals. We're liberals of different stripes.

Sane, rational, and reasonable people know tyranny does not exist in the USA today. Why? We have representative government with open and free elections. The ultimate power resides in the vote, not money or political power.

Only a small percentage of Americans want a government and corporate restrained America. Very few of them are in the GOP or Democratic Party.

A truly free America in terms of classical liberalism, would be one where most of these are the case:
- The government doesn't regulate most aspects of morality, including marriage.
- The governments focus is maintaing infrastructure and restraining corporations from establishing monopolies
- Taxes are voluntary and government services are on a use it you buy it principle.
- Everyone is taxed the same percentage.
- Property rights supersede utilitarian attitudes.
- Private healthcare, and no restrictions on operations like abortions, or stem-cell research. This goes with the government staying out of people's lives.
- Financial regulations are mostly removed, but there are no bailouts or subsidies. Just pure rise or sink capitalism.
- No government subsidies of any kind.
- Secular society where religion is a private sphere matter with no interference from the government.
- No welfare system, and obviously no food stamps.

That isn't the GOP platform, because it doesn't want small government any more than the Democratic Party. Without corporate donors and lobbyists, most US political parties wouldn't exist.

Most government legislation in America contains clauses that create subsidies or tax loopholes for a few corporations. This is not about building a free market, but using the government as a means to disadvantage other corporations or businesses.

There is no such thing as a 'small government party' in America, with the exception of the libertarian party. Only a few rebel factions exist in the two major parties - and like Ron Paul, they are ignored.

That's never been this country or any other.

The two in bold already do, at least according to the intent of the US Constitution - and don't forget the monopoly that the British Empire had on America (not just the tax and duties) before the war of independence.

ever read the state constitution that preceded the national one? - Secular society where religion is a private sphere matter with no interference from the government.?

It had to be amended to fall into line with this idea. Yep, Massachusetts' provided for religious funding. Have to look at a few others

 

[hipeter924]

So more big government. Again NOT A LIBERAL. Thanks for playing.

So now why don't you explain how to administer a big country without big government?

One of my friends dares people that speak against big government, to provide an example of a major nation or superpower that has come to exist without a strong and powerful government. Usually they fall silent, as pretty much every country on Earth was built on a fabric of regulation and government control over the economy.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

So more big government. Again NOT A LIBERAL. Thanks for playing.

So now why don't you explain how to administer a big country without big government?

One of my friends dares people that speak against big government, to provide an example of a major nation or superpower that has come to exist without a strong and powerful government. Usually they fall silent, as pretty much every country on Earth was built on a fabric of regulation and government control over the economy.

That's fine. But it's a logical fallacy. The reason why humans have these big failing governments is because, well, parasites. We have human parasites. It's part of the human condition.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Political Liberty and The Right of Popular Rebellion Against Tyranny: It is a liberal concept. So is democracy as well as republicanism. Conservatives in the USA come out of the liberal tradition.

We are all liberals. We're liberals of different stripes.

Sane, rational, and reasonable people know tyranny does not exist in the USA today. Why? We have representative government with open and free elections. The ultimate power resides in the vote, not money or political power.

Only a small percentage of Americans want a government and corporate restrained America. Very few of them are in the GOP or Democratic Party.

A truly free America in terms of classical liberalism, would be one where most of these are the case:
- The government doesn't regulate most aspects of morality, including marriage.
- The governments focus is maintaing infrastructure and restraining corporations from establishing monopolies
- Taxes are voluntary and government services are on a use it you buy it principle.
- Everyone is taxed the same percentage.
- Property rights supersede utilitarian attitudes.
- Private healthcare, and no restrictions on operations like abortions, or stem-cell research. This goes with the government staying out of people's lives.
- Financial regulations are mostly removed, but there are no bailouts or subsidies. Just pure rise or sink capitalism.
- No government subsidies of any kind.
- Secular society where religion is a private sphere matter with no interference from the government.
- No welfare system, and obviously no food stamps.

That isn't the GOP platform, because it doesn't want small government any more than the Democratic Party. Without corporate donors and lobbyists, most US political parties wouldn't exist.

Most government legislation in America contains clauses that create subsidies or tax loopholes for a few corporations. This is not about building a free market, but using the government as a means to disadvantage other corporations or businesses.

There is no such thing as a 'small government party' in America, with the exception of the libertarian party. Only a few rebel factions exist in the two major parties - and like Ron Paul, they are ignored.

Does the USA precede the advent of what we now describe as 'classical liberalism?'

hipeter924

'Classical liberalism' dates back to the 19th century, but liberalism as a political movement dates back to the enlightenment: Classical liberalism - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Depends on whether you identify with the liberal philosophies of the 18th century or the 19th - the US Constitution having been ratified in 1788, and before that the Articles of Confederation in 1777. The earlier shaped the initial beginnings of America, and classical liberalism came to hold a place in US politics after that.

So the people that founded the USA were not classical liberals?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Liberals are not big government advocates.

Liberals aren't afraid of democracy, are you?

This one is, as were most all of the Founders. Or at least the ones who won the argument of the day

 

[hipeter924]

Political Liberty and The Right of Popular Rebellion Against Tyranny: It is a liberal concept. So is democracy as well as republicanism. Conservatives in the USA come out of the liberal tradition.

We are all liberals. We're liberals of different stripes.

Sane, rational, and reasonable people know tyranny does not exist in the USA today. Why? We have representative government with open and free elections. The ultimate power resides in the vote, not money or political power.

Only a small percentage of Americans want a government and corporate restrained America. Very few of them are in the GOP or Democratic Party.

A truly free America in terms of classical liberalism, would be one where most of these are the case:
- The government doesn't regulate most aspects of morality, including marriage.
- The governments focus is maintaing infrastructure and restraining corporations from establishing monopolies
- Taxes are voluntary and government services are on a use it you buy it principle.
- Everyone is taxed the same percentage.
- Property rights supersede utilitarian attitudes.
- Private healthcare, and no restrictions on operations like abortions, or stem-cell research. This goes with the government staying out of people's lives.
- Financial regulations are mostly removed, but there are no bailouts or subsidies. Just pure rise or sink capitalism.
- No government subsidies of any kind.
- Secular society where religion is a private sphere matter with no interference from the government.
- No welfare system, and obviously no food stamps.

That isn't the GOP platform, because it doesn't want small government any more than the Democratic Party. Without corporate donors and lobbyists, most US political parties wouldn't exist.

Most government legislation in America contains clauses that create subsidies or tax loopholes for a few corporations. This is not about building a free market, but using the government as a means to disadvantage other corporations or businesses.

There is no such thing as a 'small government party' in America, with the exception of the libertarian party. Only a few rebel factions exist in the two major parties - and like Ron Paul, they are ignored.

That's never been this country or any other.

The two in bold already do, at least according to the intent of the US Constitution - and don't forget the monopoly that the British Empire had on America (not just the tax and duties) before the war of independence.

ever read teh state constitution that preceded the national one? - Secular society where religion is a private sphere matter with no interference from the government.?

Which one, Massachusetts?

Article II. It is the right as well as the duty of all men in society, publicly and at stated seasons, to worship the Supreme Being, the great Creator and Preserver of the universe. And no subject shall be hurt, molested, or restrained, in his person, liberty, or estate, for worshipping God in the manner and season most agreeable to the dictates of his own conscience, or for his religious profession or sentiments, provided he doth not disturb the public peace or obstruct others in their religious worship.

Never said the founders agreed over everything. The US Constitution was ultimately a compromise of various religious and political factions, and one of those compromises was a secular government*. State constitutions after the Federal constitution was passed effectively became secondary, hence the situation today where US state constitutions can forbid atheists from holding public office, yet such restrictions are overturned by the Federal US constitution.

*Secular government is a loose term however, and doesn't have to mean absence of religion in politics, such as a separation of church and state.

 

[hipeter924]

Political Liberty and The Right of Popular Rebellion Against Tyranny: It is a liberal concept. So is democracy as well as republicanism. Conservatives in the USA come out of the liberal tradition.

We are all liberals. We're liberals of different stripes.

Sane, rational, and reasonable people know tyranny does not exist in the USA today. Why? We have representative government with open and free elections. The ultimate power resides in the vote, not money or political power.

Only a small percentage of Americans want a government and corporate restrained America. Very few of them are in the GOP or Democratic Party.

A truly free America in terms of classical liberalism, would be one where most of these are the case:
- The government doesn't regulate most aspects of morality, including marriage.
- The governments focus is maintaing infrastructure and restraining corporations from establishing monopolies
- Taxes are voluntary and government services are on a use it you buy it principle.
- Everyone is taxed the same percentage.
- Property rights supersede utilitarian attitudes.
- Private healthcare, and no restrictions on operations like abortions, or stem-cell research. This goes with the government staying out of people's lives.
- Financial regulations are mostly removed, but there are no bailouts or subsidies. Just pure rise or sink capitalism.
- No government subsidies of any kind.
- Secular society where religion is a private sphere matter with no interference from the government.
- No welfare system, and obviously no food stamps.

That isn't the GOP platform, because it doesn't want small government any more than the Democratic Party. Without corporate donors and lobbyists, most US political parties wouldn't exist.

Most government legislation in America contains clauses that create subsidies or tax loopholes for a few corporations. This is not about building a free market, but using the government as a means to disadvantage other corporations or businesses.

There is no such thing as a 'small government party' in America, with the exception of the libertarian party. Only a few rebel factions exist in the two major parties - and like Ron Paul, they are ignored.

Does the USA precede the advent of what we now describe as 'classical liberalism?'

hipeter924

'Classical liberalism' dates back to the 19th century, but liberalism as a political movement dates back to the enlightenment: Classical liberalism - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Depends on whether you identify with the liberal philosophies of the 18th century or the 19th - the US Constitution having been ratified in 1788, and before that the Articles of Confederation in 1777. The earlier shaped the initial beginnings of America, and classical liberalism came to hold a place in US politics after that.

So the people that founded the USA were not classical liberals?

I meant, it depends who you identify with, and whether you would consider the liberal philosophies of the 18th or 19th century (when 'classical liberalism' began) as more significant to the establishment of America.

 

[georgephillip]

Using democracy in this regard is the hallmark of a serious progressive authoritarian statist.

Give me an example of a serious progressive authoritarian statist from 20th century US History; would either Teddy Roosevelt or Eugene V. Debs qualify?

 

[hipeter924]

Liberals are not big government advocates.

Liberals aren't afraid of democracy, are you?

This one is, as were most all of the Founders. Or at least the ones who won the argument of the day

Have to agree, as the founders clearly spoke against the 'tyranny of majority', and established checks and balances within the political system to avert such a situation.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Political Liberty and The Right of Popular Rebellion Against Tyranny: It is a liberal concept. So is democracy as well as republicanism. Conservatives in the USA come out of the liberal tradition.

We are all liberals. We're liberals of different stripes.

Sane, rational, and reasonable people know tyranny does not exist in the USA today. Why? We have representative government with open and free elections. The ultimate power resides in the vote, not money or political power.

Only a small percentage of Americans want a government and corporate restrained America. Very few of them are in the GOP or Democratic Party.

A truly free America in terms of classical liberalism, would be one where most of these are the case:
- The government doesn't regulate most aspects of morality, including marriage.
- The governments focus is maintaing infrastructure and restraining corporations from establishing monopolies
- Taxes are voluntary and government services are on a use it you buy it principle.
- Everyone is taxed the same percentage.
- Property rights supersede utilitarian attitudes.
- Private healthcare, and no restrictions on operations like abortions, or stem-cell research. This goes with the government staying out of people's lives.
- Financial regulations are mostly removed, but there are no bailouts or subsidies. Just pure rise or sink capitalism.
- No government subsidies of any kind.
- Secular society where religion is a private sphere matter with no interference from the government.
- No welfare system, and obviously no food stamps.

That isn't the GOP platform, because it doesn't want small government any more than the Democratic Party. Without corporate donors and lobbyists, most US political parties wouldn't exist.

Most government legislation in America contains clauses that create subsidies or tax loopholes for a few corporations. This is not about building a free market, but using the government as a means to disadvantage other corporations or businesses.

There is no such thing as a 'small government party' in America, with the exception of the libertarian party. Only a few rebel factions exist in the two major parties - and like Ron Paul, they are ignored.

That's never been this country or any other.

The two in bold already do, at least according to the intent of the US Constitution - and don't forget the monopoly that the British Empire had on America (not just the tax and duties) before the war of independence.

ever read teh state constitution that preceded the national one? - Secular society where religion is a private sphere matter with no interference from the government.?

Which one, Massachusetts?

Article II. It is the right as well as the duty of all men in society, publicly and at stated seasons, to worship the Supreme Being, the great Creator and Preserver of the universe. And no subject shall be hurt, molested, or restrained, in his person, liberty, or estate, for worshipping God in the manner and season most agreeable to the dictates of his own conscience, or for his religious profession or sentiments, provided he doth not disturb the public peace or obstruct others in their religious worship.

Never said the founders agreed over everything. The US Constitution was ultimately a compromise of various religious and political factions, and one of those compromises was a secular government*. State constitutions after the Federal constitution was passed effectively became secondary, hence the situation today where US state constitutions can forbid atheists from holding public office, yet such restrictions are overturned by the Federal US constitution.

*Secular government is a loose term however, and doesn't have to mean absence of religion in politics, such as a separation of church and state.

Massachusetts Constitution. First one and used as a model for national one. It provided for :

Article III. [As the happiness of a people, and the good order and preservation of civil government, essentially depend upon piety, religion and morality; and as these cannot be generally diffused through a community, but by the institution of the public worship of God, and of public instructions in piety, religion and morality: Therefore, to promote their happiness and to secure the good order and preservation of their government, the people of this commonwealth have a right to invest their legislature with power to authorize and require, and the legislature shall, from time to time, authorize and require, the several towns, parishes, precincts, and other bodies politic, or religious societies, to make suitable provision, at their own expense, for the institution of the public worship of God, and for the support and maintenance of public Protestant teachers of piety, religion and morality, in all cases where such provision shall not be made voluntarily.
Constitution of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts​

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Political Liberty and The Right of Popular Rebellion Against Tyranny: It is a liberal concept. So is democracy as well as republicanism. Conservatives in the USA come out of the liberal tradition.

We are all liberals. We're liberals of different stripes.

Sane, rational, and reasonable people know tyranny does not exist in the USA today. Why? We have representative government with open and free elections. The ultimate power resides in the vote, not money or political power.

Only a small percentage of Americans want a government and corporate restrained America. Very few of them are in the GOP or Democratic Party.

A truly free America in terms of classical liberalism, would be one where most of these are the case:
- The government doesn't regulate most aspects of morality, including marriage.
- The governments focus is maintaing infrastructure and restraining corporations from establishing monopolies
- Taxes are voluntary and government services are on a use it you buy it principle.
- Everyone is taxed the same percentage.
- Property rights supersede utilitarian attitudes.
- Private healthcare, and no restrictions on operations like abortions, or stem-cell research. This goes with the government staying out of people's lives.
- Financial regulations are mostly removed, but there are no bailouts or subsidies. Just pure rise or sink capitalism.
- No government subsidies of any kind.
- Secular society where religion is a private sphere matter with no interference from the government.
- No welfare system, and obviously no food stamps.

That isn't the GOP platform, because it doesn't want small government any more than the Democratic Party. Without corporate donors and lobbyists, most US political parties wouldn't exist.

Most government legislation in America contains clauses that create subsidies or tax loopholes for a few corporations. This is not about building a free market, but using the government as a means to disadvantage other corporations or businesses.

There is no such thing as a 'small government party' in America, with the exception of the libertarian party. Only a few rebel factions exist in the two major parties - and like Ron Paul, they are ignored.

Does the USA precede the advent of what we now describe as 'classical liberalism?'

hipeter924

'Classical liberalism' dates back to the 19th century, but liberalism as a political movement dates back to the enlightenment: Classical liberalism - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Depends on whether you identify with the liberal philosophies of the 18th century or the 19th - the US Constitution having been ratified in 1788, and before that the Articles of Confederation in 1777. The earlier shaped the initial beginnings of America, and classical liberalism came to hold a place in US politics after that.

So the people that founded the USA were not classical liberals?

I meant, it depends who you identify with, and whether you would consider the liberal philosophies of the 18th or 19th century (when 'classical liberalism' began) as more significant to the establishment of America.

If Classical Liberalism didn't exist before the founding then the founders could not have been influenced by classical liberalism