Our founding fathers were not conservative

[Flopper]

In 1791 the Federal government socialized healthcare insurance imposing a tax that was withheld from the sailor’s pay to support the Marine Hospital Service offering free healthcare to merchant seaman.

Congress also approve the founding of the First Bank of the United States 20% owned by the government which competed with local commercial banks.

Madison was pushing for establishing a national brewery which would compete with commercial brewers.

The founding fathers were afraid of a democracy. Thomas Jefferson said "A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine." You will not find the word democracy or democratic anywhere in the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence.

There is no doubt that the Tea Party would consider the founders liberals and probably Marxist.


First Bank of the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Our Founding Father's Socialized Healthcare System - Paul J. O'Rourke - Open Salon

 

[JakeStarkey]

They weren't?

 

[Liability]

* * * *

There is no doubt that the Tea Party would consider the founders liberals and probably Marxist.

* * * *

Actually, there is no doubt at all that you are flatly wrong.

 

[Intense]

* * * *

There is no doubt that the Tea Party would consider the founders liberals and probably Marxist.

* * * *

Actually, there is no doubt at all that you are flatly wrong.

The shock that Marxism is totalitarian, is just too much for them to handle.

 

[mdn2000]

To equate slavery as worst than feudalism is to show complete ignorance and in the context of this thread its purpose is politics. Anarchist and Marxist repeat this premise to portray the USA as a nation not worthy of being. This mantra is repeatedly chanted by the dirt bag Chomsky and Chomsky's worshipers. In one short sentence of ugliness those of the anarchist/marxist ideology distort history for the purpose of winning peoples minds over to the Marxist ideology. How could anyone ever be a part of a nation built on the ugliness of slavery.

Jefferson was instrumental to ending slavery in the USA.

If I had the choice of being a slave or a peasant in France under the tyrannical rule of a King the choice is simply, I would wish to be Jefferson's slave.

Jefferson's slaves never knew famine, never had a want for food, never longed for a morsel of meat, peasants in France knew famine, peasants in France would go months without meat. Peasants in France mixed sawdust with flour in order to have bread, peasants in France worked the entire year to maybe have enough food to feed their children.

Jefferson's slaves were better off than the peasants in Colonial America, they were better clothed, they were better educated as well as better fed. Jefferson's slaves were given one chicken a week, many peasants across the world ate one chicken a year, during Christmas, a rare treat.

To suggest that Jefferson should of turned slaves loose, without the means to be self-sufficient, in a world where they would be Lambs amongst Wolves shows nothing less than ignorance of history and the culture of the world during those times.

The United States of America, is the best of all nations, for we are the people of all nations, and our government it the culmination of not merely the founding fathers, for men like John Adams studied all the great books written and knew the history of all the nations before us. Our nation is built on all the great principles and morals of philosophers and great thinkers, for our founders were men of great wisdom and of an education unequaled in their time.

That we are founded on morals and principles that ended slavery is what we are most proud of.

Answers.com - What was Thomas Jefferson's exact quote when he compared slavery to a wolf held back by its ears

"I can say with conscious truth that there is not a man on earth who would sacrifice more than I would, to relieve us from this heavy reproach [slavery], in any practicable way. the cession of that kind of property, for so it is misnamed, is a bagatelle [possession] which would not cost me in a second thought, if, in that way, a general emancipation and expatriation could be effected: and, gradually, and with due sacrifices, I think it might be. but, as it is, we have the wolf by the ear, and we can neither hold him, nor safely let him go. justice is in one scale, and self-preservation in the other"

Read more: Answers.com - What was Thomas Jefferson's exact quote when he compared slavery to a wolf held back by its ears

 

[JakeStarkey]

The point that social democratic institutions are not Marxist is hard for the far right wackloons to grasp because of their lack of understanding of basic definitions.

You revisionists are entitled to your own opinions but not to your own reality or set of definitions.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

In 1791 the Federal government socialized healthcare insurance imposing a tax that was withheld from the sailor’s pay to support the Marine Hospital Service offering free healthcare to merchant seaman.

Congress also approve the founding of the First Bank of the United States 20% owned by the government which competed with local commercial banks.

Madison was pushing for establishing a national brewery which would compete with commercial brewers.

The founding fathers were afraid of a democracy. Thomas Jefferson said "A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine." You will not find the word democracy or democratic anywhere in the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence.

There is no doubt that the Tea Party would consider the founders liberals and probably Marxist.


First Bank of the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Our Founding Father's Socialized Healthcare System - Paul J. O'Rourke - Open Salon

From your last link

Our Founders realized that a healthy work force was essential to our economic health and growth. It was for this reason that, in July of 1798, Congress passed, and President John Adams signed into law an act “For the Relief of Sick and Disabled Seamen,” establishing the Marine Hospital Service.

This Federal government socialized healthcare insurance was funded by a tax that was withheld from the sailor’s pay, and then turned over to the government by the ship’s owner.




If this is even true this is equal to the VA not socialism. dDo you have any gov. links beside the word of another socialist progressive?

 

[Agit8r]

"Do you agree with them (and with me) that too much centralization of power in the Federal Government is a dangerous thing and worthy of being avoided?"

yes, of course. When i speak of modern conservatism, i am speaking of the mainstream of that movement. If there are some on the fringes of what is called "conservatism" that feared the power that George W. Bush wielded in his first term, that does not disprove what i said. I DID NOT say that our founders were in line with modern "liberalism"/"progressivism." It also means very little that they did not because MOST LIBERALS MAKE NO PRETENSE that they are originalists.

However, MOST CONSERVATIVES do believe that they embody the very same ideals as our founding fathers, and they are wrong. That is the point i was making; that most conservatives are either ignorant or phonies

 

[JakeStarkey]

<snip> ]

Let's back up here, and point out who here has said that American slavery means that America should never have existed. That is one of the more moronic statements of the day, even considering Righteous1's earlier rantings.

No one here ever said or insinuated such a thing. You are guilty of false imputation, and very politely, fuck you for doing it.

I would suggest that America deserves to exist because it ended the foul institution.

And you dare to defend African American slavery as somehow a good institution?

Again, fuck you.

 

[mdn2000]

<snip> ]

Let's back up here, and point out who here has said that American slavery means that America should never have existed. That is one of the more moronic statements of the day, even considering Righteous1's earlier rantings.

No one here ever said or insinuated such a thing. You are guilty of false imputation, and very politely, fuck you for doing it.

I would suggest that America deserves to exist because it ended the foul institution.

And you dare to defend African American slavery as somehow a good institution?

Again, fuck you.

Are you sure your talking to me because you have stated I said things I did not.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

<snip> ]

Let's back up here, and point out who here has said that American slavery means that America should never have existed. That is one of the more moronic statements of the day, even considering Righteous1's earlier rantings.

No one here ever said or insinuated such a thing. You are guilty of false imputation, and very politely, fuck you for doing it.

I would suggest that America deserves to exist because it ended the foul institution.

And you dare to defend African American slavery as somehow a good institution?

Again, fuck you.

I am glad that you are showing just how dishonest you are.

 

[JakeStarkey]

<snip> ]

Let's back up here, and point out who here has said that American slavery means that America should never have existed. That is one of the more moronic statements of the day, even considering Righteous1's earlier rantings.

No one here ever said or insinuated such a thing. You are guilty of false imputation, and very politely, fuck you for doing it.

I would suggest that America deserves to exist because it ended the foul institution.

And you dare to defend African American slavery as somehow a good institution?

Again, fuck you.

Are you sure your talking to me because you have stated I said things I did not.

You opened with the comment, "To equate slavery as worst than feudalism is to show complete ignorance and in the context of this thread its purpose is politics. Anarchist and Marxist repeat this premise to portray the USA as a nation not worthy of being."

Your premise is false in the context of the discussion.

Fuck you if you don't like being called on it.

 

[mdn2000]

<snip> ]

Let's back up here, and point out who here has said that American slavery means that America should never have existed. That is one of the more moronic statements of the day, even considering Righteous1's earlier rantings.

No one here ever said or insinuated such a thing. You are guilty of false imputation, and very politely, fuck you for doing it.

I would suggest that America deserves to exist because it ended the foul institution.

And you dare to defend African American slavery as somehow a good institution?

Again, fuck you.

I never posted what you attribute to me, how about a quote before the insults or have I left you with no basis for your position.

You are guilty of false imputation, typical Anarchist/Marxist/Chomsky tactic, to accuse the other of what yourself are in the process of doing.

Then to end your hateful-rage inspired attack by attributing a premise I did not state is again exactly what an Anarchist/Marxist/Chomsky does.

I can think of no better example of the weak, the ignorant, the hateful, that have not a chance against the strength of conservatism.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Let's back up here, and point out who here has said that American slavery means that America should never have existed. That is one of the more moronic statements of the day, even considering Righteous1's earlier rantings.

No one here ever said or insinuated such a thing. You are guilty of false imputation, and very politely, fuck you for doing it.

I would suggest that America deserves to exist because it ended the foul institution.

And you dare to defend African American slavery as somehow a good institution?

Again, fuck you.

Are you sure your talking to me because you have stated I said things I did not.

You opened with the comment, "To equate slavery as worst than feudalism is to show complete ignorance and in the context of this thread its purpose is politics. Anarchist and Marxist repeat this premise to portray the USA as a nation not worthy of being."

Your premise is false in the context of the discussion.

Fuck you if you don't like being called on it.

You're just another lying troll that has been busted for being dishonest.

 

[Intense]

The point that social democratic institutions are not Marxist is hard for the far right wackloons to grasp because of their lack of understanding of basic definitions.

You revisionists are entitled to your own opinions but not to your own reality or set of definitions.

Yes Comrade... you are so right.... you have never been more right......


In Marxist theory, the proletariat is the class of a capitalist society that does not have ownership of the means of production and whose only means of subsistence is to sell their labour power[1] for a wage or salary. Proletarians are wage-workers, while some refer to those who receive salaries as the salariat. For Marx, however, wage labour may involve getting a salary rather than a wage per se. Marxism sees the proletariat and bourgeoisie (capitalist class) as occupying conflicting positions, since workers automatically wish their wages to be as high as possible, while owners and their proxies wish for wages (costs) to be as low as possible.

In Marxist theory, the borders between the proletariat and some layers of the petite bourgeoisie, who rely primarily but not exclusively on self-employment at an income no different from an ordinary wage or below it; and the lumpen proletariat, who are not in legal employment; are not necessarily well defined. Intermediate positions are possible, where some wage-labor for an employer combines with self-employment. While class belonging is often hard to determine in the case of each individual person, from the standpoint of society as a whole, taken in its movement (i.e. history), the class divisions are incontestable; the easiest proof of their existence is the class struggle - strikes, for instance. While an employee may be subjectively unsure of his class belonging, when his workmates come out on strike he is objectively forced to follow one class (his workmates, i.e. the proletariat) over the other (management, i.e. the bourgeoisie). Marx makes a clear distinction between proletariat as salaried workers, which he sees a progressive class, and Lumpenproletariat, "rag-proletariat", the poorest and outcasts of the society, such as beggars, tricksters, entertainers, buskers, criminals and prostitutes, which he considers a retrograde class.[2][3] Socialist parties have often struggled over the question of whether they should seek to organize and represent all the lower classes, or just the wage-earning proletariat.

According to Marxism, capitalism is a system based on the exploitation of the proletariat by the bourgeoisie. This exploitation takes place as follows: the workers, who own no means of production of their own, must use the means of production that are property of others in order to produce, and, consequently, earn their living. Instead of hiring those means of production, they themselves get hired by capitalists and work for them, producing goods or services. These goods or services become the property of the capitalist, who sells them at the market.

Proletariat - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[JakeStarkey]

<snip> ]

Let's back up here, and point out who here has said that American slavery means that America should never have existed. That is one of the more moronic statements of the day, even considering Righteous1's earlier rantings.

No one here ever said or insinuated such a thing. You are guilty of false imputation, and very politely, fuck you for doing it.

I would suggest that America deserves to exist because it ended the foul institution.

And you dare to defend African American slavery as somehow a good institution?

Again, fuck you.

I never posted what you attribute to me, how about a quote before the insults or have I left you with no basis for your position.

You are guilty of false imputation, typical Anarchist/Marxist/Chomsky tactic, to accuse the other of what yourself are in the process of doing.

Then to end your hateful-rage inspired attack by attributing a premise I did not state is again exactly what an Anarchist/Marxist/Chomsky does.

I can think of no better example of the weak, the ignorant, the hateful, that have not a chance against the strength of conservatism.

I have already posted your false imputation. Far right Saul-Alinksy type arguers use the false Marxist/Anarchist naming to hide what they did.

You made the false imputation, and you try to impugn me. Fuck you if you don't like being called on it. Fuck you.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I understand that the Left here often gets things wrong and slants their points, but too many of you far right wackloons outright lie. I will call you meatheads out every time you do it.

 

[mdn2000]

Let's back up here, and point out who here has said that American slavery means that America should never have existed. That is one of the more moronic statements of the day, even considering Righteous1's earlier rantings.

No one here ever said or insinuated such a thing. You are guilty of false imputation, and very politely, fuck you for doing it.

I would suggest that America deserves to exist because it ended the foul institution.

And you dare to defend African American slavery as somehow a good institution?

Again, fuck you.

Are you sure your talking to me because you have stated I said things I did not.

You opened with the comment, "To equate slavery as worst than feudalism is to show complete ignorance and in the context of this thread its purpose is politics. Anarchist and Marxist repeat this premise to portray the USA as a nation not worthy of being."

Your premise is false in the context of the discussion.

Fuck you if you don't like being called on it.

First off, the statement is not a premise but fact. Second that you are so quick to run off with extreme insults with vulgar language shows you must have your tongue licking the fecal matter from chomsky's asshole, how filth like you can exist outside of a cesspool is an example of the imperfection of man as well as the depravity of intellect that has plagued society through the ages. Your ideas are weak and cannot stand up to the strength of our founding, your ideas can only be posted anonymous on a message board or said in the secret of a septic tank.

I will wipe you from the bottom of my boots, for I feel like I just stepped in dog shit.

 

[Intense]

Let's back up here, and point out who here has said that American slavery means that America should never have existed. That is one of the more moronic statements of the day, even considering Righteous1's earlier rantings.

No one here ever said or insinuated such a thing. You are guilty of false imputation, and very politely, fuck you for doing it.

I would suggest that America deserves to exist because it ended the foul institution.

And you dare to defend African American slavery as somehow a good institution?

Again, fuck you.

Are you sure your talking to me because you have stated I said things I did not.

You opened with the comment, "To equate slavery as worst than feudalism is to show complete ignorance and in the context of this thread its purpose is politics. Anarchist and Marxist repeat this premise to portray the USA as a nation not worthy of being."

Your premise is false in the context of the discussion.

Fuck you if you don't like being called on it.

You are arguing over different brands of totalitarianism as if it matters to a corpse who beat it to death.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I recognize a false imputation, which invalidates your premise from the get go. I could care less about your concern for my "vulgar language," because, kid, I am far more concerned with your distortion of historical reality and your false interpretation of it. Your type of argumentation is absolute filth, and those who so argue that American Negro slavery was somehow decent, are filth who are not American in hope and decency.

Tough luck, MDN. Don't dare think that I will tolerate anyone who falsely imputes filth to me. You fool.