Thread: Are We Incrementally Losing Our Freedom?

Originally Posted by MistressNomad

Do you really think the Founding Fathers were gods? . . . I'm starting to worry that the religious right is turning the Founding Fathers into a religion. Man, of all the things we don't need in this country...

They've already done it, MistressNomad. It accounts for much of what you're reading here.

B-T-W, here's another one of those passages from the declaration that takes the starch out of "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness:"

"He [George III] . . . has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions."

So now all "men are created equal" except black men, all women and all of the native inhabitants of the continent.

Jefferson would go on to encourage a plan for the dispossession of native peoples in what would become Illinois that involved addicting them to alchohol, crushing them with debt and using that to take their land.

Unfortunately, it's difficult to teach history to people who think the Founders were demigods (a title those Founders, many of whom were skeptical of organized religion [Adams], deistic [Washington, Jefferson, Franklin] and even atheist [Paine] actually rejected out of hand), especially when make-believe has replaced the actual study of history.

More than anything else, what has been lost is the idea that history, properly done, should be neutral and fact-based.

There is, of course, a word for faith-based history: propaganda. Consider what the Texas School Board recently did.

I remember when I was in AP US history in high school, I had a very good teacher. The kinda you expect to be a very good teacher, just looking at him - tall, grey, bearded, with piercing eyes and the longest tenure of anyone working in the school.

We had a standard assigned textbook from the AP board, which wasn't *that* bad all things considered, but it did tend to gloss over any failings of the American government - especially the very early government - in favor of a view of the Founding Fathers are demigods and the Constitution as the new American Bible.

It wasn't anywhere near as bad as some textbooks I'd had, but the undertone was definitely there.

I remember my teacher standing at the front of the class, looking very grave, and saying something to this effect:

"My job is to teach you comprehensively about American history. So with that in mind, I'm going to show you something. Before I do, I need your word - all of you - that you won't show this to your parents or other teachers. I could get in very big trouble for this. But this textbook doesn't always allow me to do my job."

Of course we were all very on edge. This had to be something serious right?

He passed out a new textbook. I opened it, not sure what to expect, but expecting something truly radical.

That's not what it was. It was just an account of American history. Probably the least biased one I'd ever read, in that there was absolutely no "gushy" language in it, which I'd come to expect from American history textbooks. It wasn't telling me to worship the Founders. It was just telling me what they did.

All of it. The good, the bad, the ugly, and the incredible. Everything from their sacrifice to their moral failings.

And the idea that my teacher could have gotten fired for showing us the truth, in a Northern state no less, still blows my mind to this day.

It's been a few years since then. They forced him to retire this year, I believe. I wonder why. I wonder if they suspected something.

Originally Posted by MistressNomad

I'm starting to worry that the religious right is turning the Founding Fathers into a religion. Man, of all the things we don't need in this country...

Very good point, as your posts always are MistressNomad, though I don't know who the religious right are or conservatives, liberals, radicals, socialists, etc. I've always suspicioned that they are these anonymous groups that individuals paint a positive or negative picture of for their own purpose. Kind of what a particular ideology did about 70 years ago in another country with Jews.

The founding fathers as they are termed, despite having very varied opinions about a host of things, would I am sure would shutter at the thought suggested.

As far as government being run by devils, probably a tongue in cheek comment, meaning in more exact terms....

The essence of Government is power; and power, lodged as it must be in human hands, will ever be liable to abuse.
James Madison

=MistressNomad;568873]Do you really think the Founding Fathers were gods?

I dont ever recall saying they were gods, and no I dont.

They were brilliant men. But what made them so brilliant was that they understood how human they were. That's why they built the government to be "run by devils" - because they feared that "devil" within themselves.

It wasnt so much that they understood how human they were, but that they understood how humans are. You are exactly right about the reason they insituted our government, and gave it limited powers. Because they feared the devil within every human. And they knew as soon as people realized that they could vote for their own aggrandizment(entitlements), our limited government is doomed. Seems to me that we are well on our way there.

The thing that made them brilliant was their willingness to admit how imperfect they were. They were just men, with all the normal flaws and shortcomings that humans tend to have. They were just sufficiently smart that they could envision a world where people had the intellectual honesty to admit it - a world which, 234 years later, still hasn't come. They suspected it wouldn't.

You mean humility? Can we find the same humility today in government, which ever party is in power feels they have the only valid argument and force it onto the minority. When was the last time you ever heard a politician say they dont know, or that they dont think they are worthy of the position they were put into?

So what if the Declaration was propoganda? You see propaganda on TV, telling you not to drink and drive. Propaganda is everywhere, good and bad both. It's a perfectly good strategy in conflict, both to rouse your enemy and rally your troops.

I didnt say propaganda doesnt exist, I said the DOI wasnt propaganda, now if you want to talk about Thomas Paine, propaganda might come up. Those tv ads you mention, would they still be put out if they knew it meant them hanging? I dont think many today have the same courage or conviction of their beliefs.

I'm tired of people insinuating that anything less than borderline worshipping is said about the Founding Fathers, the person must be lying or a jerk.

Who is worshipping the founders? I am grateful to our founders for forming this wonderful country and think they deserve the credit they are due. I dont think your lying, or a jerk, just wrong. Rest assured though that is just MO, so it doesnt mean much.

I'm starting to worry that the religious right is turning the Founding Fathers into a religion. Man, of all the things we don't need in this country...

Their not, but freedom of religion allows them to do so, if they so wish. If there is a scary religion emerging it would be enviromentalism, imo.

hrdblues - I think the religious right is dead easy to identify, because they identify themselves. They go by all kinds of names - "Moral Majority," anyone? For some reason in the last 20 or 30 years, extreme Christian views and Republicanism (as is, to me, completely distinct and separate from conservatism) have been associated together, and there are any number of people who identify themselves that way.

So please don't imply that I'm looking for the equivalent of a Nazi Germany whipping dog. I am not a bigot conflating some imaginary populace. I am identifying a populace which actually exists, and makes great efforts to insist that they exist.

These are also the people I see peddling revisionist history. Look at what Texas just did. They threw out non-Christian Thomas Jefferson in favor of Reagan, pro-McCarthy rhetoric, and even John Calvin, a FRENCH theologian.

They'd rather have non-Americans in the history books than than a non-religious American.

Jasongreat - Why wasn't it propaganda? What is the reason? And if they thought it would achieve their goals and rally the people to be cohesive, why wouldn't they risk their lives for it?

It sounds like you just don't like the word propaganda...

Originally Posted by BobKincaid

and even atheist [Paine]

Paine was no atheist, he was a diest, read his The Age of Reason if you dont believe me. He was outspoken against the bible, which was the main reason a few of the founders turned on him, like Sam Adams, which is where alot of this atheist talk started. But he believed in a diety, ie diest.

According to Ben Frankilin in a letter to a french man looking to come here to live, you can find mechanics, and merchants, and farmers and such as one would find in a growing nation, the one thing he said you wouldnt find is an atheist.

Originally Posted by BobKincaid

More than anything else, what has been lost is the idea that history, properly done, should be neutral and fact-based.

There is, of course, a word for faith-based history: propaganda. Consider what the Texas School Board recently did.

I am not aware of a country where history that is being taught at schools is not mixed with propaganda.
I think the reasoning is to build national identity and pride, as it's quite successful at it.

At first or second grade I asked why all the wars we lost are termed invasions, while all the wars we won were liberations. Neither my parents nor my teacher answered that. I consider this my first accomplishment in logic.

In college I had a roommate who was historian and had taught few years in school before going to college. He told me directly that the history that is taught in schools is mandated to be propaganda and it's always been like that. The more objective stuff comes only in the higher education.

Originally Posted by Jasongreat

But [Paine] believed in a diety, ie diest.

What did he believe in?

Mistress...I wasn't implying that you were doing anything of the sort...I want you to be clear on that...not my style, not my nature.

I was commenting on a few points within your post, most of which supported what you said, with a Madison quote that paralleled the issue.

Concerning group identification, that is always pretty subjective, whether it be from someone on the outside looking in, or someone being a self-appointed spokesman for a group...most often, they are speaking for themselves and hoping to imply the are speaking for many so their point is more validated...again, whoever the many may be...that's all I was saying...no implication on you or trying to interpret your words for you...I enjoy your take on things for the most part. Okay?

All good. I just don't think we can rule that out, that these groups of people do exist in cohesive forms, although it is true that many people are unfairly associated with groups to which they don't belong.

There are people who explicity which to be associated with these groups - a lot of people enjoy being part of a group, even if it's one that has questionable ethos.