Let's start with some readings of the Declaration of Independence.
They promised us another American Revolution. They neglected to mention that they were planning on taking the position of King George and the redcoats.
Let's start with some readings of the Declaration of Independence.
They promised us another American Revolution. They neglected to mention that they were planning on taking the position of King George and the redcoats.
No, they didn't neglect to mention it at all: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/oct/16/project-2025...
“We are in the process of the second American Revolution, which will remain bloodless if the left allows it to be.”
Almost all of history's greatest, most-destructive conspiracies were not concealed in smoke-filled rooms, they were published and advertised to great fanfare. This one included.
I didn't say the intentions weren't plain as day for anyone not stuck in the Fraudster in Chief's reality distortion field. Just that they abused the reference to the history without actually owning up to where in the analogy their agenda sits. Lawless gangs of soldiers terrorizing American cities for political purposes is straight out of the Revolution.
And yeah "bloodless, if the left allows it". It's always projection and gaslighting with these fascists. "Stop hitting yourself. Stop hitting yourself. Look what you made me do."
(see also "TDS" to describe anybody not in the Fraudster in Chief's reality distortion field)
Yup. Millions happily voted for Project 2025. It reminds me of the people who railed against Obamacare but were horrified ending it would also effect their Affordable Care Act plans.
> Almost all of history's greatest, most-destructive conspiracies were not concealed in smoke-filled rooms, they were published and advertised to great fanfare. This one included.
I agree, and I've always found it kind of amusing. There is a conspiracy of elites that are actively trying to bring you down to enrich themselves, and they exert absurd amounts of control on the government, tax policy, and actively use their platform to move public opinion in their favor.
We call that group of elites "billionaires", and it's not really even hidden. Elon Musk was the CEO of like five companies while still heading a government "department", but for some reason Alex Jones and Paul Joseph Watson aren't going on long tirades about how utterly inappropriate that is. Instead they go on about "satanists" and "child sacrifices" and then their listeners will replace those with "Jews".
It's always the Declaration and never the Constitution.
I suppose getting to Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3 is a disappointing early start to what is meant to be a uniting and patriotic activity.
Ideals are much more inspiring than a specific attempt at implementation, which if we're being honest with ourselves as systems engineers, has failed pretty spectacularly in a few ways.
these truths ... all men* are created equal
*white male landowner
That the founders were able to articulate lofty ideals while steeped in being oppressors in multiple ways isn't the condemnation you seem to think it is. Rather it's more commendable that they were able to be so forward thinking, as people with power benefiting from the society they were in. Our modern interpretation of that sentence would most certainly have shocked many of the people who supported it in the context of the time, and yet they were able to draw a rough sketch that we are still appealing to eight generations later as a beacon of progress!
Of course it is important to guard against those who would dredge up that historic context as what "the founders intended" to try and drag us back there, on some rosy vision of the past where all of the problems seem quaint (as they've been addressed in the current day).
yeah, no
a lofty ideal is worthless if you're not actually striving to put it into practice, which they did not
They did strive to put it in practice, in the societal context of their time.
You seem to be missing that progress is a gradual process of painstaking change. Presumably you're looking at what we currently have, thinking its manifestly obvious, and taking it for granted. But to me, this kind of thinking actually contributes to sliding backwards.
thanks, but I've read history too. The "revolution" (which despite the name wasn't much of a revolution since it maintained much of the social structure that came before it) was the opportunity to make some great leaps of progress, which the founders, is their now revered wisdom, failed to do. These did eventually come but some of them only at great expense and activism (abolition movement, workers progressive movement, suffrage movement, civil right movement).
Voting rights in the new US were much the same as those in British Empire they broke away from, where white adult landowning males had been able to vote for some time.
As for slavery, most countries still allowed it, but abolishing it, while admittedly a big step forward, would still have been possible within the context of the time, and one of the strides of progress one would expect from people who declare independence on the basis of "all men being created equal". Some States began to abolish it shortly afterwards, and France did so with its own actual revolution (with its own set of problems).
You might be comfortable with it all, but I expect much more from the founders than some nice words on a page.
Ironically, the fundamental basis for the revolution was "taxation without representation", which we _still_ have in the United States today (i.e., PR).