Comments on: Traitors to the American Revolution

By: JoeJones

JoeJones — Sun, 11 Dec 2011 14:23:34 +0000

further, the current federal govt is doing exactly as its creators wanted–it has decreased democracy and preserved (and even increased) wealth inequality by removing the people from the process of governance. That is exactly what has happened, and the larger and more centralized the fed govt becomes, the more it becomes what Madison et al, visualized. The govt is not further from what Madison et al wanted, but instead it is getting closer. As the nation grows larger and more diverse, it is becoming more factionalized, which decreases democracy, which is exactly what they wanted.

By: JoeJones

JoeJones — Sun, 11 Dec 2011 14:14:35 +0000

ok, allow me to elaborate. The PROBLEM madison et al wanted to solve was what they called “an excess of democracy,” to quote founding “father” Elbridge Gerry. Under the Articles, the working class was taking control of their own government by using democracy. The rich people like madison, washington etc etc, did not like all that democracy. So they implemented a COUP, a takeover. That coup was accomplished by installing our current federal govt.

How they controlled america was explained by Madison in the federal papers and in a letter to jefferson. Madison wrote jefferson that the way to rule america was via the ‘divide et impera’ maxim–divide and rule.

In the federalist papers, madison wrote that the way to do this was to decrease the unity of the voters. Madison said that his system would prevent the voters from uniting and discovering their common interest. Madison wrote that his primary goal was to preserve wealth inequality. Madison wrote that he would do this by creating larger voting districts, federal voting districts. Madison wrote that these enlarged federal districts would create more factions in each district, thus preventing the people from uniting and using the govt against the rich people. Madison wrote that this new federal govt, with its enlarged voting districts, its checks and balances, its seperation of powers, etc would “protect the minority of the opulent against the majority.”

I suuuure hope that was clear enough for you.

By: klarg

klarg — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 22:15:28 +0000

Before wagging your tongues any further about the 10th amendment and the evils of a strong federal government you might take the time to read the "Federalist Papers" written by Alexander Hamilton and his allies. (Of course you know Alexander Hamilton was one of the "founding fathers.") How do you square your revisionist version of history with the federalism of many of the founding fathers?

By: 10th Amendment 101: Essential Reading for Tenthers | California Tenth Amendment Center

Wed, 17 Feb 2010 22:03:09 +0000

[...] Traitors to the American Revolution [...]

By: Terry Morris

Terry Morris — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 15:07:14 +0000

What are you talking about?! Everyone who's anyone knows that we must protect the children from the slimeballs who would fill their impressionable public school educated heads with all this nonsense about "freedom," "liberty," "local self-government," "independency," "personal responsibility," and anything else that doesn't conform to the dominant herd, group-think, the-whole-is-greater-than-the-sum-of-its-parts mentality pervasive in our society. If the constitution doesn't say anything about the federal government's power to establish "uniform rules for child indoctrination" then it damn sure ought to.

But you know how it is, Michael, when people start to overheat, they invent … air-conditioning.

By: Terry Morris

Terry Morris — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 14:54:13 +0000

You'll have to forgive me, Cryofan, but I fail to see your point. I don't think anyone is arguing that the federal constitution did not create a powerful central government as intended by the framers. All that is really said here, if I may cut a bit more to the chase, is that it (the central authority) has, as predicted by the anti-federalists, sucked the great mass of governmental power into its ever-growing vortex. In other words, that the central government has greatly exceeded its constituted authority in direct violation of both the spirit and the letter of the U.S. Constitution.

By: cryofan

cryofan — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 09:23:31 +0000

actually, the founders DID want a centralized federal govt because that would decrease democracy. Recall that the constitution was a replacement for the articles of confederation, which was NOT a centralized govt.

The founders went with the present form of federalist, check and balances, presidential republic because they wanted enlarged voting districts. The father of the constitution, james madison, said that enlarged voting districts would increase the number of factions in the districts, which would decrease voter unity so that the voters could not unite and discover their common interest and then use the power of govt against the rich and powerful.

Madison said that the primary purpose of his form of centralized govt was to preserve the wealth of the rich and that he wanted a large, centralized govt that was not controllable by the people so that he could protect the wealthy people from the masses.

Read the recent essays and books by Dr Woody Holton (google holton and "an excess of democracy")

By: MichaelBoldin

MichaelBoldin — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 21:11:04 +0000

It sure is, Rich! I think back to even just 10 years ago, and how could the average person find such information? They couldn't. And I'm sure that's why we hear all the fear-mongering about how government needs to "protect the children" by regulating the internet. Well, they'll say by keeping it "free" or "neutral" – but the long-term reality will be that it will be less and less free…

By: Rich

Rich — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 20:39:25 +0000

What an excellent article! The Internet is the sword of light that pierces the heart of darkness. Protect it's freedom.

By: A_pen

A_pen — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 15:16:31 +0000

In the dark the federalists have become communists, education has been subverted to the cause and the monopoly on power has now reached a point it is unable to remain hidden so it is thrust into the light as "hope & change" and peddled to the historically ignorant educated masses. How many of the people can be fooled all of the time?