Posts Tagged With: Thomas Jefferson

The Founders’ Vision for America’s Prosperity

“Peace, Commerce, and Honest Friendship with All Nations — Entangling Alliances with None.” – Thomas Jefferson

The founders of the United Sates were very astute in understanding the dangers of “entangling alliances” with other nations. As W. Cleon Skousen wrote in The 5000 Year Leap:

“This was the Founders’ doctrine of ‘separatism.’ This was far different from the modern term of ‘isolationism.’…[The Founders] desired to cultivate a wholesome relationship with all nations, but wished to remain aloof from sectional quarrels and international disputes.”

We’ve discussed the great costs the United Sates has paid for deviating from these principles. Many of the wars of the 20th and 21st Centuries were unnecessary or avoidable. Truly, “No war is inevitable until it has begun,” as Patrick J. Buchanan wrote. So indoctrinated we have become concerning the “necessity” of wars, we fear to question them and our actions in them. To this day, do not dare question the bombing of civilians in the World War II, because it was a “good” war. Nor question if there was a better way to end slavery than the loss of hundreds of thousands of Americans in the Civil War.

There are just wars, but there are no good wars.

The Founders also warned of foreign influence on our government. Skousen writes, “[George] Washington also warned that giving a more favored status to particular nations could open up the United States to strong foreign influences which could subvert the security or best interests of the United States.” Here is what George Washington warned:

“Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence…the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government…Real patriots, who may resist the intrigues of the favorite [foreign nation], are liable to become suspected and odious, while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people to surrender their interests.”

Those who think or deny our “friends” cannot or will not attempt to influence our government need only open their eyes. This is not a new problem, but one that has existed throughout history, which is why our founders left us with many warnings.

Flash forward a bit to the years after World War I. This tragic and terrible disaster left America with over 100,000 dead, and 200,000 injured. We let our “allies” goad and scare us into the war. Congressman Charles A. Lindbergh (father of the famous pilot) implored our leaders to return to the Founders’ vision:

“We had elected a president [Woodrow Wilson] for a second term because he said he ‘kept us out of war’ in his first term. We proved by a large vote that we did not want to go to war, but no sooner was the president re-elected than the propaganda started to put us to war. Then we became hysterical, as people always have done in war, and we believed everything bad against our enemy and believed only good of our allies and ourselves. As a matter of fact all the leaders were bad, vicious. They lost their reason and the people followed…”

Mark Twain is credited with the saying, “History doesn’t repeat itself, but it often rhymes.

It sure does.

And as Skousen muses: “Looking back, one cannot help wondering how much happier, more peaceful, and more prosperous a policy of ‘separatism’ as the world’s great peacemaker instead of ‘internationalism’ as the world’s great policeman.”

When will we have enough of death and debt?

Categories: government, History | Tags: , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Rescuing History

The truth is that the white men and savage Indians could never live in peace in the same land. The Indians wanted the land for hunting grounds; the white people wanted it for farms and ranches. The white men, being stronger, were able to win.

So it was written in the elementary school history text, The Growth of the American People and Nation, published in 1937. Boy, times have changed. A perfect example of history being revised, perhaps unintentional or based on the intentional agendas of others. Some more:

The government at last decided it was cheaper to feed the Indians than to keep on fighting them…moved [them] to…Indian reservation[s]…Government Indian schools were opened…The Indian problem was no longer one of our chief problems.

History has since, for the most part, corrected its recording of what transpired to the natives in the Americas. They didn’t just want the land for hunting, it was their home where they had lived for generations. Nor were they particularly more “savage” then any other humans. The text even notes that, “…the Indians had no food supply [buffaloes killed], [their] lands were taken from them…[they] were put on reservations.” Sobering to those who think such things cannot happen in a democracy. Historian Francis Jennings wrote in The Founders of America:

From 1812 until the end of the century, official policy, no matter what euphemistic terms expressed, was simple conquest. Its purpose was to reduce Indian persons to dependence and to seize tribal lands. It is common scandal that the United Sates has violated every single one of its treaties with Indians.

We cannot engage in revisionism of history, the good or bad, what we like or dislike, or else we cannot learn from it. One wonders, though, how many genocides and oppressions we must witness, or allow happen, before we get it. Unfortunately, historical revisionism is alive and well and is a favorite of those with political and other agendas.

There seems to have been a craze of trying to dig up dirt on the Founding Fathers in order to justify support for our less than stellar elected class. No one ever claimed the founders were perfect, unblemished humans. Comparative to many of our own, they did have a higher respect for their office. In the zealous attempts to dethrone them, facts have often been flushed away. For instance, take the cottage industry of attacking Thomas Jefferson.

One of those attacks is the claim that DNA proved he was fathering children with slave Sally Hemings. The problem with this is that the DNA didn’t have Jefferson’s name on it, only that someone in his family was implicated. Turns out that his brother could have been the father of the children. There is nothing that can be used to state that Thomas Jefferson absolutely was fathering these children, as so often has been implied or stated.

Often the old history books do get it right and can be used to ferret out agendas in our own. It is always a fun exercise to compare the two. The points to remember are these: Dig a little deeper, don’t think everything you are told or read is without error. Look for bias and agendas, especially when attached to politicians and those that fund them. Ask why some detail of history has changed and where’s the evidence. Yes, it can take time and may seem unnecessary to some people. Ultimately, however, we have a responsibility to pass on accurate and truthful history.

We must start thinking about those who will follow us instead of just tomorrow and the next day. We do this in the hope that our ancestors won’t repeat our tragedies and mistakes and will remember our triumphs.

hsbks

Categories: History | Tags: , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.