It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What party would our founding fathers belong to today?

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 6 2004 @ 09:03 PM
link   
Well, as a Libertarian myself and a great admirer of the founding fathers, I'd like to say that they'd all be libertarians, too.

But their milieu was such that they probably couldn't be as tolerant toward the social issues as most Libertarians are, so they'd probably lean more to the right than the pure libertarian; more of a Randian objectivist, is you don't mind me confusing philosophy with politics.

The only person I could see who would be comfortable as a Republican would be Alexander Hamilton and maybe James Madison.

And I suppose Aaron Burr would be a fascist, if you had to nail his sorry butt into any kind of 20th-century political philosophy.



posted on Oct, 6 2004 @ 09:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
Are yo serious? What party would they belong to? Neither. They'd pick up the weapons and attack in all directions. They'd probably put holes in a lot of us for allowing the nation to degenerate.


Thanks TC for pretty much suming up my arguement. Part of my point was to show how far we have drifted from the course they laid out.

I still think most would at least lean toward the Libertarians and also that they would consider the Republicans a left wing group.

I doubt if even Hamiltan would be a Democrat, that party pretty much sums up where they did NOT want us to go



posted on Oct, 6 2004 @ 09:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by cavscout
if they feel the major population centers of Portland and Sealtle properly represent them.

Unfortunately the difference is that the colonists were not represented and could not vote, whereas the people in rural washington are simply outnumbers by the people in seatle (ok, not acutally outnumbered, by the power of the seatle-people is in their numbers). I understand their gripe tho. Look at it this way, in a democracy, a 51 percent majority wins. That means that in a democracy just about half of the people are 'ruled' by someone they didn't vote for.


I agree they'd probably faint at the tax rate, but, heck, some of them would probably think that public schools are an infringment of a person's rights, or that the governements job isn't to build roads and maintain waterworks.



you seem to present as being silly are more common than you think.

I wasn't trying to make the position look silly. Although I do think it is. Public Schools and roads and waterworks are good things to have, well worth paying taxes. The founders would understand such a social contract.
[quote[amuk
It is like a huge black hole that swallows our tax dollars and maybe spits out 10% to 30% back to all the rest of us.
One man one vote tho right? Rember what churchill said about democracy, I think its still relevant.



posted on Oct, 7 2004 @ 01:10 AM
link   
The founding fathers would be scared #less by the giant metal birds that scream across the skies, self-propelled carriages, giant concrete mountains that we live in, the "funny looking" people with their funny looking clothes. even things like telephones and electricity. They'd probably be too busy being catatonic in the fetal positon to worry about our government.

The vast majority would go insane, and some might even commit suicde. Perhaps after alot of time and therapy, some of the more open-minded ones like Ben Franklin would be able to live somewhat normal lives.


As to what party they would join, I don't think it's possible to say. While it's easy to assume that they would all be Libertarians, I don't think it's that simple. They'd have to assimilate the global situation and adjust their thinking. More than likely, there would be founding fathers in many different parties (Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Green, etc.).

A bunch of them would probably upset that we let everyone vote...after all that wasn't the original intention of their founding this country.




[edit on 10/7/2004 by Flinx]



posted on Oct, 7 2004 @ 07:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by Indy
Amuk..... If someone builds a million dollar home and then someone moves next door and builds a $150,000 home it would harm the property value of the million dollar home. But the person with the $150,000 did no wrong.


I'd just like to know why someone with a million dollars would even want to build next to someone with a 150,000 home



This neighbourhood has a good mix. We have 280,000 homes on the water, across the street homes go for 180,000, then you have about 4 houses that were built that probably are around 400,000. I'm sure they have money to spend. But it doesn't matter because their homes are on the water so your buying location... If someone with a million bucks built a home on a regular street next to 150,000 homes, my guess is that he or she wouldn't be too smart...


That's like building a 3 million dollar home on a busy street... (yes we have them here) Your views from the window would include bustling traffic and transport trucks... Some people were born a little slow, but god bless em.



posted on Oct, 7 2004 @ 02:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Flinx
As to what party they would join, I don't think it's possible to say. While it's easy to assume that they would all be Libertarians, I don't think it's that simple. They'd have to assimilate the global situation and adjust their thinking. More than likely, there would be founding fathers in many different parties (Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Green, etc.).

A bunch of them would probably upset that we let everyone vote...after all that wasn't the original intention of their founding this country.


[edit on 10/7/2004 by Flinx]


"You have voted Flinx for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have two more votes this month."

Someone had to say it! What party would a bunch of elite slave owners from the 18th century be in? I don't know, the Amish Ku Klux Klan?

Are you asking, if our founding fathers were born in say, in this century? What party? Dem or Repub, I don't think they would take the Libertarian party seriously, IMHO.



posted on Oct, 7 2004 @ 02:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Janus
I think they would land in Washington, take one look round and then head off and start a new Revolution.
Im not an American but from what ive read they put individual freedoms above government. As is enshrined in the US Constitution. I may be wrong, but i think they would be appalled at how government has resticted the freedoms they fought for.



Or maybe they'd be appalled at how people have abused those freedoms.



posted on Oct, 7 2004 @ 03:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by curme

Are you asking, if our founding fathers were born in say, in this century? What party? Dem or Repub, I don't think they would take the Libertarian party seriously, IMHO.



Which founding father was FOR 50% taxation, gun control, a semi-empire streched around the world, Government interferiance in almost EVERY part of your life?

Name one.

I still think most would have been Libertarians OR old time Republicans

I cant think of any that would be Democrats



posted on Oct, 7 2004 @ 03:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amuk

Which founding father was FOR 50% taxation, gun control, a semi-empire stretched around the world, Government interferiance in almost EVERY part of your life?

Name one.


Before or after the discovery of electricity? It's impossible to try to suppose how any of the founding fathers would think, after our country expanded all the way to California, and beyond.

Our founding fathers were smart guys, but I think it's lunacy to try to apply their ideals to today's world, without recognizing how the world changes.



posted on Oct, 7 2004 @ 03:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amuk
I still think most would have been Libertarians OR old time Republicans

Aren't the libers governmental conservatives and social liberals? Meaning they want a smaller less intrusive government thats more isolationist but on social issues they are for all the good modern stuff? They might agree with the libertarians on some issues, but certainly not any social issues.


I cant think of any that would be Democrats

The Democratic Party is the oldest party and was around back then. You are thinking of social democrats perhaps. Also, in the context of their times, the Founders were liberal in the extreme. Letting citizens vote, giving them guns, leaving business unencumbered, all that sort of stuff. People like Sam Adams, sure, they'd dislike having to pay high taxes, but these are some of the most Liberal and Radical politicians of their times. If you just drop them in today, they'd be too out of place to fit anywhere, they wouldn't subscribe to any party probably.




posted on Oct, 7 2004 @ 05:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by curme
Before or after the discovery of electricity? It's impossible to try to suppose how any of the founding fathers would think, after our country expanded all the way to California, and beyond.

Our founding fathers were smart guys, but I think it's lunacy to try to apply their ideals to today's world, without recognizing how the world changes.



Do what?

How is it impossible to suspose what they would think, they left thousands of documents, letters, articles, etc; discribing EXACTLY what they thought and its a fairly easy mental exersize to aply thoughts to today.

Its lunacy to apply their ideals to todays world?

So I guess we should just trash the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, etc after all its a different world today right?



posted on Oct, 7 2004 @ 05:27 PM
link   
That our founding fathers would be so disgusted with what happened to their creation that they would take up arms and start again. There is no way in he.. that any of them would consider themselves democrats or republicans as neither party shares any of the values our forefathers had or believed in. There wasn't one of our forefathers who was for big business and selling their souls for $ and therefore neither party would suit them.



posted on Oct, 7 2004 @ 05:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan
The Democratic Party is the oldest party and was around back then.


True it was, but the Democratic party of today has little or nothing to do with the one back then. Just as the Republican party of today has little to do with the Republican party in the past. I think MOST (not all) of them would have looked upon the Republican party today as left wing.

I think a few might have problems with the social freedoms of the Libertarians but all in all I think MOST would lean toward them.



posted on Oct, 7 2004 @ 05:51 PM
link   
The founding fathers wanted less government and more responsibility for the states and the citizens. The democrats want a huge government and many massive government programs to keep the citizens from being responsible themselves. Our founding fathers would be Republicans.



posted on Oct, 7 2004 @ 05:56 PM
link   
"Our founding fathers would be Republicans. "

The republicans have created the largest government in our history and are working on the largest deficit in this countries history. There is now way in he.. they would agree with that. Buy a vowel!



posted on Oct, 7 2004 @ 06:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by GrndLkNatv
That our founding fathers would be so disgusted with what happened to their creation that they would take up arms and start again. There is no way in he.. that any of them would consider themselves democrats or republicans as neither party shares any of the values our forefathers had or believed in. There wasn't one of our forefathers who was for big business and selling their souls for $

A large part of resistance against the british was agitated by business owners, merchants and what not, angry at crushing taxes and market restrictions (ie mercantalism). There were definitely monied interests during the revolution.


amuk
would have looked upon the Republican party today as left wing

I'm not so sure left wing right wing would work to well back then. If you think about it, one was either a monarchist or part of the rabble. With 'em or against 'em in a sense. Look at the connections, at least in terms of outlook, between the american revolutionary radicals and the actual bavarian illuminati. Or, not to push the ludicrous 'geo. washington was a terrorirst' idiocy, but the Sons of Liberty were hardly a charity organization, and obviously had little problem destroying british property or tarring tories (of course, they didn't wheel powderkegs into british dominated schools and kill children, so they were hardly terrorists). But the patriots were certainly radicals, especially the agitators of the revolution. Later on it became more of a mainstream movement and with that less 'radical', however those early stages I imagine involved a lot of incindiary newspaper articles and hooliganism.



posted on Oct, 7 2004 @ 06:39 PM
link   
Erm, to answer, I guess? Either of them. They had Different sides way back when. Like John Adams who was Democrat...



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join