|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It has often been said that when legend and myth become accepted as historical fact it is better to print the legend and myth instead of the truth. This concept is quite evident in the historical writings surrounding the founding fathers. The men who freed themselves from British tyranny have been romanticized, canonized, and idolized. The founding fathers have been depicted as high-minded men who were only concerned with building a strong democratic nation; men who saw all men as equal in the sight of god; men who wrote a constitution to insure the rights and liberty of all Americans. But, is this an accurate portrayal of the founding fathers or just myths that are accepted as facts?
When writing about the founding fathers, traditional historians tend to omit crucial facts that would give insight into the true characters of the founding fathers. Instead, legendary tales and half truths are often written and stressed to add to the stature of the founding fathers. Because of this omission of facts, most Americans come away with a false image of the founding fathers. They tend to believe that men like Jefferson, Madison, Washington, and Henry were more honorable than the politicians of today. But, in reality, the founding fathers were no different than today's politicians. They were partisan, greedy, hypocritical, and dishonest in their dealings with each other and the American people, which are clearly denoted in the overlooked historical records.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
When begrudgingly acknowledging the sins of the founding fathers, traditional historians usually chronicle the their faults, such as owning slaves and denying women the right to vote, as being beyond their control. The excuses range from all whites during that time accepted the practice of owning slaves and denying women the right to vote as normal to if the founding fathers had tried to establish a truly democratic nation, the country would have been thrown into a civil war. In the end, the founding fathers are seen as victims of their times instead of those who were truly the victims, people of color and women.
Let us begin with the most outrageous claim that all whites during the colonial period accepted the practice of owning slaves and denying women the right to vote as normal. This claim is absolutely false. Traditional historians have fostered this lie to cover up the greedy and hypocritical nature of the founding fathers. It must be understood that not all white people were racist and not all white people supported slavery or the domination of one group over another during the colonial period. There were many white Americans who favored emancipation for all human beings. Aaron Burr, Alexander Hamilton, Thomas Paine, John Adams, and Abigail Adams were among the many who were abolitionists and abhorred the peculiar institution. They and others were well aware of the hypocrisy of proclaiming to be fighting a war of independence while holding human beings in bondage. In one of her many letters to her husband, Abigail Adams passionately wrote in behalf of the Africans, "I wish most sincerely there was a slave in the province. It always seemed a most iniquitous scheme to me - to fight ourselves for what we are daily robbing and plundering from those who have as good a right to freedom as we have." In compliance with his wife's sentiments, John Adams condemned slavery as a "foul contagion in the human character." Thomas Paine, considered by many historians as the inspirational force behind the revolutionary spirit, wrote an arousing essay condemning the revolutionary leaders of hypocrisy for not believing in what they were suppose to be fighting for. "Christians are taught to account all men their neighbours; and love their neighbours as themselves; and do to all men as they would be done by;...Is this doing to them as we would desire they should do to us? If they could carry off and enslave some thousands of us, would we think it just?...How shameful are all attempts to colour and excuse it!" When Paine confronted men like Jefferson and Patrick Henry for their outrageous acts of human cruelty, their responses were always silence.
When the founding fathers convened in Philadelphia to write the constitution, they were well aware that slavery was morally wrong. The sad fact is that men who have been considered high-minded chose to let their greed, hatred, and cowardly nature be their guides. The founding fathers had three main reasons for maintaining the institution of slavery: First reason: The erroneous belief that whites were superior to Blacks because of skin color. Second reason: America's southern aristocracy profited greatly from the free labor of Africans. The greed of southern whites, such as Washington, Jefferson, and John Rutledge, was another driving force that would cause the Africans to languish in slavery for an additional 180 years. The founders had no desire to do the right thing because their economic interests were more important than the rights of their fellow human beings. Rutledge of South Carolina summed up the general mood of the delegates: "Religion and humanity had nothing to do with this question. Interest alone is the governing principle with nations. The true question at present is whether the Southern states shall or shall not be parties to the Union. If the Northern states consult their interests they will not oppose the increase of slaves which will increase the commodities of which they will become the carriers." With the weight of such arguments, delegates agreed that their economic needs would be better met with the institution of slavery well intact.
|
|
|
Third reason: Many of the founders feared that the country would be thrown into civil strife if emancipation became the law of the land. Even though many considered this concern as an acceptable excuse for allowing slavery to exist, I view it as a cowardly act that established a mind-set in the United States, which still haunts people of color today. When the rights and liberties of the white colonists were being threatened by the British government, the white colonists wasted no time in demanding that they be afforded their human rights. When the violations continued, white colonists immediately took up arms to defend their rights. As the delegates converged on the city of Philadelphia, they were confronted with their first constitutional crisis, what to do about the Africans. While acknowledging that Africans were suffering under the brutal system of slavery, the legislators decided the plight of Africans was not worth warring over and became enraged when two Quaker delegates brought the slave question up for debate. After a brief four hour debate, the delegates, under the leadership of Madison, made it unconstitutional for Congress manumit slaves at any time. This manipulative act on the part of the founders sent a powerful message and established a shameful legacy. Ever since, there has been a propensity by those in authority to place more emphasis on issues that plague white Americans, while relegating the problems of people of color. This is clearly evident in matters of social, political, and economic issues. Their unwillingness to solve the slavery question set the stage for a country based on inequality. A nation that puts the needs of the dominant culture over the needs of minorities. Traditional historians call the actions of the founding fathers gallant. I call the actions of the founding fathers hypocritical, cowardly, and greedy. So be it. If it was necessary for whites to fight for their freedom, then, it should have been a matter of essence to fight for the rights of the Africans and other people of color. If the new nation had been thrown into a civil war, so be it. It would have been the moral and democratic thing to do, the very qualities that were lacking in the founding fathers. More importantly, it would have shown the inhabitants of the United States that the rights and liberties of all Americans were worth fighting and dying for.
|
|
By now, it should be quite obvious that when Thomas Jefferson wrote, "All men are created equal," those sentiments did not apply to people of color or white women. But, it also must be understood that those same sentiments did not even apply to the average white man. Those sentiments were reserved solely for the white aristocracy of America. The founding fathers never embraced the concept of democracy. Instead, the founders feared democracy. The fear of democracy was best expressed by Elbridge Gerry when he said, "The evils we experience flow from the excess of democracy." Through out the constitutional convention, the delegates voiced concerns over the "leveling of democracy." Men like Jefferson, Madison, and Washington vehemently believed that the rich should be protected from the unruly impulses of the masses. The delegates at the convention drew a sharp distinction between those with property and those without property and it was quite clear that the white men with property should be afforded more rights than those without property.
To ensure the rights of the aristocracy in America, the founders enacted property qualifications in regards to voting, owning guns, and holding office. Because of the strict property qualifications, over 2/3 of the white male population were disfranchised and not allowed to hold any elective office. In South Carolina, state senators were required to possess estates worth at least 7,000 pounds; in New Jersey, members of the legislature had own at least 1,000 pounds; in Maryland, out of the 25,000 eligible voters, only 6,000 were allowed to vote on constitutional issues. When the constitution was finally ratified, the majority of the people saw it as an elites document and were strongly against the ratification of the Constitution. Most traditional historians promote the myth that the constitution and other laws enacted by the founders were widely popular. This is a gross misrepresentation of the historical facts. At the time of the framing of the Constitution and the enactment of many other laws by the founders, the majority of Americans were vehemently against the Constitution and the founders themselves. Fearful of the growing resentment, the delegates agreed to a rule of secrecy. The general public was not allowed to know what had transpired at the convention or what commits were made. The delegates agreed to allow 53 years to pass before notes from the convention could be released and there was good reason for this clause. As stated earlier, a clear majority of the people were in opposition to the Constitution. If the Constitution had been submitted to a popular vote, it would have been soundly defeated. Most of the delegates who passed the Constitution were from the propertied class who tended to be more conservative than the populace. The notes and transcripts from the constitutional meeting display a conservative mind-set that were concerned only about the welfare of the wealthy. The following commits from the founding fathers demonstrate this elitist mind-set and distrust they had towards all Americans, including white males:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Alexander Hamilton believed that the best type of government was a government completely controlled by the propertied class. At the constitutional convention, Hamilton stressed his sentiments over how a government should function: "All communities divide themselves into the few and the many. The first are the rich and well born, the other the mass of the people. The voice of the people has been said to be the voice of God; and however generally this maxim has been quoted and believed, it is not true in fact. The people are turbulent and changing; they seldom judge or determine right. Give therefore to the first class a distinct, permanent share in the government. They will check the unsteadiness of the Second...Can a democratic assembly who annually revolve in the mass of the people, be supposed steadily to pursue the public good? Nothing but a permanent body can check the imprudence of democracy....It is admitted that you cannot have a good executive upon a democratic plan."
Roger Sherman stressed dismay at the concept of popular sovereignty: "The people immediately should have as little to do as may be about the government. They want information and are constantly liable to be misled."
Gouverneur Morris was a strong advocate for aristocratic rule and showed contempt towards the masses: "There never was, nor ever will be a civilized Society without an Aristocracy....Give the votes to people who have no property, and they will sell them to the rich who will be able to buy them....Voting should be restricted to property owners."
John Francis Mercer stated that "the people cannot know and judge of the characters of candidates. The worst possible choice will be made."
|
|
|
Charles Pinckney believed that "members of government ought to be possessed of competent property to make them independent and respectable." He also made the following comments to Madison: "Are you not...abundantly impressed that the theoretical nonsense of an election of Congress by the people in the first instance is clearly and practically wrong, that it will in the end be the means of bringing our councils into contempt?" Charles C. Pinckney believed that the Senate ought to represent the wealth of the country and members of the government ought to hold property. He also stated, "There is a need for stiff measures to restrain the urges of arrant democracy."
Edmund Randolph viewed the problems that the United States were experiencing at the time was due to the "turbulence and follies of democracy."
John Rutledge stated that "the defects of democracy have been found arbitrary, severe, and destructive."
George Washington was the owner of acres of land and was extremely concerned about the violent nature of the American people who were capable of rising up against the propertied class. This concern led him to distrust popular democratic tendencies and viewed criticism of the government akin to sedition.
James Madison, considered the father of the Constitution, was equally suspicious of the common people. He considered the masses to be an unjust and interested majority. In the Federalist 10, he pondered on how "to secure the public good and private rights against the danger of such a faction (the masses) and at the same time preserve the spirit and form of popular government is then the great object to which our inquiries are directed." He also stated, "The landed interest, at present, is prevalent, but in process of time...when the number of landholders shall be comparatively small...will not the landed interests be overbalanced in future elections? and, unless wisely provided against, what will become of our government? In England, at this day, if elections were open to all classes of people, the property of landed proprietors would be insecure. An agrarian law would take place. If these observations be just, our government ought to secure the permanent interests of the country against innovation. Landholders ought to have a share in the government, to support these invaluable interests, and to balance and check the other. They ought to be so constituted as to protect the minority of the opulent against the majority."
In conclusion, America's early beginnings was not based on democratic principles, but the desires of a select few. Only a select few were allowed to participate in the democratic process. People of color, white women, and even white men who did not own enough property were excluded from the democratic process. The aristocracy of the United States felt disdain and distrust toward those with less wealth than them. The founding fathers basically trusted only those from their own class and sought out to make sure that the propertied class were the sole benefactors of the new laws. The founding fathers feared the masses, as well as the democratic process. The historical record clearly shows an elitist group who were hypocritical, greedy, and dishonest. The founders established an oligarchy dressed in democratic clothing. The heroic and noble images of the founding fathers are nothing more than myths that are now accepted as facts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For more information:
Straight Talkers
Email: enavy@straighttalkers.com
© Copyright 2008 Straight Talkers Site. All Rights Reserved.
|
