Thomas Jefferson Quotes

[He-man]

Slavery has existed in every culture up until present. It's had various names, like slavery, serfdom, caste and others.

It wasn't until Western European civilization, specifically British and American political philosophy as of the 1800's, that people started thinking it was something to abolish.

Not entirely true, I find it hard to compare serfs to slaves for serfs would often have legal rights that slaves would not have and could more often then not be traded away, anyhow the idea to abolish slavery started way earlier then the 18th century Anglo Saxon realms. In medieval Europe it was considered an ill thing to own Christian slaves(among Christians of course, pagans wouldn't care a lot for the poor Christians) and the Catholic church would press on the Royals of the lands to abolish slavery - yes in fact it was replaced with serfdom(some time over time as the nobles would force the newly freed men into economic hardship) but I don't think that could be compared much with the American slavery Africans enjoyed in the Americas.

What little I remember of the Indian caste system(I assume that is what you meant) it could not be considered slavery either, all men, even "free men" have been bound by law and tradition by one mean or the other, and still is in many parts of the world - just because you are born into a low caste does not mean you can be bartered with or have no legal rights, or can be considered property of an owner.

 

[Enthetan]

Not entirely true, I find it hard to compare serfs to slaves for serfs would often have legal rights that slaves would not have and could more often then not be traded away, anyhow the idea to abolish slavery started way earlier then the 18th century Anglo Saxon realms. In medieval Europe it was considered an ill thing to own Christian slaves(among Christians of course, pagans wouldn't care a lot for the poor Christians) and the Catholic church would press on the Royals of the lands to abolish slavery - yes in fact it was replaced with serfdom(some time over time as the nobles would force the newly freed men into economic hardship) but I don't think that could be compared much with the American slavery Africans enjoyed in the Americas.

What little I remember of the Indian caste system(I assume that is what you meant) it could not be considered slavery either, all men, even "free men" have been bound by law and tradition by one mean or the other, and still is in many parts of the world - just because you are born into a low caste does not mean you can be bartered with or have no legal rights, or can be considered property of an owner.

Freedom versus slavery can be looked at as a spectrum.

Towards the "free" end, people can go live where they please, work for whoever wants to pay them (or for themselves), doing whatever anybody is interested in paying them to do. Note the usage of the word "pay", indicating un-coerced exchange.

Towards the "slave" end, people have somebody who tells them what to do, where to do it, and decides what they will eat, where they will live, and what shall be done with their bodies.

In between, you have various situations of greater or lesser freedom. In between the extremes, you have cases like serfdom (where you are not free to go elsewhere, not free to decide to do something other than what the lord of the castle tells you, not really free to own property, and where the lord can do what he pleases with your women), castes (where you have more freedom, but not the freedom to do preferable work of another caste, no matter how smart and skilled you are).

And then there is the Sea Org, which has varied between mostly-free and mostly slave, depending on circumstances and how closely local law enforcement looks at things.

 

[DeeAnna]

Some more history of Mr. Jefferson, regarding the Louisiana Purhase:


"While the 1803 Louisiana Purchase was a great achievement of the Jefferson administration, domestically it was complicated by the establishment of pre-existing French slaveholders from modern Illinois to Missouri to Louisiana. Faced with the option to confiscate the slaves of French nationals, Jefferson chose to answer English and Spanish objections to the sale by quickly incorporating resident settlers politically into U.S. territories. Jefferson's failure to tamper with preexisting conditions led to criticism for his having allowed slavery to continue in the newly acquired territory, and the adoption of the Code Napoleon in the New Orleans Territory that would become the state of Louisiana. Since the Purchase historians have differed in their assessments regarding constitutional and slavery issues. Jefferson is considered historically as a major architect of American expansionism.[SUP]"


[/SUP][SUP]Once again, a factual summary from Wikipedia.

The purchase of the Louisiana Territory was highly controversial at the time. Remember that our nation was still quite new in 1803. The last of the British troops did not leave New York until the Autumn of 1783. Our Constitution was not implemented until 1789. One of the biggest problems was that our Constitution made no provision for the acquisition of new territories. So the old "but how are we going to pay for THIS?" question was a big one. (They were still trying to figure out how to pay for the Revolution!) Jefferson felt it was too good of a deal to pass up (Napoleon need some quick cash) so he pushed it hard. And of course the slavery issue was raised. Despite his lofty writings, Jefferson allowed slavery to remain in the newly acquired territory.

[/SUP][SUP]Much like today's politicians, they made "behind closed door deals", slandered their opponents, pushed their own agendas, and were concerned for their own "legacies". [/SUP]

 

[Leland]

Some more history of Mr. Jefferson, regarding the Louisiana Purhase:


"While the 1803 Louisiana Purchase was a great achievement of the Jefferson administration, domestically it was complicated by the establishment of pre-existing French slaveholders from modern Illinois to Missouri to Louisiana. Faced with the option to confiscate the slaves of French nationals, Jefferson chose to answer English and Spanish objections to the sale by quickly incorporating resident settlers politically into U.S. territories. Jefferson's failure to tamper with preexisting conditions led to criticism for his having allowed slavery to continue in the newly acquired territory, and the adoption of the Code Napoleon in the New Orleans Territory that would become the state of Louisiana. Since the Purchase historians have differed in their assessments regarding constitutional and slavery issues. Jefferson is considered historically as a major architect of American expansionism.[SUP]"


[/SUP][SUP]Once again, a factual summary from Wikipedia.

The purchase of the Louisiana Territory was highly controversial at the time. Remember that our nation was still quite new in 1803. The last of the British troops did not leave New York until the Autumn of 1783. Our Constitution was not implemented until 1789. One of the biggest problems was that our Constitution made no provision for the acquisition of new territories. So the old "but how are we going to pay for THIS?" question was a big one. (They were still trying to figure out how to pay for the Revolution!) Jefferson felt it was too good of a deal to pass up (Napoleon need some quick cash) so he pushed it hard. And of course the slavery issue was raised. Despite his lofty writings, Jefferson allowed slavery to remain in the newly acquired territory.

[/SUP][SUP]Much like today's politicians, they made "behind closed door deals", slandered their opponents, pushed their own agendas, and were concerned for their own "legacies". [/SUP]

Well, that is certainly one way to look at it.

Another is that your post above is why they are called "founding fathers." Their vision of what America was and could become....and their making it so.

American that grew from the 13 colonies into a country that eventually spanned the continent from coast to coast....

The British Empire spanned the globe.....at the time. France, Spain, Portugal and Italy had many colonies....

 

[Mystic]

I think I'll go sing We Shall Overcome.

 

[Leland]

I think I'll go sing We Shall Overcome.

I hear you Mystic.....

But you have used a hymn title....that is Christian...(1948)......and part of the think that lies underneath the entire thrust and growth of Western Civilization....?

It was mainly a Civil Rights Movement anthem....

 

[Mystic]

I hear you Mystic.....

But you have used a hymn title....that is Christian...(1948)......and part of the think that lies underneath the entire thrust and growth of Western Civilization....?

It was mainly a Civil Rights Movement anthem....

Na na. I come from Joan Baez. I have no use for christian think, and "western civilization" is a really neat slavery to the Rothschild/Rockefeller owners of that slavery.

 

[Gib]

Freedom versus slavery can be looked at as a spectrum.

And then there is the Sea Org, which has varied between mostly-free and mostly slave, depending on circumstances and how closely local law enforcement looks at things.

I guess it depends on state of mind. LOL

One could consider hisself a slave or free in the SO.

Depends on education, PR, marketing. LOL

Please don't give comparisons to the SO members, they might realize a few things.

 

[lotus]

It's funny as from my own experience and observations

When we arrive at a SO compound - Flag for example

As a public - we may feeeeeeeeelllllllllll so freeeeeeeeeeee and this is the most thetaaaaaaaa place on earth (after Freewinds)


BUT,
As a SO - we may soon feeeeeeeeeeellll so entrapped - enslaved - and it's a very much dark world.

What they use to say to people experiencing the dellusion after they arrive there is:

''Oh! I TOTALLY got that - it's a restimulation - don't worry - MEST work (epf) will help you to stay in pt.

To be slave or not to be!:confused2:

 

[Leland]

It's funny as from my own experience and observations

When we arrive at a SO compound - Flag for example

As a public - we may feeeeeeeeelllllllllll so freeeeeeeeeeee and this is the mos thetaaaaaaaa place


As a SO - we may soon feeeeeeeeeeellll so entrapped - slave - and it's a very much dark world.

What they used to say to people experiencing the dellusion after they arrive there is:

''Oh! I TOTALLY get you - it's restimulation - don't worry - MEST work (epf) will help you to stay in pt.

To be slave or not to be!:confused2:

WoW...that is a rough one. I never looked at it that way...

 

[Helena Handbasket]

I'm just getting tired of the whole "white people were so mean to black people, and should make reparations to blacks who weren't alive at the time, taking the funds from white people whose ancestors weren't even here at the time" meme

"No one is responsible for the actions of their race ... ancestors", or government. Jean-Luc Picard, from the episode Encounter At Farpoint, ST:TNG. (I added the "government" part.)

Helena

 

[Enthetan]

[SUP]Much like today's politicians, they made "behind closed door deals", slandered their opponents, pushed their own agendas, and were concerned for their own "legacies". [/SUP]

And Jefferson died heavily in debt, having spent his life working for the welfare of the new Republic. I strongly doubt that modern US politicians will wind up likewise -- they seem to have a talent for making lots of money from "speaking fees", and peddling their "influence" to lobbyists.

 

[Enthetan]

It's funny as from my own experience and observations

When we arrive at a SO compound - Flag for example

As a public - we may feeeeeeeeelllllllllll so freeeeeeeeeeee and this is the mos thetaaaaaaaa place


As a SO - we may soon feeeeeeeeeeellll so entrapped - slave - and it's a very much dark world.

What they used to say to people experiencing the dellusion after they arrive there is:

''Oh! I TOTALLY get you - it's restimulation - don't worry - MEST work (epf) will help you to stay in pt.

To be slave or not to be!:confused2:

“A slave cannot be freed, save he do it himself. Nor can you enslave a free man; the very most you can do is kill him!” ― Robert A. Heinlein,

 

[strativarius]

And Jefferson died heavily in debt, having spent his life working for the welfare of the new Republic. I strongly doubt that modern US politicians will wind up likewise -- they seem to have a talent for making lots of money from "speaking fees", and peddling their "influence" to lobbyists.

And not just modern US politicians. Major slimeball Tony Blair isn't doing too badly for himself either since he left office.

 

[Commander Birdsong]

Na na. I come from Joan Baez. I have no use for christian think, and "western civilization" is a really neat slavery to the Rothschild/Rockefeller owners of that slavery.

jeeeee-yay-ziss myzztyck...

god ye be one hard case

yes, on the one hand hierarchal institutionalized christian thought has for 1700 years been handmaiden to the political/financial powers of the western world

but if you closely examine the... uhhh... source materials...

well, never mind. you got the hots for the same essential principles from other clear water mountain springs of the human soul, that's all that matters

 

[Helena Handbasket]

... I propose therefore

That the Governors of Michigan, Ohio & Indiana be instructed immediately to have designated according to law such proportions of their militia as you shall think advisable, to be ready for service at a moment’s warning, recommending to them to prefer volunteers as far as they can be obtained; & of that description fitted for Indian service. ...​

A rare example of the use of the word militia (emphasis mine) from America's early days. (A chapter in Adam Smith's The Wealth Of Nations also mentions the militia.)

This is important because of all the arguments regarding the Second Amendment: "A well-regulated militia, being necessary ... ".

So what is the militia? IMHO it's a group of citizens ready to set aside their regular jobs on short notice, pick up their guns, and defend their country against invaders (that means you pommes). No one in the USA expects citizens to do that now, although the Swiss are doing that today.

Helena

 

[strativarius]

A rare example of the use of the word militia (emphasis mine) from America's early days. (A chapter in Adam Smith's The Wealth Of Nations also mentions the militia.)

This is important because of all the arguments regarding the Second Amendment: "A well-regulated militia, being necessary ... ".

So what is the militia? IMHO it's a group of citizens ready to set aside their regular jobs on short notice, pick up their guns, and defend their country against invaders (that means you pommes). No one in the USA expects citizens to do that now, although the Swiss are doing that today.

Helena

No Helena, you mean poms. 'Pomme' is French for 'apple'. I don't mind being slagged off, but I object to being called a fruit!

 

[He-man]

No Helena, you mean poms! A 'pomme' is French for 'apple'. I don't mind being slagged off, but I object to being called a fruit!

Limey.

Also:

"There are several folk etymologies for Pommy or Pom. The best-documented of these is that pommy originated as a contraction of "pomegranate".[12][13] According to this explanation, "pomegranate" was Australian rhyming slang for "immigrant" ("Jimmy Grant").[14] Usage of "pomegranate" for English people may have been strengthened by a belief in Australia that sunburn occurred more frequently among English immigrants, turning those with fair skin the colour of pomegranates."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_names_for_the_British#Pommy_or_Pom

 

[Enthetan]

A rare example of the use of the word militia (emphasis mine) from America's early days. (A chapter in Adam Smith's The Wealth Of Nations also mentions the militia.)

This is important because of all the arguments regarding the Second Amendment: "A well-regulated militia, being necessary ... ".

So what is the militia? IMHO it's a group of citizens ready to set aside their regular jobs on short notice, pick up their guns, and defend their country against invaders (that means you pommes). No one in the USA expects citizens to do that now, although the Swiss are doing that today.

Helena

You are correct. The definition of "militia" in those days was that it was all able-bodied free men physically able to bear arms.

The Militia Act of 1792 also said that members of the militia were obliged to provide themselves with a suitable firearm, with bayonet, along with his own ammunition.

Today, US federal law defines the militia as

(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are—

(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.​

​

 

[strativarius]

Limey.

Septic.
Etymology: You don't want to know!