Forum Post: Thomas Jefferson is on our side
Posted 12 years ago on Oct. 8, 2011, 6:02 p.m. EST by TIOUAISE
(2526)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
The "Occupy Wall Street" movement is quintessentially American... and Thomas Jefferson - 3rd U.S. President (1801-1809) and author of the Declaration of Independence - would be enthusiastically on our side.
SHAY'S REBELLION (1786–87)
Uprising in western Massachusetts. In a period of economic depression and land seizures for debt collection, several hundred farmers led by Daniel Shays (1747?–1825), who had served as a captain in the Revolutionary army, marched on the state supreme court in Springfield, preventing it from carrying out FORECLOSURES and debt collection. Shays then led about 1,200 men in an attack on the nearby federal arsenal, but they were repulsed by troops under Benjamin Lincoln. As a result of the uprising, the state enacted laws easing the economic condition of debtors.
THOMAS JEFFERSON'S OPINION OF SHAY'S REBELLION
"I hold it that A LITTLE REBELLION NOW AND THEN IS A GOOD THING, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical. Unsuccessful rebellions, indeed, generally establish the encroachments on the rights of the people which have produced them. An observation of this truth should render honest republican governors so mild in their punishment of rebellions as not to discourage them too much. IT IS A MEDICINE NECESSARY FOR THE SOUND HEALTH OF GOVERNMENT." (Letter to James Madison of January 30, 1787)
OTHER RELEVANT JEFFERSON QUOTES
“The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions, that I wish it to be always kept alive. It will often be exercised when wrong, but better so than not to be exercised at all."
“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.”
“If once the people become inattentive to the public affairs, you and I, and Congress and Assemblies, Judges and Governors, shall all become wolves. It seems to be the law of our general nature, in spite of individual exceptions.”
“Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms (of government) those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny”
JEFFERSON'S CALL FOR A SECOND REVOLUTION
Jefferson was convinced that American democracy, in order to stay healthy, needed a regular general overhaul. On Wikipedia, under “Second American Revolution”, can be found these little-known facts: “A second (or third, or fourth) American revolution was conceived early on as attainable via the Article V Convention, as set forth in the U.S. Constitution. Occasional conventions were envisioned by many of the country’s founding generation of leaders to be a sort of institutionalized avenue toward THE IDEAL OF REVOLUTION EVERY TWENTY YEARS, often attributed to Thomas Jefferson. According to Samuel Williams of Vermont (1743-1817), it was to be the means to accomplish periodic constitutional adaptation to changing times.”
"Dissent is the highest form of patriotism" is a quote from Howard Zinn not Thomas Jefferson.
http://urbanlegends.about.com/b/2005/02/15/misattributed-dissent-is-the-highest-form-of-patriotism.htm
Thank you. I stand corrected.
I just read on that link: "Dissent is the highest form of patriotism" along with the name "Thomas Jefferson" and you will find THOUSANDS of Web pages attributing the sentiment to the third president of the United States." So it was an honest mistake on my part.
To make up for it, I've added a replacement quotation:
“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.”
And I've completed one of the quotations in my post: “The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions, that I wish it to be always kept alive. It will often be exercised when wrong, but better so than not to be exercised at all."
You said nothing about the other 4 quotations, may we assume that they are all authentic?
Thanks for your valuable assistance.
he also said this:
"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issuance of their currency, firt by inflation, and then by deflation, the banks and corportions that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered." - Thomas Jefferson
the monetary system itself is to blame for all of these complaints money is not essential for our survival or for progress. actually since the creation of money our progress has slowed down to a snail pace.
Thank you for adding that highly relevant quotation!
Thomas Jefferson would be fighting the present System with all his might. His indignation with what America has become, especially under the Bush and Obama administrations, would know no bounds.
I would LOVE to see OWS, graphic artists, etc., make posters of Jefferson with short, meaningful quotes.
www.radiokazoo.net/OPV
don't forget the one about the banks and corporations that grow up around them...
On a somewhat lighter note... some of you may enjoy this other post: http://occupywallst.org/forum/july-4-2015-deposed-president-taking-refuge-in-can/
I'm not a Constitutional scholar, so I'm just thinking out loud: I wonder if a Convention could be called at this point by the American people. After all, our country is going through a MAJOR CRISIS that threatens its very existence. If "We the People" are not relevant now, when WILL we be?
Would it be practical to call a Convention? Would it achieve anything more than the nationwide protests under way? Would it be too easily manipulated by the power elite? I would greatly appreciate your enlightened comments on that.
Thanks
TIOUAISE , I was the sponser of a California state ballot intiative that would have provided and opportunity to state voters to direct the state legislation to apply to congress for an Article V convention.
http://algoxy.com/poly/ca.bal.init1480.11-0003.html I can only assume that "cognitive infiltration" or severe ignorance prevented non profit organizations from supporting the education of Californians. The internet experience met with lots of failures to be cognitive in ways parallel to stated intent. The result was no support and a failed intiative. The FEAR of a convention of being manipulated by the elite is used to create rejection of discussion. In discussion it can be shown that IF a movement were to focus on the facts of Article V, and purposesly limit, for good reason any ratification of proposed amendments outside of what logically meets their first need, and 3/4 of the states were witholding ratification, such a hijacking by elite could not occur.
Thank you! Any other comments on that particular point of the feasability of a Convention?
Well, actually, technically, legally, congress is in violation of the constitution for not conveneing delgates long ago. Another wiki piece that is verified. WIKI- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_to_propose_amendments_to_the_United_States_Constitution "Congress acted preemptively to propose the amendments instead. At least four amendments (the Seventeenth, Twenty-First, Twenty-Second, and Twenty-Fifth Amendments) have been identified as being proposed by Congress at least partly in response to the threat of an Article V convention."-- Legally, based in that, American citizens have had their first right violated for a long time. Here a law suit uncovered some facts about congress and Article V. http://algoxy.com/poly/article_v_convention.html Good links, resources. Also, congresses interpretations of Article V lack the constitutionality that is in the intent of the constitution when the 9th amendment and 14th amendment are considered, so all of their decisions based in the erroneous, unconstitutional interpretations are questionable. I'm quite certain that IF OWS focused on Article V, and called for the tea party to "Join in defense of the Constitution by use of the Constitution", the level of embarassment known by tea partiers in NOT using the constitution would have them either converting the tea party or parting ways.--
ON EDIT: TIOUAISE wrote: "THE PRESENT SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT IS ILLEGAL and therefore MUST be challenged by all patriotic and law-abiding Americans,"END-
Yes, and after many years of knowing that the failure of Americans to drive congress to convene, after the civil war, and formally end it, I found the "Lieber code" and that it was used by congress to allow the defacto military government to continue without being made consttitutional, explaining, for example, the gold fringed flag is allowed in the courts. The "Lieber code" was the rules of engagement for the civil war and is still in effect. This page has much of that consolidated. See the .pdf download for the bits about the Lieber code and what led to unconstitutional government. http://algoxy.com/poly/emergency_powers_statutes.html
MOST interesting!!!
I do hope that OWS leadership is listening in on this conversation.
If you are right in stating that "actually, technically, legally, Congress is in violation of the constitution for not convening delgates long ago", I should think that a case could be made that THE PRESENT SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT IS IILLEGAL and therefore MUST be challenged by all patriotic and law-abiding Americans, whatever their political persuasion. Methinks I smell a possible consensus here... This could open the door to that "general overhaul of the system" that is so desperately needed.
Pulitzer-prize winning Chris Hedges was spot on when he stated recently that the OWS patriots "should be seen as “conservatives” because “THEY CALL FOR THE RESTORATION OF THE RULE OF LAW.”
Anybody else want to add their two-cents on this important topic?
yes, the current government is actually illegal according to the nations laws in many different ways.
http://occupywallst.org/forum/organizational-map-2/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/dangers-of-unmoderated-forums/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/purple-dialogue/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/enough-jabbing-at-wall-street-lets-go-for-the-knoc/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/its-time-the-occupy-movement-as-a-whole-become-a-m/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/corporate-oligarchy/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/thetruth-socialismcapitalismcommunismmarxism/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/capitalism-versus-corporatism/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/no-war/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/help-me-understand/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/capitalism-a-love-story/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/sociology/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/energy-101-solution/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/ethics/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/break-your-left-right-conditioning/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/nader-kucinich-and-paul/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/5-facts-you-should-know-about-the-wealthiest-one-p/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/i-am-homeless-joe-jp-morgan-chase-accidentally-for/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/can-we-end-the-fed/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/why-end-the-federal-reserve-and-what-do-you-replac/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/where-are-we-and-how-do-we-move-forward/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/things-wall-st-did-were-not-illegal/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/teaching-the-occupation/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/this-forum-needs-structure/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/ows-is-not-your-personal-billboard-for-your-politi/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/systems-theory-primer/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/organize-inform-take-action-effect-change/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/better-website-needed/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/stop-playing-the-devils-games/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/nonviolence-the-only-path/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/ows-not-against-capitalism/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/this-is-not-about-political-stripe-it-is-about-bas/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/national-initiative-for-democracy/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/a-third-political-party-the-movement-of-the-middle/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/300-fema-camps/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/ows-is-a-false-flag-operation/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/why-this-will-not-work/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/paradigm-shift-now/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/a-proposal-for-focus/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/stop-the-bullshit-posts-and-get-organized/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/suggested-goals/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/oct-18-gao/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/naomi-klein-climate-change-fight-is-down-to-the-99/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/only-1-demand-includes-all-others-article-v-of-the/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/occupy-eco-villages/
i know it man. great post.
Wonderful words of encouragement. Thank you for sharing!
Thomas Jefferson may be with us in spirit, but he's dead and the powers that be don't pay much attention to dead people.
Jesus and the Buddha are long dead as well, and yet more ALIVE than so many of us...
My own feeling is that these great men live on in people like Nelson Mandela or the Dalai Lama or movements like the OWS.
As I like to say so often, Jesus may save, but he doesn't pay the utility bills.
But he does have a way of warming the heart ...
Oh, and by the way, as many of you may already know, Thomas Jefferson was extremely critical of CHRISTIANITY, especially the Catholic Church, but had a deep love and admiration for JESUS, to the point of composing while President his own personal version of the Bible, which has remained in print ever since and is known as "The Jefferson Bible".
If curious, try googling "Jefferson Christianity Jesus". Fascinating stuff!
Very true, "to stay healthy we need a regular general overhaul" of both Government and Business, and although I'm all in favor of taking down today's ineffective and inefficient Top 10% Management Group of Business & Government, there's only one way to do it – by fighting bankers as bankers ourselves. Consequently, I have posted a 1-page Summary of the Strategic Legal Policies, Organizational Operating Structures, and Tactical Investment Procedures necessary to do this at:
http://getsatisfaction.com/americanselect/topics/on_strategic_legal_policy_organizational_operational_structures_tactical_investment_procedures
Join
http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/StrategicInternationalSystems/
if you want to support a Presidential Candidate – myself – at AmericansElect.org in support of the above bank-focused platform.
TIOUAISE, You must have intended to refer to Article V when using a quote with the word "institutionalized". "Occasional conventions were envisioned by many of the country’s founding generation of leaders to be a sort of institutionalized avenue toward THE IDEAL OF REVOLUTION EVERY TWENTY YEARS, often attributed to Thomas Jefferson. According to Samuel Williams of Vermont (1743-1817), it was to be the means to accomplish periodic constitutional adaptation to changing times.”END-
WHAT IF; there was a doctrine of natural law, chopped up and partially included in the Declaration of Independence, then later, more cut out and placed in the Bill of rights, and this was self evident when the missing parts are recombined with what is carried by our social contract? There is still 70% more still unknown that has exactly that status. What it means is that free speech is not enough to assure that communication are adequate to see that vital speech for survival is shared and understood. The doctrine logically provides fixed criteria which engages public support for speech that reasonably qualifies with priority recognized by moderate numbers of citizens signing petitions. The corporate media will never expose secrets faithfully, but it can deal somewhat IF the public already knows. That is what I'd propose for revision of the first amendment at Article V because the misleading of the people by media is a tragic thing. That is logically followed by election reform. Info then decision.
May I refer you to the very beginning of that sentence, "On Wikipedia..." If not satisfied, check it on that site ans take it up with them.
I have no problem with the sentence. I only point out that it could be taken to infer Article V is an institutionalized rebellion. One has to use discernment with wiki, and they are not open to correcting things reasonably. Which does not mean it is all wrong either./
Ahh, selective quotations from the founding fathers...
How about this one:
"We should make the poor uncomfortable, to kick them out of poverty"
-Benjamin Franklin
This sort of cherry picking of quotes does nothing to lend credence to your claims and works counter to any goal you may have.
This is on par with the Tea Party quoting Thomas Paine while simultaneously claiming this is a "christian nation". It often makes you look intellectually vacuous and merely attempting to leverage greater thinkers from history.
"Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes" -Thomas Jefferson, The Unanimous Declaration of the Thirteen United States of America, July 4th 1776
You quote:
"Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes" -Thomas Jefferson, The Unanimous Declaration of the Thirteen United States of America, July 4th 1776
Our country is going through a MAJOR CRISIS that threatens its very existence. I think there is at present a national consensus that we are definitely NOT talking here about "light and transient causes".
I'm not sure OWS is just about poverty, though. It is also about middle class people, hard-working people who are doing their best and still not "making it".
Someone sent me to the wearethe99 tumblr to see all the whining, greedy poor people & stupid hippies with 6 figure student loan debt and the first photo I saw was someone who was in a 2 income household with children and still had various problems and no student loan debt.
My point was not poverty, but rather an educated guess that the OP would be uncomfortable with that quote from a respected founder. I use it to highlight the cherry picking of quotes from founders is not an effective way to convey a point, or persuade someone of the merits of your position.
ok, point taken.