Oh, your a google graduate! Good for you, I just hope you didn’t pay too much for your google diploma.
I’ll stick to the history books that actually wrote the truth. You know, those dusty text books that were actually written by those old dead male & female patriots who actually lived during the revolution. You know, those dead people that you all like to dismiss because they didn’t actually know what they were fighting for.
“Oh, your a google graduate! Good for you, I just hope you didn’t pay too much for your google diploma.”
I mention google because it’s the easiest of means available (children of 3, maybe under, being able to use it effectively) of collecting information. If you’re not even willing to exploit that to prevent sticking your foot in your mouth, there’s not much to be said of your research skills.
“I’ll stick to the history books that actually wrote the truth.”
I could reference countless books demonstrating the founders considered themselves Englishmen (well, at least the ones that actually were transplanted Englishmen; natives, blacks, Dutch, French, etc. naturally might not have seen it that way) with claims to the traditional “rights of Englishmen.” I enjoy “The Lamp of Experience: Whig History and the Intellectual Origins of the American Revolution” by Trevor Colbourn and “The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution” by Bernard Bailyn. But no need to dig up those particular books. The concept is veritably everwhere, even in revisionist works. So omnipresent that ignorant little google is well aware of it.
How you’ve managed to miss and/or ignore it is beyond me. It’s nigh-impossible to understand much of the Declaration and the Constitution, to say nothing of mountains of other documents, without this understanding. You don’t have to agree with it, of course, but I’d think you’d at least address it, rather than sticking your fingers in your ears, humming “mmmm, mmmm, mmmm, I don’t hear you.” Doesn’t speak well of the potential benefit of arguing with you.
“You know, those dusty text books that were actually written by those old dead male & female patriots who actually lived during the revolution.”
Quotes from the founding fathers are brim with shout outs to the “rights of Englishmen” and praise for the common law, if you’d read them:
Adams: “the liberty, the unalienable and indefeasible rights of man, the honor and dignity of human nature...and the universal happiness of individuals, were never so skillfully and successfully consulted as in that most excellent monument of human art, the Common Law of England.”
Jefferson: “Saxon ancestors left their native wilds and woods in the North of Europe, had possessed themselves of the island of Britain” and established “that system of laws [i.e. the common law] which has so long been the glory and protection of that country.”
A glory which disappeared following the imposition of feudalism by William the Conqueror, according to Jefferson, came back in trickles with the various constitutional acts, and was to come back in full force, if he got his way, in the colonies. Indeed, his vaunted universal humn rights, as expressed in the opening of the Declaration, were obviously but the rights of Englishmen extended to all humanity.
That phrase, by the way, “expatriated men,” which you seem to think implies they weren’t at all British anymore, means no more than a phrase which I use, namely “transplanted Englishmen.”
“You know, those dead people that you all like to dismiss because they didn’t actually know what they were fighting for.”
I dismiss the figments of your imagination, not the actual people.