Posted on 05/28/2002 11:05:06 AM PDT by stainlessbanner
| Review: 'Founding Brothers' is a television landmark It's a common refrain today when a politician runs awry: "What would the founding fathers say?" The implication, of course, is that the founding fathers were above reproach, men who stuck to the straight and narrow, laying down a shining example for us to follow. The History Channel, in a mini-series that ought to be required viewing for all letters-to-the-editor writers, dissipates the fog that now surrounds these men and their reputations. The sad and unavoidable truth is the founding fathers lied, lusted and lurched from dilemma to dilemma, just like the folks in office today. The four-hour tell-all focuses on the men most of us associate with the founding of the republic -- Washington, Adams and Jefferson. The glue that bound these strong personalities together was the American Revolution. Once that was over, they came apart like the buttons on one of Britney Spear's blouses. Washington, alone of the founders, emerges with very few blemishes on his reputation. Another founder emerges from the series in a reshaped fashion -- Alexander Hamilton. Heretofore best know for getting killed in a duel with Aaron Burr, Hamilton was actually a major player in Washington's cabinet. He was arguably the most important man in the government after the president. He was also, sadly, constantly plotting against his brethren, The show goes to considerable length to chronicle the split between Adams and Jefferson. Their arguments - small government vs big government - still resonate today. One of the salient points, alas, of the series, is the role of newspapers in the verbal war between the followers of Adams (the Federalists) and Jefferson (the Republicans). The newspapers became partisan players, hurling charges and invectives that only served to deepen the divide. But these two presidents did set one shining example, perhaps their greatest lesson. Near the end of their lives, Adams and Jefferson renewed their correspondence and their once-close relationship. Like the government they helped found, their friendship weathered terrible storms and still survived. Click here to return to story: http://www.savannahnow.com/stories/052502/LOCfoundingfathers.shtml |
I thought they were taking some digs on Jefferson.
Christianity played a major part in America's creation. Yet today it seems as though many would wish this history forgotten altogether.
1891 - The U.S. Supreme Court restates that America is a "Christian Nation."
"Our laws and our institutions must necessarily be based upon and embody the teachings of the Redeemer of mankind. It is impossible that it should be otherwise; and in this sense and to this extent our civilization and our institutions are emphatically Christian ... this is a religious people. This is historically true. From the discovery of this continent to the present hour, there is a single voice making this affirmation ... we find everywhere a clear definition of the same truth ... this is a Christian nation." (Church of the Holy Trinity vs. United States, 143 US 457, 36 L ed 226, Justice Brewer)
The ads for this show seemed to emphasize how the Founding Fathers fought the British and then fought themselves.
Strictly speaking, this is not incorrect (Hamilton and Jefferson or Hamilton and Burr certainly come to mind). But it has always seemed to me that the problem with the French Revolution was that the leaders spent most of their time sending their rivals to the guillotine. The American Revolution was nothing like that.
I suppose I'm too sensitive, but I see this as a variation on moral equivalence: "See everybody! Our revolution was exactly like the French Revolution!"
I want to celebrate our past, not struggle to find reasons to lose respect for it.
Hope I'm not being unfair to the show.
I thought the same thing. I would like to go and read some of the letters they quoted from Jefferson to others during the Washington administration to see if they interpretated them the way I would. They made Jefferson appear mean-spirited and petty to a degree that I believe it would have been difficult for him to have made such a positive contribution to the founding of our country had it all been true.
What I am wondering, though, is how likely and how much resistance would they meet, if the History Channel decided to run a miniseries on the faults of "politically correct" figures, such as MLK, Malcolm X, Fidel Castro, Gloria Steinem, etc.
Having seen part 1, I was fascinated and disappointed at the same time.
Fascinated by the historical context, but disappointed by the (allegations? insinuations?) that all in power were a bunch of conniving, self-indulgent egotists. ( my take )
The characterizations of our founders make Bill Clinton look like a "noble soul".
That disturbs me a great deal.
Any information or links concerning Joseph Ellis and his works would be greatly appreciated.
He taught a class about Vietnam and used his experience's in combat there to explain war to the students. The only problem was he never went to Vietnam. He made it all up. He was suspended by his college.
During the Clinton impeachment he was one of the scholar's pushing a story about proof that Jefferson fathered a child with his slave Sally Hemmings. This was used to say that what Clinton did wasn't a big deal. Recently it came out that this DNA evidence only proves that a Jefferson male fathered Sally Hemmings child, not Thomas Jefferson.
Our government is not at all like Jefferson imagined it should be. Since almost everyone has become accustomed to the nanny state and can't even conceive of it being any other way, Jefferson has become persona non grata.
The more he is held up by classical liberals as someone who's ideas are more correct than ever, he is to be pilloried (sometimes subtly) at every chance so as to keep everyone confortable with the status quo.
Actually you are quite WRONG on that score. An example is the series The History of the Gun. Very informative and it doesn't take an anti-gun stand. They have this real fat guy who comments about guns and artillery pieces a lot who seems to know EVERYTHING about guns. I find the History channel overall to be quite fair in its presentations. Perhaps you should watch the History Channel again.
By the way, does anyone know why they called them the founding "brothers" instead of the usual founding "fathers?"
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.