Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Hemingway's Ghost

Take your best shot punk.


214 posted on 02/04/2009 2:19:18 PM PST by ForGod'sSake (ABCNNBCBS: A lie will travel halfway around the world before the truth can get its shoes on!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 213 | View Replies ]


To: ForGod'sSake
Take your best shot punk.

Okay. For openers: John Hancock gained his wealth through his family's relationships with a succession of Massachusetts royal governors; he was an aristocrat of the highest order---at least in colonial terms. When the Stamp Act Crisis first hit Boston, Hancock preached moderation as a loyal British subject . . . until Sam Adams convinced him otherwise. Later, Hancock enjoyed a clandestine, cordial relationship with Thomas Hutchinson; Hutchinson even sought to use their relationship to exploit what he perceived was a split in the Whig party between Adams (Sam) and Hancock.

And let's not forget that Hancock profited handsomely in shipping prior to the Townshend Acts---as a royal aristocrat---and afterwards he probably made even more money as a smuggler. This from a man whose refusal to hand over the Lydia was arguably the first direct act of resistance to British authorities by Massachusetts colonials . . . to say nothing of the Liberty affair.

That's just off the top of my head. Were I at home where I have access to my books, we could discuss in depth the political climate in Boston prior to April 19, 1775 . . . which future revolutionaries were trying to gain favor with the Massachusetts royal government . . . which two Massachusetts political families---one of them who played a key role in fomenting the revolution, of course---had a long-standing political feud over the failure of the revolutionary family to be appointed to a lucrative royal government post . . . which well-known revolutionary was actually supposed to be a royal tea agent for the East India Company.

Even Samuel Adams, arguably the greatest revolutionary of all time, and arguably the most altruistic of the Founding Fathers, could not incite revolution through altruism alone. He had to employ Boston's North End and South End gangs to riot for him during the Stamp Act Crisis, and he sure as hell used their muscle to enforce his boycott of British goods. Plus, he had to wrap some of the rioting around "traditional" riots in Boston like the Guy Fawkes Day riots.

Evidently you consider these people deities, and completely forget they were mortal men. They were great men, but largely, they had the same faults as the rest of us; the same passions and the same weaknesses. Altruism is a crock of sh*t; sorry.

217 posted on 02/05/2009 6:47:18 AM PST by Hemingway's Ghost (Spirit of '75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 214 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson