Review: 'Founding Brothers' is a television landmark

Savannah Now ^ | 25 May 2002 | Chuck Mobley

[Paulus Invictus]

Having just finished the bios of John Adams and Ben Franklin, there is no doubt that the Founders had their differences politically and otherwise. Adams appeared to be jealous of Franklin's popularity in France and Jefferson and Adams, once great friends, became enemies and did not speak for years. Hamilton was greatly disliked by all for his behind-the-scenes efforts to undermine his "enemies", the other Founders.

[Paulus Invictus]

And owning a Dell will make your IQ and patience drop even more! My Bro's new, top-of-the-line Dell from Hell is a pure POJ (piece of junk).

[Restorer]

Lincoln wan't anything close to a saint. OTOH, a saint would not have been able to preserve the Union, without which the North American continent would probably have suffered through a number of wars among contending states in the last 135 years. Also, without a strong United States, it is highly likely that all of Eurasia would have fallen to either the Axis or the Commies. In either case, the enormous combined resources of the Old World would probably have eventually overwhelmed the New.

So despite his many flaws I consider Lincoln to be by far the greatest American president, both for his actions at the time and his beneficient influence on subsequent history.

[Razz]

Lincoln wan't anything close to a saint. OTOH, a saint would not have been able to preserve the Union...

Too bad he didn't preserve the Constitutional Republic either.

As for the Axis/Soviet's possible conquest of all of Eurasia, neither would have come into power without the financial backing of the very powers they eventually fought against ... in any case, you're trying to balance a 'might-have-been' against an historical fact.

It would be equally valid to suppose the Union would have comprised all of present-day Canada West of Quebec, excluding British Columbia, and the Confederacy would have extended all the way to Panama and included Cuba. Who knows how powerful those two countries might have been?

[MamaLucci]

Thanks all for the informative responses.

[Drammach]

Thanks for the links and commentaries on Joseph Ellis.

Like I said in my previous post, I was seriously dismayed at some of the characterizations of such figures as Jefferson, Adams, etc..
These insights into the authors' own character explain much.

[William Tell]

Twodees said: "Hmmm, three ships per year....Michael Bellesiles wouldn't happen to be the author, would he? ;-)"

No, but my memory of the quote is flawed as to context.

The passage is from "From Lexington to Liberty" by Bruce Lancaster, Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1955.

   It may be mentioned here that the long-cherished
   "African triangle" - that is, New England ships 
   bringing molasses from the West Indies to be made 
   into rum to be carried to Africa for the purchase of
   slaves to be sold in the West India market for more
   molasses to be made into more rum to purchase more
   slaves, etc. - seems to belong to legend.  Recent
   studies made by Charles H. P. Copeland of the Peabody
   Museum of Salem show that the Massachusetts slave
   trade averaged less than one ship a year over a 
   period of more than a century prior to the Revolution.

I am by no means an expert in the history of the slave trade, but what I have read would indicate that there would not have been a tremendous market for slaves in New England and little incentive to deliver them there for transport elsewhere.

My own understanding is:

   Great Britain     has: manufactured goods   needs: rum,sugar,wood,tobacco,cotton
   New England       has: rum, wood            needs: sugar, manufactured goods
   the Old South     has: tobacco,cotton       needs: slaves,manufactured goods
   West Indies       has: tobacco, sugar       needs: slaves,manufactured goods
   Africa            has: slaves(people)       needs: rum, manufactured goods,tobacco

The "triangle" which I see involving New England is:

   Take rum and (imported) manufactured goods to Africa
   Take slaves to West Indies
   Take sugar to New England

The reliance on sugar imported from the West Indies which is being cultivated by slaves certainly creates a dependence in New England on the slave trade.

Now that I have done this exercise, it would seem that the author's claim is ambiguous. Much depends on what he classifies as "the slave trade" in New England. The issue should be whether the ship routinely carries slaves, not whether the ship delivers slaves to New England.

Perhaps some Freeper with access to the Peabody Museum of Salem can research this detail further.

[LiberalConspiracy]

Marxism has inflitrated America. Every one of the 10 planks of communism are now apart of our laws. Under each pank is the US equivalent law in parenthisis. Because of the liberal left America's window of life is fading. We are at a cultural crossroads, roughly 50/50 going in each way. I believe 2008 will be the deciding year. If Hillary Clinton the well known socialist is elected president then America is doomed. We will either see a revolution or a nation fall into slavery. If she is not elected then the battle rages on between the marxist liberals and the patriotic conservatives who are trying desperately to hold onto the county that they once knew.

Had our founders been alive today they would be according to the marxist liberals right-wing gun wielding extremists who are a threat to America. These same liberals control the media, Universities, the entertainment industy, and the school systems.

First Plank: Abolition of property in land and the application of all rents of land to public purposes. (Zoning - Model ordinances proposed by Secretary of Commerce Herbert Hoover widely adopted. Supreme Court ruled "zoning" to be constitutional in 1921. Private owners of property required to get permission from government relative to the use of their property. Federally owned lands are leased for grazing, mining, timber usages, the fees being paid into the U.S. Treasury.)

Second Plank: A heavy progressive or graduated in-come tax. (Corporate Tax Act of 1909. The 16th Amendment, allegedly ratified in 1913. The Revenue Act of 1913, section 2, Income Tax. These laws have been purposely misapplied against American citizens to this day.)

Third Plank: Abolition of all rights of inheritance. (Partially accomplished by enactment of various state and federal "estate tax" laws taxing the "privilege" of transferr-ing property after death and gift before death.)

Fourth Plank: CONFISCATION OF THE PROPERTY OF ALL EMIGRANTS AND REBELS. (The confiscation of property and persecution of those critical - "rebels" - of government policies and actions, frequently accomplished by prosecuting them in a courtroom drama on charges of violations of non-existing administrative or regulatory laws.)

Fifth Plank: Centralization of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly. (The Federal Reserve Bank, 1913--the system of privately-owned Federal Reserve banks which maintain a monopoly on the valueless debt "money" in circulation.)

Sixth Plank: Centralization of the means of communications and transportation in the hands of the State. (Federal Radio Commission, 1927; Federal Communications Commission, 1934; Air Commerce Act of 1926; Civil Aeronautics Act of 1938; Federal Aviation Agency, 1958; becoming part of the Department of Transportation in 1966; Federal Highway Act of 1916 (federal funds made available to States for highway construction); Interstate Highway System, 1944 (funding began 1956); Interstate Commerce Commission given authority by Congress to regulate trucking and carriers on inland waterways, 1935-40; Department of Transportation, 1966.)

Seventh Plank: Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State, the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan. (Depart-ment of Agriculture, 1862; Agriculture Adjustment Act of 1933 -- farmers will receive government aid if and only if they relinquish control of farming activities; Tennessee Valley Authority, 1933 with the Hoover Dam completed in 1936.)

Eighth Plank: Equal liability of all to labor. Establishment of industrial armies especially for agriculture. (First labor unions, known as federations, appeared in 1820. National Labor Union established 1866. American Federation of Labor established 1886. Interstate Commerce Act of 1887 placed railways under federal regulation. Department of Labor, 1913. Labor-management negotiations sanctioned under Railway Labor Act of 1926. Civil Works Administration, 1933. National Labor Relations Act of 1935, stated purpose to free inter-state commerce from disruptive strikes by eliminating the cause of the strike. Works Progress Administration 1935. Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, mandated 40-hour work week and time-and-a-half for overtime, set "minimum wage" scale. Civil Rights Act of 1964, effectively the equal liability of all to labor.)

Ninth Plank: Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries, gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equitable distribution of population over the country. (Food processing companies, with the co-operation of the Farmers Home Administration foreclosures, are buying up farms and creating "conglomerates.")

Tenth Plank: Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children’s factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production. (Gradual shift from private education to publicly funded began in the Northern States, early 1800’s. 1887: federal money (unconstitutionally) began funding specialized education. Smith-Lever Act of 1914, vocational education; Smith-Hughes Act of 1917 and other relief acts of the 1930’s. Federal school lunch program of 1935; National School Lunch Act of 1946. National Defense Education Act of 1958, a reaction to Russia’s Sputnik satellite demonstration, provided grants to education’s specialties. Federal school aid law passed, 1965, greatly enlarged federal role in education, "head-start" programs, textbooks, library books.

[MHT]

Jos. Ellis' work, contrary to the declarations of his employer (Mt. Holyoke College), cannot be trusted. After all, this is the SAME Joe Ellis who made a big deal in the Ken Burns' special on Jefferson that TJ was not the father of Sally's baby(-ies) then, when the timing was good for Clinton, said that debatable DNA evidence proved TJ did father the child. He thinks that "Everyone did it" and was Clinton should be vindicated.

Sadly, no one has yet convinced him that "everyone" doesn't lie about themselves, or their subjects.

How can we trust ANYTHING he writes?

[MHT]

ManCow calls the History Channel, "All Hitler, All the Time".

[LiberalConspiracy]

The marxist liberals also slipped in the lie of seperation of church and state in 1947. The seperation of church and state was the only way to create a cultural revolution. By doing so it would enable the government to brainwash new generations of children with anti-God anti-moral beliefs.

The only place seperation of church and state is found in is the Soviet Constitution Article 13.

You know that our America history has been wiped clean when our own constitution says all men are created equal endowed by our creator with certain unalienable rights...And people still state America was not founded on God's principles.

Patrick Henry: "It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religions, but on the gospel of Jesus Christ. For this very reason peoples of other faiths have been afforded asylum, prosperity, and freedom of worship here."

George Washington: "Do not let anyone claim to be a true American, do not let them claim the tribute of American Patriotism if they ever attempt to remove religion from politics. If they do that, they cannot be called true Americans."

Benjamin Rush, signer of the Declaration of Independence: "The only foundation for ... a republic is to be laid in Religion. Without this there can be no virtue, and without virtue there can be no liberty, and liberty is the object and life of all republican governments."

But the marxist liberals have changed America. Our Republic is dying and therefore God is no longer needed because the marxist liberals have decided His law is not the same law they want to follow. As we can see after the ban of God in schools in 1947 we saw the rise of the first generation to have been apart of this ban, one which caused America's foundation to crack. The birth of the 1960's liberals.

1756 John Adams, America's second President: "Suppose a nation in some distant region should take the Bible for their only Law Book, and every member should regulate his conduct by the precepts here exhibited... What a paradise would this region be!"

As the Declaration of Independence was being signed on July 4, 1776, Samuel Adams said: "We have this day restored the sovereign to whom all men ought to be obedient. He reigns in heaven, and from the rising to the setting of the sun let his kingdom come."

Marxist liberals have used their influence to indoctrinate school children with the idea that all religions are equal, that all ideas and beliefs are equal and that challenging any certain belief is wrong. This is how they brainwashed each new generation starting in the late 40s. With each new generation these beliefs are forced on children even harder. To question them would be to insult one race, one group, or one lifestyle and to the liberal that is inexcusable.

But the truth of the matter is all ideas are not equal, all lifestyles are not equal, and all religions are not equal. There is an almighty God which the liberals refuse to acknowldge, but will be forced to once Christ returns.

2 Timothy 4:3-4, , "For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables."

[Bonaparte]

"...when the timing was good for Clinton..."

Oh, Ellis' has definitely earned his kneepads. Here's an ad he placed in the NYT during impeachment (post 53).

[doglot]

Edward R. Hamilton, Bookseller has the book in their latest offering. I circled it to buy. Thanks for your heads up. It is now x'd. I thought maybe the book would have good material that the series left out.

I too thought the series tried to make Jefferson look particularly bad. The Sally Hemmings thing is wearing thin with me. We have no way of knowing and may never. The History Channel has made me aware of a lot of things that public schools did not.

[Bonaparte]

We all live and learn, doglot. Charles Beards' economic theory of the founding went virtually unchallenged for decades -- until 1957, when a young PhD candidate named Forrest McDonald absolutely destroyed that theory with an intensely researched disertation later entitled "We The People" (great book, btw).

One thing that's helped me out a lot is the study of historiography or the methods of historical research. A classic in this area is Edward Hallett Carr's justly celebrated "What Is History?" It raises and discusses some fascinating questions. Here's a nice copy for only $3 plus shipping.

[Twodees]

Your analysis seems sound. The author also limits his claim to Massachussetts, which was not the major slave trading state anyway. He certainly didn't try to stretch his claim to include all of New England. If he had he would have had to exclude Rhode Island and New York.

You're right that there was not much of a market for slaves in New England. The major market was in the Caribbean and in South America. If Lancaster is saying that the triangle trade is a legend based on a study of Massachussetts shipping prior to independence and ignoring other states as well as the era of American shipping under our own flag, then he's the one manufacturing a legend.

Modern historians are mostly a gang of marxist liars. From time to time, a scholar of a different discipline will make a foray into historical writing and will be attacked by the gatekeepers of historical writing. When that happens, I always give the outsider's work a chance.

[Twodees]

Good recomendations, Bonaparte. Forrest MacDonald is roundly despised by his marxist contemporaries in his discipline because he's a Southern conservative and because he's brilliant. Good man, McDonald.

[Twodees]

If Lincoln preserved the union, when did he do so and where is it now? It's much more accurate to say that Lincoln presided over the dissolution of the union. Four states seceded in response to his election, and the rest of the South followed once Lincoln declared his intention to wage war against the departed states. The union was divided for the entire time he was in office and was still divided when he was murdered. The union that existed when he was elected hasn't been seen since. Lincoln didn't preserve the union, or it would have been in existence at some point since he began his campaign to do so.

On the subject of Jim Crow, how on earth could you think those laws were passed in reaction to reconstruction when the laws were passed first in the northern state of Delaware? Delaware wasn't subject to the military occupation of "reconstruction", so it's more accurate to say that Jim Crow was a northern response to the 13th amendment.

Ever since the "civil rights era", the insinuation about Jim Crow has been that it was a Southern phenomenon, thus all the references to "the Jim Crow South". You seldom see any reference to the Jim Crow North, though Jim Crow laws were a national phenomenon which began in the north.

[Publius6961]

I thought they were taking some digs on Jefferson.

This well-produced dramatization just couldn't resist including the usual zingers, half-truths, omissions and misrepresentations.

Slick revisionism is still revisionism.
For the already well-informed it is a delightful production.
For the ignorant, it is really effective propaganda.
Food for thought, not a lifetime of meals...

[stainlessbanner]

A real, intelligent discussion! I've begun to think these no longer existed here!

Yes, there are still pockets of intelligent discussion : )

Thanks for posting, Razz

[Restorer]

It would be equally valid to suppose the Union would have comprised all of present-day Canada West of Quebec, excluding British Columbia, and the Confederacy would have extended all the way to Panama and included Cuba. Who knows how powerful those two countries might have been?

Quite possibly correct. It is even more likely that these powers would be bitterly hostile to each other and therefore, regardless of their strength, essentially neutralized when it comes to overseas influence.

Even a peacably seceded Confederacy would have had innumerable ongoing conflicts with the remaining United States, from fugitive slaves to borders to navigation of rivers. It seems highly unlikely that all these issues could be settled peacably, and that therefore war would have ensued eventually.

BTW, why the exclusions for the US conquering all of Canada?

in any case, you're trying to balance a 'might-have-been' against an historical fact.

As are you. You assume a peaceful secession would have been a wonderful thing. This is a 'might-have-been'. Since the war was a horrible thing, your assumption is that the absence of that war would not have resulted in even worse things. This can, of course, never be proven either way.

IMHO, the War, not Lincoln, killed the "Old Union." Such a system is incompatible with the demands of modern war and a country that stuck with it would probably not survive a major war. I consider the demise of the old system a tragedy, but most Americans, even today, consider our present system, with all its flaws, preferable to almost any other existing one.