The founding fathers

[SomeRandom]

The US has a unique sort of set up, with regards to their own history. That being primarily the founding fathers.
But not being American I’m a bit lost as to how they are viewed by American culture. We learnt about them, of course, during world history class back in school. But ehh, I feel like the Simpsons gave me more info about that.

So my American friends. Help me understand. How are they viewed? How are they taught? And how are they criticised?

I realise answers may vary very wildly. But I’m down for a little bit of anarchy, if it comes to that

 

[sun rise]

It's different now to some degree, but when I was learning about them it was with deep gratitude for their sacrifice, courage and wisdom in creating the country.

They are credited for creating the political structure of the country and a constitution that has endured for a long time.

Calling them the "founding fathers" and thinking about how ideal fathers behave toward children conveys what I was taught.

Currently they are being criticized for being products of their time (slave owners) etc. But to me that's unfair. They were surely imperfect but their morality and ethical behavior was exemplary.

Washington could have been a King but refused. That to me says quite a bit.

 

[Rational Agnostic]

It's different now to some degree, but when I was learning about them it was with deep gratitude for their sacrifice, courage and wisdom in creating the country.

They are credited for creating the political structure of the country and a constitution that has endured for a long time.

Calling them the "founding fathers" and thinking about how ideal fathers behave toward children conveys what I was taught.

Currently they are being criticized for being products of their time (slave owners) etc. But to me that's unfair. They were surely imperfect but their morality and ethical behavior was exemplary.

Washington could have been a King but refused. That to me says quite a bit.

I agree. I often wonder if all the people who criticize Washington, Jefferson et. al would've actually been moral revolutionaries in the 1700s. I'm almost certain that they would not have been. I'm guessing they likely would've had slaves also, because it was the cultural norm at the time. Jefferson was actually revolutionary in that although he had slaves, he actually wrote about how he felt bad about it and he treated them well and gave them the option to leave (as far as I've heard, though I may be mistaken).

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

They are still revered, but few learn more about them than what the are exposed to in high school history class and popular media (e.g., the History Channel).

Among scholars in political science, history, public administration and so on, they are taught various ways, often without much deference. When I covered them, I always pointed out that they represented a limited portion of the population, were flawed, and had a vision of a new and ideal nation...which we still have not achieved...

 

[Sunstone]

Today, if you ask Americans which of the Founders was THE father of the country, most will tell you George Washington. If you were able to ask that same question of Americans living around 1800, the answer would be Benjamin Franklin.

Why the change?

The biographies of the two. Franklin quite arguably made as many or perhaps even more contributions to the new country as Washington, but his biography is not nearly as 'tame' as Washington's. In just about every respect, Franklin is the more controversial man.

 

[Curious George]

The US has a unique sort of set up, with regards to their own history. That being primarily the founding fathers.
But not being American I’m a bit lost as to how they are viewed by American culture. We learnt about them, of course, during world history class back in school. But ehh, I feel like the Simpsons gave me more info about that.

So my American friends. Help me understand. How are they viewed? How are they taught? And how are they criticised?

I realise answers may vary very wildly. But I’m down for a little bit of anarchy, if it comes to that

Speaking from my own experience, grades k-2 was very much a tourist approach, 3-5 was some bad things were done but some great things were done, grades 6-12 was "it's complicated."

We learned of atrocities committed, racism, sexism, and classism, but also of philosophical ideals, courage, perseverance, and intelligence. The English were definitely painted as the bad guys, with the founding fathers the loved, but flawed, underdogs pursuing a noble truth, even if they did not realize all which that truth entailed.

While most schools on the west coast do indeed tackle some of the more controversial aspects of the founding fathers the emphasis regarding America's history is that of a march towards progress, there by justifying much of the negative light the founding father's actions cast. As much as other races were viewed as "noble savages," in that time period, so too do we almost regard the founding fathers as noble savages in some of our educational institutions.

 

[Revoltingest]

It's different now to some degree, but when I was learning about them it was with deep gratitude for their sacrifice, courage and wisdom in creating the country.

They are credited for creating the political structure of the country and a constitution that has endured for a long time.

Calling them the "founding fathers" and thinking about how ideal fathers behave toward children conveys what I was taught.

Currently they are being criticized for being products of their time (slave owners) etc. But to me that's unfair. They were surely imperfect but their morality and ethical behavior was exemplary.

Washington could have been a King but refused. That to me says quite a bit.

"Founding fathers" always struck me as wrong.
They aren't parental figures.
I call'm "founders".

 

[ADigitalArtist]

I agree. I often wonder if all the people who criticize Washington, Jefferson et. al would've actually been moral revolutionaries in the 1700s. I'm almost certain that they would not have been. I'm guessing they likely would've had slaves also, because it was the cultural norm at the time. Jefferson was actually revolutionary in that although he had slaves, he actually wrote about how he felt bad about it and he treated them well and gave them the option to leave (as far as I've heard, though I may be mistaken).

I think more what people are realizing is that the founding fathers were just ordinary politicians. That is, egotistical, ambitious, wealthy elitists. That had some good ideas, some bad ideas, and a lot of hangups. Obsessed with legacies, making names for themselves. And gathering power.

The slavery issue is more complicated than either strawman. There were plenty of people against slavery, even then. Half of the 'founding fathers' were abolitionists. Especially those best connected to French ally philosophers. With Jefferson as the largest exception, a wealthy plantation owning man who slept with his slaves (ew) and did not release them post death like Washington. He was called out on this behavior even then (ironically by the same reporter who broke the story about Hamilton pre Reynolds paper).

The thing is though, circling back to the first paragraph, all the founding were not innocent lambs as they've been quasi deified as being. First and foremost, they were politicians. And the biggest stumbling block to abolition, as it ever was, was how much it would effect their power base and pocket books.

 

[Cooky]

The US has a unique sort of set up, with regards to their own history. That being primarily the founding fathers.
But not being American I’m a bit lost as to how they are viewed by American culture. We learnt about them, of course, during world history class back in school. But ehh, I feel like the Simpsons gave me more info about that.

So my American friends. Help me understand. How are they viewed? How are they taught? And how are they criticised?

I realise answers may vary very wildly. But I’m down for a little bit of anarchy, if it comes to that

Take my hand and run with me out of the past called yesterday
And walk with me into the future of tomorrow
Yesterday must be forgot no looking back no matter what
There's nothing there but mem'ries that bring sorrow
Yesterday is gone gone but tomorrow is forever
No more crying tears leave tracks and mem'ries find their way back
Tomorrow's waking let's journey there together
Yesterday is gone gone gone but tomorrow is forever
I care not for yesterday I love you as you are today
Yesterday just helped to pass the time while waiting
We must forget the passing time my love for you is the real kind
The kind that won't hurt you no never
Yesterday is gone gone gone but tomorrow is forever

 

[rational experiences]

When some stone masons etch their faces in the stone mountain and claim that they are the founding Fathers, when the land was owned by the Indians and their Fathers, who own the Holy Land and DNA and the etching of their Father's face in the stone because of science invention.

Then it proves that they knew all about the reality of radiation sciences.

Is it any wonder today that an organization who believes in the scientific encoding of every human study owns the title NASA and science thesis now claims and we began from aliens?

Instead of God the stone has to exist first as stone and everything else is after that stone. Yet he says everything is from before the stone in relativity because he consciously lives in a gas atmosphere....and gas existed before stone.

So then spiritual humans have to remind you, the founding Fathers said God the stone, not radiation and aliens....and you are meant to honour what they realized, but you don't.

God and its ancient science themes said SATAN.....and if you believe in your owned male human encodings then you would realize you already own your own less of the son....NASA. And own fake beliefs.

For when you burn out the upper atmospheric gases by a man/male owned designed machine cause, and you SEE what you cause, you can only SEE it due to still existing, and not for any other reason.

 

[Rational Agnostic]

I think more what people are realizing is that the founding fathers were just ordinary politicians. That is, egotistical, ambitious, wealthy elitists. That had some good ideas, some bad ideas, and a lot of hangups. Obsessed with legacies, making names for themselves. And gathering power.

The slavery issue is more complicated than either strawman. There were plenty of people against slavery, even then. Half of the 'founding fathers' were abolitionists. Especially those best connected to French ally philosophers. With Jefferson as the largest exception, a wealthy plantation owning man who slept with his slaves (ew) and did not release them post death like Washington. He was called out on this behavior even then (ironically by the same reporter who broke the story about Hamilton pre Reynolds paper).

The thing is though, circling back to the first paragraph, all the founding were not innocent lambs as they've been quasi deified as being. First and foremost, they were politicians. And the biggest stumbling block to abolition, as it ever was, was how much it would effect their power base and pocket books.

Interesting. I will admit I'm somewhat ignorant about history. I agree the founders had both good and bad aspects of their lives and personalities. I still believe that many people who criticize them today would not have behaved any better than them if they were in their shoes.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Interesting. I will admit I'm somewhat ignorant about history. I agree the founders had both good and bad aspects of their lives and personalities. I still believe that many people who criticize them today would not have behaved any better than them if they were in their shoes.

It's incidental to say that 'if you were raised in a different culture with different values you'd have different beliefs,' but to say that 'they're just a product of their time' often glosses over the myriad beliefs of that time. Like I said, two of the most prolific writers of the age, John Adams and Alexander Hamilton, wrote heavily against slavery and for women's rights as well. It's not like there was no opportunity to learn of or have those ideals.

The pendulum may over swing, as it often does, but anger at the glossing over the flaws and harms the founding fathers did exists for a reason. Absolutely nothing negative was said about the decisions of the founding fathers when I was in school and that, I think, should end.

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

It's incidental to say that 'if you were raised in a different culture with different values you'd have different beliefs,' but to say that 'they're just a product of their time' often glosses over the myriad beliefs of that time. Like I said, two of the most prolific writers of the age, John Adams and Alexander Hamilton, wrote heavily against slavery and for women's rights as well. It's not like there was no opportunity to learn of or have those ideals.

The pendulum may over swing, as it often does, but anger at the glossing over the flaws and harms the founding fathers did exists for a reason. Absolutely nothing negative was said about the decisions of the founding fathers when I was in school and that, I think, should end.

I got into some trouble in high school, because I'd read stuff...like the Declaration of Independence, Common Sense, The Constitution, the Federalist Papers...Das Kapital...and so on...with teachers, and with fellow students...