Comments on: The End of the Revolution and the Beginning of Independence https://outpost-of-freedom.com/blog/?p=180 when the government is pointing their guns in the wrong direction Thu, 25 Aug 2016 06:01:15 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.2.4 By: Outpost of Freedom » Blog Archive » The Bundy Affair #15 – Free Speech and Assembly v. Conspiracy https://outpost-of-freedom.com/blog/?p=180#comment-604471 Thu, 25 Aug 2016 06:01:15 +0000 http://www.outpost-of-freedom.com/blog/?p=180#comment-604471 […] occasionally violently, against the tax collectors, as well as other British officials, including judges, and they used muskets to do so.  They saw such demonstrations as simply a louder voice, freedom […]

]]>
By: Hunt https://outpost-of-freedom.com/blog/?p=180#comment-27 Wed, 20 Apr 2011 14:37:03 +0000 http://www.outpost-of-freedom.com/blog/?p=180#comment-27 In reply to Steven Gaylord.

Steven,
The losing side always claims that they were screwed. However, if you look at the history of the state ratification conventions, your accusations against the Philadelphia convention looses all of its merit. Only a very small minority made that claim.

Consider that all that cam e out of Philadelphia was a piece of paper. It had no standing, at all, but was sent to the Congress (under the Articles of Confederation) and was then forwarded by them to the states for ratification. By forwarding the Constitution to the states for ratification, the Congress, apparently, agreed that the piece of paper was worthy of consideration by the states. Congress was not to decide the matter, the state were.

Each state then called for a convention with the exception of Pennsylvania, ever state allowed all of its male citizens to participate in the selection of the delegates to their respective conventions. In most cases, the delegates were against the Constitution, some even pledged to reject it.

As the various conventions were in progress, those who attended as delegates, in many cases, returned to their constituents and asked to be released from their obligation to oppose — giving their reasons to those constituents. Most were released and allowed to vote to ratify.

Who are we, over 200 years later, to challenge that process that made this country the only one in the world, before, or since, truly one created by the people — to provide for self-government.

In looking for someone to blame for what happened, we seem to want to go after those who, based upon the outcome, had the foresight to envision a government that could sustain itself, and overcome the problems inherent in the Articles of Confederation — to take on the responsibility of the monetary obligations incurred by the War; to structure a government that was representative of the people, and, was created without coercion nor established by force.

No, I cannot buy your argument. I am working on an article now, dealing with the Fourteenth Amendment, which should dispel your notion that it was the Constitution (and the Federalists) that created the problem that we have, today. It falls squarely on the abolitionists who both before and after Lincoln’s death were intent on creating a new nation, contrary to that Constitution.

You will have to wait until I complete the article on the Fourteenth Amendment, which will be posted here. You can, however, read a book by Pauline Maier, “Ratification”, to understand how extremely fair the ratification by state convention was.

]]>
By: Steven Gaylord https://outpost-of-freedom.com/blog/?p=180#comment-26 Wed, 20 Apr 2011 04:08:51 +0000 http://www.outpost-of-freedom.com/blog/?p=180#comment-26 In reply to Hunt.

Well Gary, we got screwed from the beginning…

The ol’ US of A was founded with the ratification of our original constitution, the Articles of Confederation in 1781. But the deck was deliberately stacked against the defenders of the young republic at the Philadelphia Convention in 1787. The plan by the Federalists was not to revise the Articles of Confederation, but to replace it with a new one, that would allow, over time, a gradually growing central government that would eventually evolve into a global empire.

The Federalists leader, Alexander Hamilton repeatedly left the Convention for weeks at a time. Now the great money interests of New York didn’t yet exist. Wall Street didn’t yet exist and neither did the New York Stock Exchange. No “robber barons,” or Rockefeller, or Astor. No Dupont and no Vanderbilt. So, who does that leave? The Rothschild family.

Anyways, like I said, the deck was stacked and of the 55 delegates to the Convention, 41 were politicians and 34 were lawyers, at least 21 of the 55 delegates favored some form of monarchy. Those who had orchestrated the Convention actually favored abolishing the states. James Madison, proposed that the states be “reduced to corporations.” (I see a resemblence here)

Only 8 of the signers of the Declaration of Independence attended and only 6 of the signers of the Articles of Confederation were there. Jefferson and John Adams were in Europe, Patrick Henry refused to attend, and Thomas Paine, Samuel Adams and Christopher Gadsen were not chosen as delegates. 14 of the delegates would later resign from the Convention in disgust and go home. So, the remaining 41 delegates, acting against their “charter” to merely revise the Articles of Confederation, instead scrapped it and replaced it with the foundation of what has become today, unquestionably an empire serving the interests of an international elite. 224 years ago our Constitution was given a disease and today our country is dying because of this.

]]>
By: Richard Bartel https://outpost-of-freedom.com/blog/?p=180#comment-25 Sat, 27 Nov 2010 01:52:20 +0000 http://www.outpost-of-freedom.com/blog/?p=180#comment-25 Excesses of Child Protective Services (CPS). Just after the Emancipation Proclamation freeing slaves in many areas over a schedule, some slave owners tried to use child protection or parental suitability laws to prevent the slaves with children from leaving, by having them declared unfit parents if they did leave.

]]>
By: | You Have Tread On Me https://outpost-of-freedom.com/blog/?p=180#comment-24 Wed, 15 Sep 2010 08:57:22 +0000 http://www.outpost-of-freedom.com/blog/?p=180#comment-24 […] The End of the Revolution and the Beginning of Independence […]

]]>
By: Hunt https://outpost-of-freedom.com/blog/?p=180#comment-23 Tue, 25 May 2010 01:01:42 +0000 http://www.outpost-of-freedom.com/blog/?p=180#comment-23 Steve,
I agree that our history and heritage is being dumbed down even more. You have to understand, however, that in the past, shortly after the Revolution, it became simplified, with no political objective, because the war was over and people just went on with their lives. It was a matter of fact, and didn’t get as much attention as we would have expected until after about 1825.
When people started looking back to record what had happened (those who had not lived through it), they began by looking for people, events and dates, with which to create an abbreviated scenario of those events that lead to out independence. When they identified events, the Boston Tea Party or the Boston Massacre had much more appeal than the relatively non-violent events described in
The “End of the Revolution and the Beginning of Independence”. Of course, they didn’t have to worry, as we do, bout the change in the nature of government. It was well fixed until 1861. So, the events, dates, and people were condensed into its shortened version, and have been taught that way, since.
Now, however, when what was fought for and achieved, then, is under attack and we are reduced to slavery, far more than those who lived under British rule, it is time to look not as history as s simplified narrative, rather, to look at history as an instruction book on how to demonstrate out dissatisfaction with the government. We can take this page of history and emulate the actions of the Founders. This will let those usurpers understand that we are far more serious than just sign waving people demonstrating in the streets (most often, with a permit from the government).
As you suggest, it is also time that the truth of how this once great nation came to be so that our children will understand that came from commitment, even at risk of life, so that we can reestablish that foundation of Liberty.

]]>
By: Steve Gaylord https://outpost-of-freedom.com/blog/?p=180#comment-22 Tue, 25 May 2010 00:40:04 +0000 http://www.outpost-of-freedom.com/blog/?p=180#comment-22 It’s criminal what’s being done to education in America. 40+ years later and to me it’s barely recognizable. Revisionists have literally screwed things up. Anyways, a few months ago, I read “End of the Revo…” aloud to my grand kids, but in my own narrative form, and this because of their ages. They loved it! We had fun. Afterwards we had the ice cream as I had promised.
We don’t need an Obama… Just like we didn’t need Wilson or Roosevelt. And we don’t need a U.S.S (United Socialist States) either.
If we ever dump this collectivist entity, then we should dump the Constitution… But just for repair. Until it’s repaired, dust off the ol’ Articles of the Confederation and use these until these corrections are made to the Constitution. Corrections that will never allow avarice men another opportunity to corrupt it. Sadly, I’ve traded in my optimism for pessimism.

]]>
By: Hunt https://outpost-of-freedom.com/blog/?p=180#comment-21 Tue, 13 Apr 2010 22:43:24 +0000 http://www.outpost-of-freedom.com/blog/?p=180#comment-21 Bruce,
Apparently, you have not read the entire article. I think that what is said makes very clear what the primary cause of taking up arms was.
There is no doubt that there were w number of factors which were cause for the colonists to resent the British impositions. However, the singular act which brought them to the point of insurrection , and resulted in the first Declaration of Independence (see Worcester County, Massachusetts – October 4, 1774), was the fact that they had been denied their lawful government, and, that the courts and the judges had become servants of the elite.
Gary

]]>
By: Bruce Palm https://outpost-of-freedom.com/blog/?p=180#comment-20 Tue, 13 Apr 2010 22:34:41 +0000 http://www.outpost-of-freedom.com/blog/?p=180#comment-20 I believe it was not the Stamp, Tea, nor Port Acts which caused the people to consider revolt but, the Currency Act of 1764 was the result of Benjamin Franklin’s testimony to the British Board of Trade in which he explained the benefits of Colonial Scrip, which allowed the government instead of private banks to have the benefit of money creation, thus lowering the tax burden on the people. This was a complete reversal from the established British school of economics in which the Government borrowed hard money (gold and silver) from private banks at interest, and it was viciously opposed by the British banking interests for this reason.

]]>