HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Jefferson owned slaves. F...

Thu Jun 27, 2013, 12:50 AM

Jefferson owned slaves. Fuck the Declaration of Independence.

If you can spot the flaw in that logic, I congratulate you and ask you to consider that it is precisely the reason why any revelations about the personal life, opinions and proclivities of Greenwald, Snowden or for that matter Obama, Roosevelt or ANYONE is irrelevant.

46 replies, 3227 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 46 replies Author Time Post
Reply Jefferson owned slaves. Fuck the Declaration of Independence. (Original post)
Bonobo Jun 2013 OP
JI7 Jun 2013 #1
Bonobo Jun 2013 #5
ucrdem Jun 2013 #8
sabrina 1 Jun 2013 #27
sibelian Jun 2013 #41
Cali_Democrat Jun 2013 #2
Bonobo Jun 2013 #7
sabrina 1 Jun 2013 #28
sibelian Jun 2013 #42
Gravitycollapse Jun 2013 #3
Bonobo Jun 2013 #6
Gravitycollapse Jun 2013 #10
Bonobo Jun 2013 #12
Whisp Jun 2013 #4
Tx4obama Jun 2013 #9
Gravitycollapse Jun 2013 #11
Bonobo Jun 2013 #14
Gravitycollapse Jun 2013 #15
Bonobo Jun 2013 #19
railsback Jun 2013 #22
Bonobo Jun 2013 #23
railsback Jun 2013 #24
Bonobo Jun 2013 #25
railsback Jun 2013 #26
Bonobo Jun 2013 #31
railsback Jun 2013 #32
Bonobo Jun 2013 #34
Democracyinkind Jun 2013 #37
MNBrewer Jun 2013 #44
tblue Jun 2013 #16
Gravitycollapse Jun 2013 #18
Bonobo Jun 2013 #20
reusrename Jun 2013 #36
Amonester Jun 2013 #17
sabrina 1 Jun 2013 #29
bravenak Jun 2013 #13
Bonobo Jun 2013 #21
sabrina 1 Jun 2013 #30
Summer Hathaway Jun 2013 #33
DFW Jun 2013 #35
Democracyinkind Jun 2013 #38
DFW Jun 2013 #43
Douglas Carpenter Jun 2013 #39
emma7 Jun 2013 #40
kentuck Jun 2013 #45
Waiting For Everyman Jun 2013 #46

Response to Bonobo (Original post)

Thu Jun 27, 2013, 12:51 AM

1. oh shit, Snowden is today's Rosa Parks, Elie Wiesel, Thomas Jefferson

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JI7 (Reply #1)

Thu Jun 27, 2013, 12:57 AM

5. Umm, nope. But the logic is the same.

Are you capable of understanding principles of logical thinking?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JI7 (Reply #1)

Thu Jun 27, 2013, 01:00 AM

8. You left out ML King Jr, Gandhi, and Henry Thoreau.

Also Ayn Rand but that one's a secret.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JI7 (Reply #1)

Thu Jun 27, 2013, 02:21 AM

27. Lol! Congratulations on missing the point in a spectacular fashion!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JI7 (Reply #1)

Thu Jun 27, 2013, 08:19 AM

41. That's not as clever as it looks.


By repeatedly ascribing to your opposition positions that they can easily disavow in one response you essentialy present an argument for the sole purpose of being dismantled.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bonobo (Original post)

Thu Jun 27, 2013, 12:53 AM

2. If people want to post additional information about Obama, Greenwald, or Snowden....

 

I say have at it.

Whether or not it's irrelevant is up to the reader to determine.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Reply #2)

Thu Jun 27, 2013, 12:58 AM

7. Yes, and I could post that the moon is made of green cheese.

And hopefully someone would point out how stupid that idea is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Reply #2)

Thu Jun 27, 2013, 02:24 AM

28. Yes, I agree. Free expression is part of what keeps a country from becoming a totalitarian state.

Powerful people paying for smear campaigns against journalists however, is the opposite of free expression and no matter who they are aimed at, should be condemned, unless we are hypocrites.

(If you need details let me know I'll be more than happy to provide them)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Reply #2)

Thu Jun 27, 2013, 08:20 AM

42. Yeah, that reader would be me.


It's irrelevant.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bonobo (Original post)

Thu Jun 27, 2013, 12:53 AM

3. I agree with your sentiment. But this is a terribe analogy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gravitycollapse (Reply #3)

Thu Jun 27, 2013, 12:57 AM

6. It is the same logic. The analogy is irrelevant. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bonobo (Reply #6)

Thu Jun 27, 2013, 01:01 AM

10. The analogy is everything. Otherwise, why post it?

Thomas Jefferson was a slave owning rapist. Edward Snowden donated a few hundred dollars to Paul's campaign. The gulf between those two is so massive that it boggles the mind anyone would think this comparison was wise.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gravitycollapse (Reply #10)

Thu Jun 27, 2013, 01:03 AM

12. I should say the example is irrelevant.

I am using an analogy to show the logical fallacy at work and in that sense, the choice of examples is irrelevant.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bonobo (Original post)

Thu Jun 27, 2013, 12:54 AM

4. I always thought those guys were hypocrits.

 

All created equal and all that shit. lol.

Except for women! and those dark skinned people,

yah, all white males of european descent are equal the rest are barely human.

sorry, I don't understand the adorations of the Founding Daddies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whisp (Reply #4)

Thu Jun 27, 2013, 01:00 AM

9. +100 n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whisp (Reply #4)

Thu Jun 27, 2013, 01:02 AM

11. They were hypocrites and that's why much of what they said is total bullshit.

Thomas Jefferson raped women and owned slaves. Does that sound like the kind of person you want to take philosophical pointers from?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gravitycollapse (Reply #11)

Thu Jun 27, 2013, 01:07 AM

14. The point is that the message can be and should be separated from the messenger.

Unless one is incapable of coming to one's own decision about the merits or value of a particular assertion, then the content of the messenger is irrelevant.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bonobo (Reply #14)

Thu Jun 27, 2013, 01:09 AM

15. The message can never and should never be fully removed from the messenger.

To do otherwise is to not think critically. When considering a message, one must always consider the source before anything else. With that being said, nothing that has been said of Snowden so far invalidates what he's leaked. And it's unlikely anything ever will. Although nothing is impossible.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gravitycollapse (Reply #15)

Thu Jun 27, 2013, 01:15 AM

19. If a fact is claimed that is in doubt, you are correct.

If it is an idea in question, I believe you are more wrong than right.

In this case, Snowden, no one is denying the basic facts that the NSA is sucking up the meta data of tens or hundreds of millions of people.

In that context, his personal life and that of Greenwald's is utterly irrelevant.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bonobo (Reply #19)

Thu Jun 27, 2013, 01:35 AM

22. So, it seems Greenwald tried to suck up an old story and make it his own

 

because that shit has been out there for a few years now. Its like forgery.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to railsback (Reply #22)

Thu Jun 27, 2013, 01:57 AM

23. Please link to the old story about Prism! I'd be really interested to see it! nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bonobo (Reply #23)

Thu Jun 27, 2013, 02:03 AM

24. PRISM is like upgrading from PS1 to PS6

 

It doesn't change the fact that gathering data is gathering data.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to railsback (Reply #24)

Thu Jun 27, 2013, 02:06 AM

25. Then please link to the old stories that revealed that Apple, Google, Facebook and Skype

data is mined on a massive scale for meta data on just about everyone regardless of suspicion.

I'll wait.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bonobo (Reply #25)

Thu Jun 27, 2013, 02:17 AM

26. LoL, you make the accusations so sure of yourself

 

and don't even take the time to research it yourself?? Good Gawd. Use Google and a search parameter of like around 2010. Since you apparently do none of this, 'sour grapes' would seem to be the best description of this thread.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to railsback (Reply #26)

Thu Jun 27, 2013, 02:30 AM

31. Dude, are you going to link to show your claim that none of this is new news or not?

If not, just say so and stop with the hot air.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bonobo (Reply #31)

Thu Jun 27, 2013, 02:43 AM

32. Wow. Ok. I guess its easier to just flame away on sour grapes.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to railsback (Reply #32)

Thu Jun 27, 2013, 03:01 AM

34. I didn't think so because you don't have shit.

Thanks for the laugh.

I've been here over 10 years. I have seen all sorts of crap so try the old fake bait and switch with someone else.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bonobo (Reply #34)

Thu Jun 27, 2013, 03:42 AM

37. Ha... Totally owned him'

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gravitycollapse (Reply #15)

Thu Jun 27, 2013, 08:30 AM

44. I really have to disagree with you there

Snowden said "The NSA is spying on you."

Not "I am an example of what it means to live an incorruptibly moral life."

The first claim requires no evaluation of Snowden, where the second claim does.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gravitycollapse (Reply #11)

Thu Jun 27, 2013, 01:10 AM

16. The point is he got some things right.

And some things horribly, unforgivably wrong. And we can distinguish between the two. MLK had extramarital affairs, but he was a great and courageous civil rights leader and orator. Yes, a person can do awful things and sill be great, or do great things and be an a-hole. Does that mean we disregad everything they've done? Only if you need perfection, in which case, you got Jesus and....??????

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tblue (Reply #16)

Thu Jun 27, 2013, 01:13 AM

18. The source of a message must always be considered. That is what I'm saying.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gravitycollapse (Reply #18)

Thu Jun 27, 2013, 01:16 AM

20. Sometimes considering something results in saying "Yup, it's irrelevant." nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gravitycollapse (Reply #18)

Thu Jun 27, 2013, 03:39 AM

36. This is the root of why/how they want to use metadata to disrupt dissent.

 

Metadata is used to create the targets for a counterinsurgency operation. Sometimes (or according to research, in most cases) the most influential person in a social network (or insurgency) is not the most high profile or the most vocal individual in the group. With very large political groups (OWS for example), this new technology identifies those individuals who's participation in the group is the most critical.

What makes certain folks more critical than others is something very much like what you are going on about. A radical idea presented by a trusted friend will be more easily accepted than if it is tendered by a known loon or crackpot. That's why there is so much effort dedicated to discrediting folks rather than locking them up.

It is super easy to just plant some contraband on an individual and make an anonymous phone call. But if the person is viewed as ultra-reliable then no one will believe the attempted set-up. They have to be discredited in order for these kinds of dirty tricks to be effective.

That, in a nutshell, is why it is so important for them to accurately map our social networks. This is exactly what all the metadata is being collected and used for. It should be obvious how this information can be used/misused to affect our first amendment freedoms, specifically our right to peaceably assemble. There are a couple of stories floating around today about how the MIC is targeting opponents of the keystone pipeline. This counterinsurgeny technology and training is being used against law-abiding citizens right here in America.

Because the algorithms being used are easily handled by computers, and because no errors are introduced by trying to decode or translate any communication content, the system can create a very precise mapping of our social networks. Only actual metadata associated with each communication is logged into the software, and from that the algorithms sort out the social connections.

Remember that our country was founded by insurgents. Many, if not all of our heroes, would have been easily thwarted under this type of surveillance regime and folks have written about how Paul Revere could have been stopped.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whisp (Reply #4)

Thu Jun 27, 2013, 01:11 AM

17. Yep. They wrote down some awesome Utopian ideals, but...

lived like "Do as I say, not as I do."



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whisp (Reply #4)

Thu Jun 27, 2013, 02:27 AM

29. So you think we should toss out the Constitution then?



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bonobo (Original post)

Thu Jun 27, 2013, 01:06 AM

13. Jefferson was full of it.

 

If he believed what he wrote it should have applied to everyone.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bravenak (Reply #13)

Thu Jun 27, 2013, 01:22 AM

21. Yup, that's why I said fuck him.

We should have waited until someone without personal flaws wrote the Declaration.

It would be like, totally different then.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bravenak (Reply #13)

Thu Jun 27, 2013, 02:30 AM

30. That's the point, isn't it? Yet our whole country is based on his and the other very flawed

FFs' ideas. Have we made a huge mistake all these years? Was Bush right after all? It is just a 'quaint document' and we'd be better off with a Monarchy or a 'benign dictator'?

Those people wrote our Constitution and Bill of Rights. What should we do about it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bonobo (Original post)

Thu Jun 27, 2013, 02:55 AM

33. I have to disagree.

" ... any revelations about the personal life, opinions and proclivities of Greenwald, Snowden or for that matter Obama, Roosevelt or ANYONE is irrelevant."

There are many times when such revelations give one a different perspective of a man's words, behavior, motives - as well as ideals and principles.

I am certainly not talking about such trivia as a preference for Coke over Pepsi. And I am never interested in anyone's sex life.

There have been times when my knowing a bit of someone's background - someone I had previously viewed extremely negatively - softened my view of them, and reminded me that they are just flawed human beings, like the rest of us.

When someone like Snowden makes very serious allegations about how the gov't has easy access to our personal information - including that of the president - and then fails to provide proof of those allegations, there is no other course open to an interested citizenry than to judge the credibility of what he is saying by finding out just WHO this particular messenger is. There was no other way to assess whether his message was to be believed or dismissed as the ravings of a mad man - or perhaps something in between.

If you can't prove what you've said, I have to take you at your word - and I can only do that if it can be shown that you ARE a man of your word.

When I'm told I can't go behind THAT curtain, when I am told that what's behind that curtain is, in its entirety, irrelevant, I become increasingly convinced that the messenger, and everything he has said, is suspect.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bonobo (Original post)

Thu Jun 27, 2013, 03:02 AM

35. Yeah, and y'all would positivley FREAK at Jefferson's Facebook page.....

It's kinda difficult to use 21st century standards on 18th century anglo white guys.

With permission from the author, I am going to publish a piece of dialogue between a 75 year old retired President Thomas Jefferson and an accidental (and temporary) friend almost 200 years later. It's pure fantasy, of course, but it does highlight the point-there's no way one can't call Jefferson enlightened FOR HIS TIME, as, I think the op implied from the beginning. FYI, the book isn't out yet.--------------


Jefferson pondered. “I had only ten years with my Martha. She died before her thirty-fourth birthday. I was devastated. I must have spent three weeks inside a room in utter despair. Much later, I took up with someone that was completely illicit, at least in my day.”

“It’s all right, Mr. President, we all know about Sally Hemings, and don’t consider it a stain on your legacy at all.”

Jefferson looked stunned. “Really? You all know about Sally? Please don’t even tell me how. I don’t want to know. You can’t imagine what a scandalous thing this is in my time. Our country, then, has truly become the beacon of enlightenment we hoped--Franklin, Madison, the others.”

“Well, not entirely, I’m afraid,” I answered. “There are still strong, even violent forces of reaction that would bring the country back to the days when people were burned at the stake for such things. But they are a distinct minority, to be sure.” I didn’t want to get into the Texas School Board. “We even abolished slavery entirely in 1865.”

“It took that long? I failed in my efforts to get slavery abolished over the years, although I still hold some slaves myself to this day. Ironic, isn’t it? Many of us who were part of the beginning of this country envisioned abolishing slavery altogether by 1808. As president, I even signed a law back in 1808 banning the slave trade with Africa. Some of us had hoped to have slavery abolished by then, but we underestimated the resistance from the southern states, whose economies depended upon its continued existence. From what you say, it took far longer than any of us thought it would. I am glad to hear that it was finally done away with, although I imagine it had enormous economic consequences for the southern states. I’m sure some of them must have had a few objections.”

Oh, just a few, yeah. I didn’t comment on that.

He went on, “There will always be a conflict between the forces of free thought and enlightenment against those of glorified ignorance, control and darkness, I suppose,” Jefferson said. “But as long as they are beaten back by the forces of light and truth, they can be a tolerable evil—indeed, perhaps a useful one, so as to point out by example what is not worthy of aspiration and is to be avoided. I gather from what you’re leading up to that you want my opinion as to whether you’re right to consider abandoning your present life for what, to you, would be the more simple life in an era you would find, superficially, at least, to be primitive?”

“That is basically it in a nutshell,” I admitted.

“In a nutshell,” Jefferson repeated. “Nice little expression. You got that from Hamlet?”

“Umm, no, it’s a common phrase in my day. Is it from Hamlet?”

“Originally, yes. It is very apt. The evolution of language is never-ending. I’m glad you’ve given me a glimpse into what’s become of English in America. It certainly has evolved beyond anything we recognize as contemporary, which is only natural. But back to your question. You’ve said you’re married, but that your wife has left you and has petitioned for a legal dissolution of your marriage, correct?”

“Quite correct,” I confirmed.

“This is feasible in your day, and you have lost whatever affection you had for her long before this little marvel here occurred, correct?”

“Correct again.”

“Well, then, I’ll tell you what I think. But let me preface this by saying that I tell you this as one who has taken reckless risks in life. My affair with Sally may not raise eyebrows in your era, but in mine, it would be grounds for shunning me completely or even worse. This doesn’t even take into account the risk we all took in taking up arms to separate from Britain so many years ago. It cost years of hardship, and many lives were either lost or disrupted forever. The human cost was incalculable. What we call the American Revolution is still called the War of Rebellion in England. But the end result was a miraculous political experiment the likes of which has never been seen on this earth, at least not since the age of Pericles. From what you tell me, it has turned out far from perfect, and so is still a work in progress. But it is a never-ending path, the course of human events. Actually, I used that phrase…”

“In the Declaration of Independence,” I completed. “We all learn your words in school: ‘When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another…’”

A smile formed on his face, spreading to a wide beaming. “That is one of the most pleasing things I’ve learned from you, Robert. Thank you. You’ve truly made my day.”

I managed—just barely—to keep from chuckling and telling him that “make my day” was a familiar phrase, too, but not because of him. I think I would have had a difficult time explaining Dirty Harry to Thomas Jefferson.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DFW (Reply #35)

Thu Jun 27, 2013, 03:46 AM

38. Lol. It is quite good, but there's some WTF in there

Thomas "Wolf by the ear" Jefferson's efforts to end slavery.... It doesn't get better than that...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Democracyinkind (Reply #38)

Thu Jun 27, 2013, 08:28 AM

43. It's a VERY peripheral part of the story

The rest of it is kind of a wild ride, nothing to do with the OP.

Actually, the 1808 wishful thinking deadline, and the actual move to end the slave trade with Africa, are both taken from history, even if someone refraining from explaining Dirty Harry to Jefferson was just a part of the quirky personality of the narrator.

I'll let DU know if I hear of its coming out in print or on line.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bonobo (Original post)

Thu Jun 27, 2013, 03:56 AM

39. I think YOU are one missing the point. The fact that Snowden is a creep means that we don't have

anything to worry about an ever increasing and relentlessly expanding surveillance industrial complex. It is a simple fact that specifically because his girl friend poll dances, his neighbors didn't like him and Glenn Greenwald liked porno means that it doesn't matter if the intelligence service either are already or are rapidly developing the ability to track who and when we make phone calls, send text messages, send E-mails or what websites we search. Snowden and Greenwald ARE THE ISSUE. No matter how much these cranks and kooks like Al Gore or Valarie Plame or Joe Wilson or several former senior NSA and CIA officials protest! Who the hell should care if government is watching and keeping records of all our electronic communications and electronic activities when we have the important issue of the personal weirdness of Ed Snowden and Glenn Greenwald. QUIT CHANGING THE SUBJECT!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bonobo (Original post)

Thu Jun 27, 2013, 06:04 AM

40. the flaw in your logic

Flaw in the logic?

1. It assumes that all people have to be perfect in order to ever be taken seriously. Nobody is perfect.

2. You are judging people of the past based on modern ideas of equality and culture. If you lived in those times as a white person you would have very likely done a lot of what the people you protest were doing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bonobo (Original post)

Thu Jun 27, 2013, 08:34 AM

45. "The wheels of justice grind slowly but exceedingly fine..."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2556519

The Declaration of Independence simply states our desires to be free from the chains of monarchy and overlords.

The Constitution is a living document that changes slowly, as we have seen. We could not accept the Constitution of 1776 today, without the Amendments and changes over time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bonobo (Original post)

Thu Jun 27, 2013, 08:58 AM

46. It's a superficial gossip-driven society, with a mass mentality to match.

And we wonder why things don't go well. Gee, I can't imagine.

Couldn't agree with you more.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread