In your opinion, what topics in history should be taught to children in school?

I know in school, I learned very little, making me ignorant to so many topics that is discussed today..

What is your fav topics and what do you think is getting over looked into days education of history?

Originally posted by Princess
In your opinion, what topics in history should be taught to children in school?

I know in school, I learned very little, making me ignorant to so many topics that is discussed today..

What is your fav topics and what do you think is getting over looked into days education of history?
I think that there should be emphisis on why the subject of history is important in the first place. I think for most kids in school there is a tendency to see history as something taught by bearded, pipe smoking academics in ivy covered universities. It is little wonder that many young people are turned off by this. In the past history was taught by the numbers. Teachers would force their students to memorize dates: you know, 1066 Battle of Hastings, 1620, Pilgrims land at Plymouth Rock, 1773, American Revolution begins, etc. What they have NOT done is find ways to make this subject interesting by showing how it relates to their own lives. For instance, rather than stating that in 1620 the pilgrims landed, how many of us know that over half of the people who arrived on the Mayflower did not survive the first year. Do we also know that if it were not for the indians the entire colony would have perished? Do we also know that the indians who saved the colonists at Massachusetts Bay were themselves killed by disease within years of the landing?

If we can present history as a series of stories that young people can identify with, then we can reach their minds. History is little more than a group of stories. We need to look at how ordinary people lived in the past. Finally it needs to be made relavent. For example, we can study the Salem Witches Trials and compare that level of fanaticism to the fanatical regeim of the Taliban in Afghanistan.

American History. Much more is needed so people can have a foundation of what the founders were doing and thinking.

The first 5 Presidents should get a TON of time devoted to them.
Along with the important documents of the time. Dec of Independance, Constituiton, Bill of Rights. I know they are gone over but more thourough review is definetly in order.

I have recently learned Jefferson was an absolute prick and in debt all his life.
He lost to John Adams and at that time the loser became Vice Pres. Unlike Adams, who rallied behind and fully suported Washington, Jefferson undermined and literally tried to destroy Adams, especially at a difficult time when we were almost at war with France. They were at one time very good friends but we see what the quest for power can do to people.
This is not the picture that has been painted of Jefferson. Not that he didnt have any important contributions, he did. But the way he acted during the Adams presidency was shameful.

Also, people complain a lot about partisanship. Let me tell you, its always been there. Matter of factly, it was probably way worse back then.

Same with the press, everyone says that its biased one way or the other. It was horrendous back then and printed blantant lies and was just so irresponsible. This is where we got the sedition act which was presented to John Adams, which he signed and was a blemish on his record.

What sucks is, I don't think there is enough time to get everything that is needed into one classroom year. Not to mention, they teach you to memorize for testing, there isn't a huge concern as to whether or not you *understand* what is going on or has gone on in our past.

Cristina-

Yeah, I'm with Bill . . . I think there should be a year (junior year maybe) of ONLY early American history i.e. pre-Civil War. I think that kids should be encouraged to UNDERSTAND our important documents and not just figure they're obsolete or "living".

I'd like to see more than a 1/2 year on Civics, too.

I think that getting into histories of "other" places gets hairy because we've become such a melting pot. I mean, a bunch of Korean kids in LA care NOTHING about Greece, and there aren't many white/black kids in Georgia interested in the Ming Dynasty.

The problem that many kids are going to have in learning is that history isn't an absolute. We tend to change our minds on what happened as political climes change. THAT'S what we have to be careful of . . . that we're not teaching a PC version of history.

Originally posted by D Durden
Yeah, I'm with Bill . . . I think there should be a year (junior year maybe) of ONLY early American history i.e. pre-Civil War. I think that kids should be encouraged to UNDERSTAND our important documents and not just figure they're obsolete or "living".
This is SUPPOSED to be acomplished with Governmnet class. I believe the problem is that as Criminal pointed out, nobody cares about history. Most think "Why am I taking this class, it has no relevence to life." Then teachers who do the date memorization crap just make it worse. I think more emphasis needs to be placed on the individuals who participated in history. Pictures of bread lines in the 30s don't have near the impact as a personal account. They need to teach that the people they see standing in those lines didn't realize they were living history. Most people don't. They need to emphasize the LESSONS behind historical events. Overrall it just needs to be more personal. I have always loved history and always read about historical figures. However, it took on a whole new meaning the first time I opened a history book and read about something I lived through. Kinda puts things in perspective.

Originally posted by Criminal
For instance, rather than stating that in 1620 the pilgrims landed, how many of us know that over half of the people who arrived on the Mayflower did not survive the first year. Do we also know that if it were not for the indians the entire colony would have perished? Do we also know that the indians who saved the colonists at Massachusetts Bay were themselves killed by disease within years of the landing?

I am being a little picky because I sense what I think may be a little political correctness.

There was exploration of Americas throughout the 1500's and maybe much earlier. English colonies were a result of economic and religious struggle. For Englishmen Indians were of interest as customers of English goods in trade for commodities such as hides and skins. In 1578, Walter Raleigh and Humphrey Gilbert began the English settlement process.

1606 James I divided the rights to American resources to The Virginia Company of London (34th and 41st parallel) and the Plymouth Company (38th and 45th parallels) and permitted The London Company sent the Godspeed, Discovery and Sarah Constant which landed in 1607. The crews died partially as a result of being forced to search for gold and other loot rather than farm. The winter of 1609-10 was a "starving time." Indians in Virginia had no tolerance for the invaders and killed their livestock and terrorized the Englishmen.

A truce between the Indians and "Virginians" developed when Pocahontas married John Wolfe in 1614. In 1622, after her death, the tribesman tried to completely eliminate the Englishman by pretending to offer goods for sale. The massacre forced the Virginia Company of London into bankruptcy.

After one previous failed attempt to colonize, the Plymouth Colony became real estate dealers. The first enduring settlement in New England resulted from Puritan Separatists who were being persecuted and executed for their strict observance of the Bible. The Puritans got permission from Virginia Company of London and James I did not guarentee them religious freedom but said they would not be molested if they were peaceful. These were the Pilgrims 35 "saints" and 65 "strangers" who sailed the Mayflower. The wrote up The Mayflower Compact which established a civil government when they landed Dec. 1620. They settled on land previous cleared by Indians. Several friendly Indians who had survived the disease that had occured possibly as a result of the previous attempts at colonization, showed the Puritans how to grow corn and obtain seafood and it was this peaceful situation that gave rise to an October Thanksgiving. The Plymouth settlement were left in the lurch as their financial backers stopped sending supplies after their debts were paid in fur trade but they apparently got by with farming since their objective was not financial gain.

Originally posted by Princess
In your opinion, what topics in history should be taught to children in school?


Unfortunately, most high school students (heck, Americans in general) know very little about their own country’s history. Even though it’s just a basic fact, most don’t know who wrote the Constitution (James Madison) much less the importance of the document. Much of time, we can trace the lack of interest in history to poor teaching and a dry, quick recitation of our nation’s events. Nothing kills a kernel of interest more.

First, as others have stated here, it needs to be communicated WHY history is relevant to the lives of the students. Many kids at the high school level are terribly concerned with their "freedom" and "independence" regardless of how illusory it really is at that age. Nonetheless, the importance of independence could be used to explain why and how the country was founded by making parallels between the Founders and the students’ personal lives.

Second, at the basic level, it can be emphasized that having a basic understanding of history allows us to know where we've been, what we've done, and that it provides a compass on where we may be going and how to deal with issues that arise based on our experience.

Course-wise, there needs to be a real emphasis on the importance of Colonial and Revolutionary America. This HAS TO BE the foundation. Then an exploration of the remainder of U.S. history is crucial. These students need to KNOW our country’s entire history at more than a cursory level. However, I would avoid wandering into the minutiae because that will turn a lot of kids off quickly. Stick to the themes of why it’s relevant, why it happened, and other important facts.

I agree with what someone spoke to, the history of other countries needs to be saved for survey and advanced courses at the collegiate level.

I learned nothing in public school of any substance regarding history. There is a legal requirement to take to 2 classes of American History in high school but those classes were complete jokes.

I find a motivation to study history when uncovering controversial but objective truths. It is the seeking of truth and that the truth is accessible to everyone not just so-called teachers. It is like when studying the Bible and finding that "Christmas" is never mentioned to be Dec. 25 nor even a special day to be observed by Christians.

Also, I would argue that the civil wars in Afghanistan are reflective in some ways of the American Indian dilemma in that various larger nations were using them at various times and they had their own internal struggles for dominance. For example, in early Connecticut, the colonists enlisted the Mohegans and other friendly tribes in an effort to destroy the aggressive Pequots, because the Pequots were the evil doers back then.

Originally posted by Powerboss
American History. Much more is needed so people can have a foundation of what the founders were doing and thinking.

The first 5 Presidents should get a TON of time devoted to them.
Along with the important documents of the time. Dec of Independance, Constituiton, Bill of Rights. I know they are gone over but more thourough review is definetly in order.

I have recently learned Jefferson was an absolute prick and in debt all his life.
He lost to John Adams and at that time the loser became Vice Pres. Unlike Adams, who rallied behind and fully suported Washington, Jefferson undermined and literally tried to destroy Adams, especially at a difficult time when we were almost at war with France. They were at one time very good friends but we see what the quest for power can do to people.
This is not the picture that has been painted of Jefferson. Not that he didnt have any important contributions, he did. But the way he acted during the Adams presidency was shameful.

Also, people complain a lot about partisanship. Let me tell you, its always been there. Matter of factly, it was probably way worse back then.

Same with the press, everyone says that its biased one way or the other. It was horrendous back then and printed blantant lies and was just so irresponsible. This is where we got the sedition act which was presented to John Adams, which he signed and was a blemish on his record.

Sorry Powerboss, I edited your comments by mistake. I corrected it again so it is back the way that you left it.:rolleyes:

Originally posted by Snouter


I am being a little picky because I sense what I think may be a little political correctness.


I see you did your homework. You get an A.

I did not give the complete version of the events at Mass. Bay but only a thumbnail scetch for the same of an example.

BTW: I am decended from one of the colonists who arrived on the Mayflower.:)

I will see if I can kill this thread too!

That is, the following has had only 1 response; I wish that these words had been part of both my high-school(civics maybe) and college courses(history). Ya'll seem to have good ideas and am I the only one who sees too many linkages between the treatise, history, and current events?

Therefore, RE-posting:
The following is from a document purporting to have been translated from French early in the 20th century-ie, historical.

Do you think it's a work of fiction, or more factual than that?

Note this is a little of part 1; the source has 24 sections and in total is about 80 pages of text. Whoever wrote it read Machiavelli I would say.


No. 1

2. What I am about to set forth, then, is our system from the two points of view, that of ourselves and that of the OTHERS [].

6. Political freedom is an idea but not a fact. This idea one must know how to apply whenever it appears necessary with this bait of an idea to attract the masses of the people to one's party for the purpose of crushing another who is in authority. This task is rendered easier if the opponent has himself been infected with the idea of freedom, SO-CALLED LIBERALISM, and, for the sake of an idea, is willing to yield some of his power….

11. The political has nothing in common with the moral. The ruler who is governed by the moral is not a skilled politician, and is therefore unstable on his throne…
Great national qualities, like frankness and honesty, are vices in politics, for they
bring down rulers from their thrones more effectively and more certainly than the
most powerful enemy. Such qualities must be the attributes of the kingdoms of the OTHERS, but we must in no wise be guided by them.

14. In any … who have lost their personality amid the flood of rights ever multiplying out of liberalism, I find a new right - to attack by the right of the strong, and to scatter to the winds all existing forces of order and regulation, to
reconstruct all institutions and to become the sovereign lord of those who have left to us the rights of their power by laying them down voluntarily in their liberalism.

17. Before us is a plan in which is laid down strategically the line from which we cannot deviate without running the risk of seeing the labor of many centuries brought to naught.

21…. Without an absolute despotism there can be no existence for civilization which is carried on not by the masses but by their guide, whosoever that person may be. …. The moment the mob seizes freedom in its hands it quickly turns to anarchy, which in itself is the highest degree of savagery.

22. Behold the alcoholic animals, bemused with drink, the right to an immoderate use of which comes along with freedom….. The peoples of the OTHERS are bemused with alcoholic liquors; their youth has grown stupid on classicism and
from early immorality,


FROM ORIGINAL THREAD
CRIMINAL: So tell me, who wrote that? THe part of about the alcoholic animal especially made sense.

MY NEXT POST:
The author(s) are unknown, whether fact or fiction. The version I posted has been redacted by me to remove implications in the French version as to who the 'OTHERS' are, and therefore who the group is that writes/uses/directs?? these ideas.

remember, 24 Parts..

here is the rest of Part 1, Part 2. and a bit of Part 3:
Part 1. (continued)
25… The would-be wise men of the OTHERS, the intellectuals, could not make anything out of the uttered words in their abstractedness; did not see that in nature there is no equality, cannot be freedom: that Nature herself has established inequality of minds, of characters, and capacities, just as immutably as she has established subordination to her laws …

26 … we have set up the aristocracy of our educated class headed by the aristocracy of money. The qualifications for this aristocracy we have established in wealth, which is dependent upon us, and in knowledge, for which our learned elders provide the motive force.

27… we have always worked upon the most sensitive chords of the human mind,upon the cash account, upon the cupidity, upon the insatiability for material needs of man; and each one of these human weaknesses, taken alone, is sufficient to paralyze initiative….

No. 2

2.. … The OTHERS are not guided by practical use of unprejudiced historical observation, but by theoretical routine without any critical regard for consequent results. … For them let that play the principal part which we have persuaded them to accept as the dictates of science (theory)….

3. Do not suppose for a moment that these statements are empty words: think carefully of the successes we arranged for Darwinism, Marxism, Nietzsche-ism. To us Ourselves, at any rate, it should be plain to see what a disintegrating
importance these directives have had upon the minds of the OTHERS.

[N.B. See this board for the Dinosaurs vs Bible 'controversy'.]

5. … The part played by the Press is to keep pointing our requirements supposed to be indispensable, to give voice to the complaints of the people, to express and to create discontent. It is in the Press that the triumph of freedom of speech finds its incarnation. But the OTHERS States have not known how to make use of this force; and it has fallen into our hands ….

No. 3

5. …. if talkers get the right to babble, if journalists get the right to scribble any
nonsense side by side with good stuff, once the proletariat has no other profit out of the constitution save only those pitiful crumbs which we fling them from our table in return for their voting in favor of what we dictate, in favor of the men we place in power, …

7. We appear on the scene as alleged saviours of the worker from this oppression when we propose to him to enter the ranks of our fighting forces - Socialists, Anarchists, Communists …

10. … THE DIVISION OF MEN INTO CLASSES AND CONDITIONS. It is essential for all to know that OWING TO DIFFERENCE IN THE OBJECTS OF HUMAN ACTIVITY THERE CANNOT BE ANY EQUALITY, …

12. Remember the French Revolution… its reparations are well known to us for it was wholly the work of our hands.

16. At the present day we are, as an international force, invincible, because if attacked by some we are supported by other States.

[N.B.I am one of the OTHERS so far as I know. If the treatise be fact, I would
say knowledge of who are 'non-others' a good question, and one I don't pretend
to have an answer to.

As I read history, It appears that various groups might have thought they were
the 'non-others', and used these thoughts to their advantage??]

Originally posted by Snouter
I learned nothing in public school of any substance regarding history. There is a legal requirement to take to 2 classes of American History in high school but those classes were complete jokes.


I was really lucky . . . my history teachers were all really good and knew their stuff. Oddly enough, they were all either basketball or football coaches . . .

Originally posted by jwreck
This is SUPPOSED to be acomplished with Governmnet class. I believe the problem is that as Criminal pointed out, nobody cares about history. Most think "Why am I taking this class, it has no relevence to life." Then teachers who do the date memorization crap just make it worse. I think more emphasis needs to be placed on the individuals who participated in history. Pictures of bread lines in the 30s don't have near the impact as a personal account. They need to teach that the people they see standing in those lines didn't realize they were living history. Most people don't. They need to emphasize the LESSONS behind historical events. Overrall it just needs to be more personal. I have always loved history and always read about historical figures. However, it took on a whole new meaning the first time I opened a history book and read about something I lived through. Kinda puts things in perspective.

Well put, JW. I think that if kids knew WHY they were studying history, maybe they'd take more interest in it and, instead of memorizing historical facts, they'd apply historical reasoning.

More. Parts 4. thru 8. of 24.
No. 4

3. But even freedom might be harmless and have its place in the State economy without injury to the well-being of the peoples if it rested upon the foundation of faith in God, upon the brotherhood of humanity, unconnected with the conception of equality…. This is the reason why IT IS INDISPENSABLE FOR US TO UNDERMINE ALL FAITH, TO TEAR OUT OF THE MIND OF THE "OTHERS" THE VERY PRINCIPLE OF GOD-HEAD AND THE SPIRIT, AND TO PUT IN ITS PLACE ARITHMETICAL CALCULATIONS AND MATERIAL NEEDS.

4. In order to give the OTHERS no time to think and take note, their minds must be diverted towards industry and trade.

5. …Their only guide is gain, that is Gold, which they will erect into a veritable cult, for the sake of those material delights which it can give.

No. 5

6… The science of political economy invented by our learned elders has for long past been giving royal prestige to capital.

7. … Nowadays it is more important to disarm the peoples than to lead them into war: ..

10. IN ORDER TO PUT PUBLIC OPINION INTO OUR HANDS WE MUST BRING IT INTO A STATE OF BEWILDERMENT BY GIVING EXPRESSION FROM ALL SIDES TO SO MANY CONTRADICTORY OPINIONS AND FOR SUCH LENGTH OF TIME AS WILL SUFFICE TO MAKE THE "OTHERS" LOSE THEIR HEADS IN THE LABYRINTH …This is the first secret.

11. …THERE IS NOTHING MORE DANGEROUS THAN PERSONAL INITIATIVE: if it has genius behind it… We must so direct the education of the OTHERS communities that whenever they come upon a matter requiring initiative they may drop their hands in despairing impotence

No. 6

1. We shall soon begin to establish huge monopolies, reservoirs of colossal riches, upon which even, large fortunes of the OTHERS will depend to such an extent that they will go to the bottom together with the credit of the States on the day after the political smash ...

6…What we want is that industry should drain off from the land both labor and capital and by means of speculation transfer into our hands all the money of the world, and thereby throw all the OTHERS into the ranks of the proletariat

7. To complete the ruin of the industry of the OTHERS we shall bring to the assistance of speculation the luxury which we have developed among the OTHERS, that greedy demand for luxury which is swallowing up everything. …

No. 7

1. … What we have to get at is that there should be in all the States of the world, besides ourselves, only the masses of the proletariat, a few millionaires devoted to our interests, police and soldiers.

4. The principal factor of success in the political is the secrecy of its undertakings: the word should not agree with the deeds of the diplomat.

5. … THE PRESS, WHICH, WITH A FEW EXCEPTIONS THAT MAY BE DISREGARDED, IS ALREADY ENTIRELY IN OUR HANDS.

No. 8

1. … resolutions should be set forth in expressions that shall seem to be the most exalted moral principles cast into legal form…. It will surround itself with publicists, practical jurists, administrators, diplomats and, finally, with persons prepared by a special super-educational training IN OUR SPECIAL SCHOOLS.
[N.B. Could we guess Harvard, Yale, Cambridge??]

These persons will have consonance of all the secrets of the social structure… political alphabets and words; they will be made acquainted with the whole underside of human nature, with all its sensitive chords on which they will have to play.

2. We shall surround our government with a whole world of economists. That is the reason why economic sciences form the principal subject of the teaching given to OURS. Around us again will be a whole constellation of bankers, industrialists, capitalists and - THE MAIN THING - MILLIONAIRES, BECAUSE IN SUBSTANCE EVERYTHING WILL BE SETTLED BY THE QUESTION OF FIGURES.

Originally posted by Powerboss
American History. Much more is needed so people can have a foundation of what the founders were doing and thinking.

The first 5 Presidents should get a TON of time devoted to them.
Along with the important documents of the time. Dec of Independance, Constituiton, Bill of Rights. I know they are gone over but more thourough review is definetly in order.

I have recently learned Jefferson was an absolute prick and in debt all his life.
He lost to John Adams and at that time the loser became Vice Pres. Unlike Adams, who rallied behind and fully suported Washington, Jefferson undermined and literally tried to destroy Adams, especially at a difficult time when we were almost at war with France. They were at one time very good friends but we see what the quest for power can do to people.
This is not the picture that has been painted of Jefferson. Not that he didnt have any important contributions, he did. But the way he acted during the Adams presidency was shameful.

Also, people complain a lot about partisanship. Let me tell you, its always been there. Matter of factly, it was probably way worse back then.

Same with the press, everyone says that its biased one way or the other. It was horrendous back then and printed blantant lies and was just so irresponsible. This is where we got the sedition act which was presented to John Adams, which he signed and was a blemish on his record.
You did hit on something that I find very interesting. The fight between Adams and Jefferson was in a broader sense the fight between the Federalists and the Republicans. Adams was a Federalist as as such he represented the Conservative position. He supported a strong federal government with "Hard" money tied to Gold and Silver. He supported the rights of the government over the individual and wanted the US to have close ties to Britian over France. Jefferson was a Democrat-Republican and supported the rights of the individual. He favored "soft" money, opposed standing armies, preferring militias. He pushed for the establishment of a bill of rights and supported the notion of a "continuous" revolution. Many find it ironic that America's first champion of individual liberties and democracy was himself a wealthy slave owning aristocrat.

Continuing Parts 9 thru 16 of 24(redacted)
No. 9

2. The words of the liberal, which are in effect the words of the masonic watchword, namely, "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity," will, when we come into our kingdom, be changed …, namely, into "The right of liberty, the duty of equality, the ideal of brotherhood."

9. In order to annihilate the institutions of the OTHERS before it is time we have touched them with craft and delicacy, and have taken hold of the ends of the springs which move their mechanism. These springs lay in a strict but just sense of order; we have replaced them by the chaotic license of liberalism.

11. Above the existing laws without substantially altering them, and by merely twisting them into contradictions of interpretations, we have erected something grandiose in the way of results. These results found expression in the fact that the INTERPRETATIONS MASKED THE LAW.

12. This is the origin of the theory of course of arbitration.

13. You may say that the OTHERS will rise upon us, arms in hand, if they guess what is going on before the time comes; but in the West we have against this a manoeuvre of such appalling terror that the very stoutest hearts quail - the undergrounds, metropolitans, those subterranean corridors which, before the time comes, will be driven under all the capitals and from whence those capitals will be blown into the air with all their organizations and archives.

[N.B. !!!!!]

No. 10

4. WHEN WE HAVE ACCOMPLISHED OUR COUP D'ETAT WE SHALL SAY THEN TO THE VARIOUS PEOPLES: "EVERYTHING HAS GONE TERRIBLY BADLY, ALL HAVE BEEN WORN OUT WITH SUFFERING. WE ARE DESTROYING THE CAUSES OF YOUR TORMENT - NATIONALITIES, FRONTIERS, DIFFERENCES OF COINAGES. …

5. TO SECURE THIS WE MUST HAVE EVERYBODY VOTE WITHOUT DISTINCTION OF CLASSES AND QUALIFICATIONS… The people will submit to this regime because it will know that upon these leaders will depend its earnings, gratifications and the receipt of all kinds of benefits.

10. Liberalism produced Constitutional States, …THEN IT WAS THAT THE ERA OF REPUBLICS BECOME POSSIBLE OF REALIZATION; AND THEN IT WAS THAT WE REPLACED THE RULER BY A CARICATURE OF A GOVERNMENT - BY A PRESIDENT, TAKEN FROM THE MOB….

No. 11

4. The OTHERS are a flock of sheep, and we are their wolves. And you know what happens when the wolves get hold of the flock? ....

5. There is another reason also why they will close their eyes: for we shall keep promising them to give back all the liberties we have taken away as soon as we have quelled the enemies of peace and tamed all parties ....

No. 12

1. The word "freedom," which can be interpreted in various ways, is defined by us as follows -

2. Freedom is the right to do what which the law allows….

3. …: what is the part played by the press to-day? It serves to excite and inflame those passions which are needed for our purpose or else it serves selfish ends of parties…

4. NOT A SINGLE ANNOUNCEMENT WILL REACH THE PUBLIC WITHOUT OUR CONTROL. Even …all news items are received by a few agencies, in whose offices they are focused from all parts of the world.

6. …. All the so-called liberals are anarchists, if not in fact, at any rate in thought. Every one of them in hunting after phantoms of freedom, and falling exclusively into license, that is, into the anarchy of protest for the sake of protest ....

8. Literature and journalism are two of the most important educative forces, and therefore our government will become proprietor of the majority of the journals.

12. All our newspapers will be of all possible complexions - aristocratic, republican, revolutionary, even anarchical - for so long, of course, as the constitution exists …

No. 13

1. .. the press will distract the current of thought towards, new questions, (have we not trained people always to be seeking something new?). ….

3. … In order that the masses themselves may not guess what they are about WE FURTHER DISTRACT THEM WITH AMUSEMENTS, GAMES, PASTIMES, PASSIONS, PEOPLE'S PALACES …: these interests will finally distract their minds from questions in which we should find ourselves compelled to oppose them

4. The part played by the liberals, utopian dreamers, will be finally played out when our government is acknowledged. …, till there is not among the OTHERS one mind able to perceive that under this word lies a departure from truth in all cases where it is not a question of material inventions

6. Who will ever suspect then that ALL THESE PEOPLES WERE STAGE-MANAGED BY US ACCORDING TO A POLITICAL PLAN WHICH NO ONE HAS SO MUCH AS GUESSED AT IN THE COURSE OF MANY CENTURIES?

No. 14

5. IN COUNTRIES KNOWN AS PROGRESSIVE AND ENLIGHTENED WE HAVE CREATED A SENSELESS, FILTHY, ABOMINABLE LITERATURE.

No. 15

1. When we at last definitely come into our kingdom by the aid of COUPS D'ETAT …. Every kind of new institution of anything like a secret society will also be punished with death; those of them which are now in existence, are known to us, serve us and have served us, we shall disband …

3. In THEIR societies, in which we have planted and deeply rooted discord and Protestantism…..

4. Meantime…, we shall act in the contrary way: we shall create and multiply free masonic lodges in all the countries of the world…. AMONG THE MEMBERS OF THESE LODGES WILL BE ALMOST ALL THE AGENTS OF INTERNATIONAL AND NATIONAL POLICE since their service is for us irreplaceable

[N.B. The original purports NOT to be Masonic in origin.]

5. The class of people who most willingly enter into secret societies are those who live by their wits, careerists, and in general people, mostly light-minded, with whom we shall have no difficulty ….

6. … they thirst for the emotion of success and applause, of which we are remarkably generous...... You cannot imagine to what extent the wisest of the OTHERS can be brought to a state of unconscious naivete in the presence of this condition of high conceit of themselves…

7. If we have been able to bring them to such a pitch of stupid blindness is it not a proof, and an amazingly clear proof, of the degree to which the mind of the OTHERS is undeveloped in comparison with our mind? This it is, mainly, which guarantees our success.

13. … OUR JUDGES WILL KNOW THAT WHENEVER THEY FEEL DISPOSED TO PLUME THEMSELVES ON FOOLISH CLEMENCY THEY ARE VIOLATING THE LAW OF JUSTICE.... Such qualities it is proper to show in private life, but not in a public square which is the educational basis of human life. (Is it not a coincidence that OUR created "Bar Associations" has declared that "May 1st" to be "Law Day;" the same date that WE created the "xxxxxi" under the guidance of A.W. in 1776? Is it also a coincidence that OUR created "Communist Nations" celebrate "May 1st" as a National holiday?).

No. 16

2. We shall exclude from the course of instruction State Law as also all that concerns the political question. …. THE UNIVERSITIES MUST NO LONGER SEND OUT FROM THEIR HALLS MILK SOPS CONCOCTING PLANS FOR A CONSTITUTION, LIKE A COMEDY OR A TRAGEDY ….,

5. Each state of life must be trained within strict limits corresponding to its destination and work in life. The OCCASIONAL GENIUS HAS ALWAYS MANAGED AND ALWAYS WILL MANAGE TO SLIP THROUGH INTO OTHER STATES OF LIFE, BUT IT IS THE MOST PERFECT FOLLY FOR THE SAKE OF THIS RARE OCCASIONAL GENIUS TO LET THROUGH INTO RANKS FOREIGN TO THEM THE UNTALENTED …

[N.B. Hello Bill Clinton??]

TTFN..


;)

Originally posted by Criminal

You did hit on something that I find very interesting. The fight between Adams and Jefferson was in a broader sense the fight between the Federalists and the Republicans. Adams was a Federalist as as such he represented the Conservative position. He supported a strong federal government with "Hard" money tied to Gold and Silver. He supported the rights of the government over the individual and wanted the US to have close ties to Britian over France. Jefferson was a Democrat-Republican and supported the rights of the individual. He favored "soft" money, opposed standing armies, preferring militias. He pushed for the establishment of a bill of rights and supported the notion of a "continuous" revolution. Many find it ironic that America's first champion of individual liberties and democracy was himself a wealthy slave owning aristocrat.

Im not so sure about Adams Favoring Britain so much. He is solely responsible for keeping us out of war with France during his Presidency. Also, from what I understand he wasnt that much in favor of a strong Fed govt and I dont believe he supported the rights of the govt, over the individual. He thouroughly believed in "States" soveirgnty and crafted the oldest known constitution. The Constituion of the State of Mass.

Jefferson was the "pen" and Adams was the "voice" of the Declaration of Independence. It wouldnt have happened without either one of them.
Him and Jefferson were very good friends as both of them served as envoys to France during the Revolution.
Jefferson, after Adams election, basically tried to destroy and undrmine him over "Party" and didn not put the best interests of the nation at the top of the list.
It was some years later that the two finally spoke to each other again. John Adams forgave what Jefferson did to him, a very noble thing, and they continued very friendly correspondence to each other up until their deaths.
They were very different though. Adams didnt own slaves and was repulsed by the thought of it. Jefferson knew it was wrong, but did nothing about it and owned many slaves. Adams was reserved, and very humble, while Jefferson seemed to like the spotlight. Adams died with money (not rich mind you), and Jefferson died in debt.
Coincidentally enough both died on July 4th 1826. 50 years after the ratification of the Declaration of Independence. Adams was 90, Jefferson was 83.

Originally posted by Powerboss


Im not so sure about Adams Favoring Britain so much. He is solely responsible for keeping us out of war with France during his Presidency. Also, from what I understand he wasnt that much in favor of a strong Fed govt and I dont believe he supported the rights of the govt, over the individual. He thouroughly believed in "States" soveirgnty and crafted the oldest known constitution. The Constituion of the State of Mass.

Jefferson was the "pen" and Adams was the "voice" of the Declaration of Independence. It wouldnt have happened without either one of them.
Him and Jefferson were very good friends as both of them served as envoys to France during the Revolution.
Jefferson, after Adams election, basically tried to destroy and undrmine him over "Party" and didn not put the best interests of the nation at the top of the list.
It was some years later that the two finally spoke to each other again. John Adams forgave what Jefferson did to him, a very noble thing, and they continued very friendly correspondence to each other up until their deaths.
They were very different though. Adams didnt own slaves and was repulsed by the thought of it. Jefferson knew it was wrong, but did nothing about it and owned many slaves. Adams was reserved, and very humble, while Jefferson seemed to like the spotlight. Adams died with money (not rich mind you), and Jefferson died in debt.
Coincidentally enough both died on July 4th 1826. 50 years after the ratification of the Declaration of Independence. Adams was 90, Jefferson was 83.
I do think that Jefferson was really the one american who could be called a "Renessance Man", unless you would also count Franklin. Jefferson was an architect, educator, agronimist, musician, writer, scientist and statesman. You can't deny that the man was a genius. All the same, like all other great men he had his shortcommings. For one, had a sex life that would make Bill Clinton seem like a monk. He was also color blind.

As threatened, Parts 17 - 24 -- that's it!

No. 17

1. The practice of advocacy produces men cold, cruel, persistent, unprincipled, who in all cases take up an impersonal, purely legal standpoint. ..

7. … In our programs ONE-THIRD OF OUR SUBJECTS WILL KEEP THE REST UNDER OBSERVATION from a sense of duty… to the State. It will then be no disgrace to be a spy and informer, but a merit: …

8. Our agents will be taken from the higher as well as the lower ranks of society, from among the administrative class who spend their time in amusements, editors, printers and publishers, booksellers, clerks, and salesmen, workmen, coachmen, lackeys, et cetera.

No. 18

2. As the majority of conspirators act of love for the game, for the sake of talking, so, until they commit some overt act we shall not lay a finger on them but only introduce into their midst observation elements …

3. Our ruler will be secretly protected only by the most insignificant guard, because we shall not admit so much as a thought that there could exist against him any sedition with which he is not strong enough to contend and is compelled to hide from it.

4. If we should admit this thought, as the OTHERS have done and are doing, we should IPSO FACTO be signing a death sentence, if not for our ruler, at any rate for his dynasty, at no distant date.

No. 19

3. In order to destroy the prestige of heroism for political crime we shall send it for trial in the category of thieving, murder, and every kind of abominable and filthy crime. …

4… through the Press and in speeches, indirectly - in cleverly compiled school- books on history, we have advertised the martyrdom alleged to have been accredited by sedition-mongers for the idea of the commonweal. This advertisement has increased the contingent of liberals and has brought thousands of OTHERS into the ranks of our livestock cattle.

No. 20

3. … taxation will best be covered by a progressive tax on property…

5. The tax upon the poor man is a seed of revolution and works to the detriment of the State which is hunting after the trifling …..

6. A tax increasing in a percentage ratio to capital will give much larger revenue than the present individual or property tax, which is useful to us now for the sole reason that it excites trouble and discontent among the OTHERS. (Now we know the purpose of the 16th Amendment!!).

7. … it is indispensable that the capitalists should yield up a portion of their incomes …. State needs must be paid by those who will not feel the burden and have enough to take from.

20…. loans burdened the finances of the State with the payment of interest and made them the bond slaves of these capitals .... The concentration of industry in the hands of capitalists out of the hands of small masters has drained away all the juices of the peoples and with them also the States .... (Now we know the purpose of the Federal Reserve Bank Corporation!!).

26. The budgets of income and expenditure will be carried out side by side that they may not be obscured by distance one to another.

29. .. Foreign loans are leeches which there is no possibility of removing from the body of the State until they fall off of themselves or the State flings them off. … THEIR States …. go on in persisting in putting more on to themselves so that they must inevitably perish…..

32. So long as loans were internal the OTHERS only shuffled their money from the pockets of the poor to those of the rich, but when we bought up the necessary person in order to transfer loans into the external sphere, all the wealth of States flowed into our cash- boxes and all the OTHERS began to pay us the tribute of subjects.

34. … The right to issue interest-bearing paper will be given exclusively to industrial companies who will find no difficulty in paying interest out of profits, whereas the State does not make interest on borrowed money like these companies, for the State borrows to spend and not to use in operations. (Now we know why President Kennedy was assassinated in 1963 when he refused to borrow any more of the "Bank Notes" from the bankers of the Federal Reserve Bank and began circulating non-interest bearing "Notes" of the "United States of America"!!!).

37. But it is a proof of the genius of our chosen mind that we have contrived to present the matter of loans to them in such a light that they have even seen in them an advantage for themselves.

No. 21

3. States …open subscriptions for … their interest-bearing paper... Next day by artificial means the price of them goes up… - look you, they say, what confidence is shown in the government's bills of exchange.

4. But when the comedy is played out there emerges the fact that a debit and an exceedingly burdensome debit has been created. For the payment of interest it becomes necessary to have recourse to new loans, which do not swallow up but only add to the capital debt. And when this credit is exhausted it becomes necessary by new taxes to cover, not the loan, BUT ONLY THE INTEREST ON IT. These taxes are a debit employed to cover a debit .... (NOW WE KNOW OF THE PURPOSE OF THE BULLSHIT CRY FOR BALANCING THE BUDGET!!)

8. I beg you to concentrate your particular attention upon this point and upon the following: nowadays all internal loans are consolidated by so-called flying loans, that is, such as have terms of payment more or less near. These debts consist of moneys paid into the savings banks and reserve funds. If left for long at the disposition of a government these funds evaporate in the payment of interest on foreign loans, and are placed by the deposit of equivalent amount of RENTS.

No. 22

1 In all that has so far been reported by me to you…. the secret of what is coming, of what is past, and of what is going on now, rushing into the flood of the great events coming already in the near future, the secret of our relations to the OTHERS and of financial operations. …

3. Surely there is no need to seek further proof that our rule is predestined by God? … - the bringing of everything into order? … true freedom consists in the inviolability of the person who honorably and strictly observes all the laws of life in common, that human dignity is wrapped up in consciousness of the rights and also of the absence of rights of each, and not wholly and solely in fantastic imaginings about the subject of one's EGO.

No. 23

1. …We shall re-establish small master production which will mean laying a mine under the private capital of manufactures. … manufacturers on the grand scale often move, though not always consciously, the thoughts of the masses in directions against the government. A people of small masters knows nothing of unemployment and this binds him closely with existing order… Drunkenness also will be prohibited by law and punishable as a crime against humanness of man who is turned into a brute under the influence of alcohol.

2. Subjects, I repeat once more, give blind obedience only to the strong hand which is absolutely independent of them….

No. 24

14. The King must not be at the mercy of his passions, and especially of sensuality: on no side of his character must he give brute instincts power over his mind. Sensuality worse than all else disorganizes the capacities of the mind and clearness of views, distracting the thoughts to the worst and most brutal side of human activity.

[N.B.Again, these historical ideas circa 1900-- fact or fiction -- would be usefully discussed in our schools.]

People in this country suffer from an identity crisis. Most people in this nation haven't got a clue who they are or where they came from. This is why history is important. But which history will we teach the kids? Some watered down version, carefully censored as to not convey violence? The politically correct, yet incorrect version, that portrays the civil war as a conflict fought exclusively over slavery, its leader never exposed as the traitor he really was? In a nation where youngsters can be arrested for threatening by just making an imaginary gun with their hands, do we really expect that they will be taught anything meaningful about a violent American Revolution aside from some philosophically insignificant dates?

86d>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The politically correct, yet incorrect version, that portrays the civil war as a conflict fought exclusively over slavery, its leader never exposed as the traitor he really was?
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

OK, like most wars -- economics was the reason;
which leader do you pose as the traitor??

I always like to examine history. :)

Found this on a conservative site ... presented as satire, but sounds rational to me...


I see it as a clash between two religious fundamentalisms. On the one side you have the Taliban, Osama bin Laden, Al Qaeda, and the actions we have witnessed. All that clearly represents the fanaticism of a religious fundamentalism.

On the other side of the conflict we are dealing with another religious fundamentalism, one that is not generally recognized as such. The Buddhist theologian David Loy has described faith in the free market as a religion, a religion with a transcendent god, a god that is worshiped and that
its adherents have a deep yearning to embrace and to be at one with--and that god is capital.

It also has a theology in the form of economics, a
fundamentalist ideology that excludes all others. Its cathedrals are the shopping malls, and there is paradise or the promise of paradise for those who get on board. It is the fastest growing religion in the world today. ;)