The power of an Idea - The Long View.

[Zeno]

Today’s events in Iraq from a very broad and long-term perspective.

From Thomas Jefferson’s last letter (to Roger C. Weightman, June 24, 1826), in which he had to decline being at the 50th celebration of the signing of the Declaration of Independence due to ill health (He died about a week later, on July 4, 1826).

“May it be to the world, what I believe it will be, (to some parts sooner, to others later, but finally to all,) the signal of arousing men to burst the chains under which monkish ignorance and superstition had persuaded them to bind themselves, and to assume the blessings and security of self-government. That form which we have substituted, restores the free right to the unbounded exercise of reason and freedom of opinion. All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately, by the grace of God. These are grounds of hope for others. For ourselves, let the annual return of this day forever refresh our recollections of these rights, and an undiminished devotion to them.”

[andyfox]

Noble words. Jefferson always talked a good game.

In 1814 Edward Coles wrote Jefferson, asking for support and encouragement in his personal campaign against slavery. Coles asked Jefferson to endorse his plan to take his slaves to Illinois and free them. Jefferson rebuffed his neighbor. In counseling Coles against freeing his adult slaves he said that people "of this color" were "as incapable as children of taking care of themselves." Free blacks were "pests in society." He spent himself into bankruptcy, selling slaves to raise money along the way. He had opportunities throughout his life to free some or all of his slaves, and only freed three, all of them members of the Hemings family, and thus Jefferson's own relatives. His will freed only five--also Hemings family members.

Saddles on their backs indeed.

[MMMMMM]

Maybe--I certainly don't know--maybe Jefferson, in that day and age, actually viewed blacks as being somewhat subhuman? I'm not excusing his ownership, but could it be that he genuinely thought they weren't capable of ruling themselves, and that they weren't fully human? If so, that could partially explain the apparent contradiction between his noble words and his selfish actions. If this is the case, part of the fault would lie with his erroneous view of blacks as inherently inferior beings--which might have not been an uncommon view at the time.

I do think your last line is particularly apropos: "Saddles on their backs indeed."

[adios]

Jefferson made a statement to the effect that he thought that there would be no way that the slaves could live in the United States as free men and that the end of slavery would mean that they would have to be returned to Africa. His reasoning was that the former slaves would be very bitter, violent and hateful due to their mistreatment under slavery. Jefferson did recognize that slaves were mistreated greatly. Jefferson seemed to be tormented by the dichotomy of what the Constitution stated and the reality of slavery. He seemed to lack the courage to change his ways regarding slavery. I'll try to dig up a source if it's required.

[Zeno]

Andy,

I am aware of Jefferson's shortcomings and much of your post is true. I am, however, a bit disappointed in you. A personal attack on Jefferson is not what I was hoping to solicit. However flawed you think Jefferson’s character – the noble words still stand. Noble words and great ideas have come from many bold people with somewhat dubious characters, Jesus, Moses, and Mohammed being excellent examples. I had no real wish to start down this path of debate as it detracts from what are the important and numerous ideas that “Good Old Boy” Tom put forth in his letter.

There are very large issues at stake in the world, and bold initiatives and policies have been set forth. Partly, I think, stemming from Jeffersonian ideas. It is the ideas that need to be discussed and debated - Not the Man.

Respectfully,

-Zeno

[MMMMMM]

No need for a source--I believe you--I was really just wondering (I never studied much history). Thanks for the information.

[MMMMMM]

I'm just curious, how was Jesus of dubious character, or on a par in this way compared with Mohammed? As I understand it, Jesus advocated turning the other cheek, whereas Muhammad advocated smiting people's necks and led military campaigns. I don't profess the faith of any organized religion but I am not aware of anything dubious about Jesus' character. Perhaps you could expand a bit on your statement.

[Zeno]

Tom,

At the risk of going off subject - some of Jefferson's ideas about emancipation (with the return to Africa idea) are put forth in a letter to Jared Sparks, dated February 4, 1824. Also, the letter Andy quotes has added information. Andy's short quotes appear harsher than would be the case if the whole letter were read in context. I have developed my own theory on his slavery stance. I have, however, no desire to propound it here.

-Zeno

[Cyrus]

You should take a look at a book written by Thomas West, a neo-conservative scholar who offers interesting, if radically contrarian, viewpoints. (He posits that the U.S. was progressing until the time of FDR, and started declining after the LBJ legislative measures!) In the process, the author offers evidence and arguments that contradict the established view that the Founding Fathers of the United States were as we believe them to have been.

<ul type="square">"Vindicating the Founders" (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0847685179/qid=1049960047/sr=12-1/104-8501142-9464757?v=glance&amp;s=books)[/list]

It's always good to listen to the opposite view.

[andyfox]

But the ideas, when not put into practice, are empty. And when the opposite of those ideas is put into practice, when the person who penned the ideas had numerous opporutunities in his lifetime, to make a stand, are worse than empty, their deceitful.

I have done a great deal of reading of both Jefferson's writings and writing about him, and I find him probably the most overrated American.

I am not as knowledgable about what Jesus and Moses did in their lifetimes, but my sense is that they had the courage of their convictions; Jefferson did not. So I am somewhat concerned when I see Jefferson quoted for his admirable thoughts when he lived a life of cowardice.

[andyfox]

Good places to start are John C. Miller's The Wolf by the Ears and Jeffersonian Legacies edited by Peter Onuf.

[andyfox]

I'm not persuaded that the invasion of Iraq had anything to do with taking the saddles of the backs of the people of Iraq, or the free right to the exercise of reason and freedom of opinion. The current Bush administration, popuulated by many from the first Bush administration, wanted to refight the Gulf War with a better outcome. They made up the connection between 9/11 and Saddam Hussein. The idea of liberating Iraq was a PR afterthought.

Now if the result proves to be better lives for the people of Iraq, that would be wonderful. The history of our involvement with overthrowing governments we didn't like, does not lead one to have confidence that the Jeffersonian ideals will be met in Iraq. I hope I am completely wrong. I'd much rather be wrong and that this invasion leads to the blessings and security of self-government. Bringing in a U.S. trained banker (Chalabi) who has not been in the country for almost 50 years to put things right does not give me cause to be optimistic.

[adios]

Given the current situation, what would your plan entail or more precisely what is the Democratic Party alternative? I think it's fair to say that Iraqis are pleased with the removal of Hussein. It's easy to be negative and cynical. What is the Democratic plan for helping the Iraqi people in this transition? Do they have one? I would interested in learning more about it. My guess is that the Democrats will play partisan politics at every turn of events and take every opportunity that they can to criticize the administration without out offering a credible policy of their own. This is the reason why I think the Democrats will lose big time in 2004. People are fed up with the negativeness and the cynicism displayed by the Democrats as well as their paucity of ideas.

[andyfox]

I agree with your assessment of the Democrats. Tom Daschle in particular, IMO, is an embarrassment. The only Democrat I have heard who has concrete ideas is Gary Hart. I hope he decides to run for president if only to push those that have a chance to get the nomination to put forward ideas rather than posturing.

[MMMMMM]

So...this naturally leads to the rather interesting question: why do the Democrats generally seem to be out of ideas (assuming you are and Tom are correct)?

Do you see this as a failure of a large collection of individuals who are just out of ideas, or...just maybe...that most of the ideas the Democrats have put forth over the years simply don't cut it in the real world? Perhaps many of these ideas addressed a time gone by? Is it primarily the poor quality of Democratic candidates/politicians or the poor quality of the Democratic platform that is producing this current paucity of ideas? Or is this effect due to something entirely different (if so, what)?

[andyfox]

First of all, assuming Tom and I are correct is a dubious premise upon which to start. . . /forums/images/icons/wink.gif

When I talk of "the Democrats," I'm talking about the leaders of the national "party." I put the word party in quotation marks because political parties are not the homogenous entities they once were. As recently as 1968, the conventions, for example, were shows. The party candidates were picked in the proverbial smoke-filled rooms. The primaries were not binding. For example. in that year, Robert Kennedy and Eugene McCarthy were banging head in the Democratic primaries, but Hubert Humphrey had locked up the nomination. Humphrey did not even compete in the infamous California primary, infamous because it was after delivering his victory speech that Robert Kennedy was killed.


Hey, I think the leaders of the Republican Party have far more bankrupt ideas than the Democrats. But I'm pretty far out in left field (not surprising news, I know), so perhaps I'm not the best person to address your questions.

[MMMMMM]

I'm not even sure if it's true, but if it is, those are the questions it raised in my mind.

[Zeno]

"But the ideas, when not put into practice, are empty."

A justifiable criticism of Jefferson. But just because the words may have been empty in regard to Jefferson's life, in no way degrades the meaning that they have for my life, or, for the life's of millions of other people that have benefited from the ideas that he helped put into motion.

-Zeno

[andyfox]

Correct, and well-put.

[Zeno]

"I'm not persuaded that the invasion of Iraq had anything to do with taking the saddles of the backs of the people of Iraq, or the free right to the exercise of reason and freedom of opinion."

I’m not persuaded that freedom did not have a large influence on the cause of going to war.

Now the immediate leaders in the cause are self-serving politicians to one degree or another and to say that they were doing this for only altruistic purposes is silly. I did not want to focus on specific individuals but on general ideas and movements that ebb and flow through history and the power those ideas have to change or alter that flow.

Whatever the motives of the leaders and the powerful, things have been set in motion, in the Middle East, the US, and Europe, that may profoundly alter the future. It may alter the future in ways that no one can foresee, or in ways that benefit only a few - or the many, or in positive ways that bring hope and security to more people, or, just the opposite. Once the wheel is set in motion the ability of those that set it moving to influence and control it may be in doubt. Or, if we are to believe our leaders, the wheel of democracy is being set in motion and then we will watch from the sidelines to see were it rolls.

Whatever the immediate chaos and divisions are at present in Iraq; a turning point for a people and country is coming about and the turning point may have profound influences on the future of the region. What will the country be like in 2 years or 10 years or the whole region in say 50 years? I hope it is a positive future. And that:

“ The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately, by the grace of God.”

How palatable that statement will be to Iraq’s people remains to be seen - Or to the other vast majority of Muslims in the region, to say nothing of the House of Saud. Or even, dare I say it, Israel.


-Zeno

[Zeno]

"Perhaps you could expand a bit on your statement."

Only a tiny bit. It is a ponderous statement that would involve writing volumes for explanation. If we just take the four canonical gospels as being a portrayal of the man Jesus then many statements he made reveal a vindicate or revengeful part to his make up. Take for instance his stance on Hell (or even his advocations that such a place existed) and eternal punishment, not all Jews held this view. Indeed, many denied the existence of eternal life altogether.

Also, see Matthew chap. 24, verses 29 - 36 to get a feel for his revengefulness, and even a bit of his bloodthirstiness. He railed against the Pharisees and Scribes, with some justification, but the tinge of hate and retribution is easy to sense. This has had a profound influence on Christianity in a variety of ways, including anti-Semitism.

He was an apocalyptical preacher and said many things that are really just shear nonsense. Take no though about tomorrow – god takes care of the birds and flowers – he will take care of you (a paraphrase) is a good example.

A critical read of the Gospels will reveal many other things about his character that show serious flaws, in my opinion. The above depends on, of course, if you believe the Gospels to be accurate history, something that I do not adhere to. Enough. Except to add that in my estimation Confucius was a much more enduring and admirable character than Jesus.

-Zeno

[MMMMMM]

Perhaps it is that I define the word "character" a bit differently. I don't consider a man's beliefs, or his emotions, to be his character, really. I think of character as something that may be defined as actions under pressure, and how one treats others. And I'm really not aware that Jesus did anything really bad--the worst might be upending a few tables and yelling at the Pharisees. I don't think Jesus inflicted violence on people, or exhorted his followers to violence. Forgiving one's tormentors, too, certainly seems like admirable character.

Mohammed, on the other hand, personally inflicted violence on many, and frequently exhorted his followers to violence as well. He took wives from among his conquered peoples, and his favorite wife, Aisha, was pre-teen while he was a relatively old man. So to say that both Jesus and Mohammed were of "dubious character" strikes me as at least somewhat undiscerning.

[andyfox]

As always, a thoughtful and eloquent post, Zeno.

I suppose I'm much more of a pessimist than you. Many times in my life, I have heard our leaders tell us that the cause of freedom and democracy had forced us to go to war, that we do so reluctantly in defense of an idea. It has always been a load of crap. The words of Jefferson and Lincoln and others are always trotted out, pronouncements from on high of the Greatest Truth.

Of course this invasion may indeed profoundly alter the future. It would be surprising if it did not. My views of the world and the United States's role in it are profoundly different from those of our leaders; this is the reason for my pessimism.

But I hope nothing but good comes out of it all. We hear talk now that Bush and Blair are ready to come to grips with the Israeli/Palestinian nightmare. There are signs of hope in the Arab world, in Qatar in particular.

I would like to end my participation in this thread by quoting a perhaps more famous piece of writing, from Conrad's Heart of Darkness.

The conquest of the earth, which mostly means the taking it away from those who have a different complexion or slightly flatter noses than ourselves, is not a pretty thing when you look into it too much. What redeems it is the idea only. An idea at the back of it, not a sentimental pretence but an idea; and an unselfish belief in the idea--something you can set up, and bow down before, and offer a sacrifice to. . . .

It is my profound hope that the rest of the affair in Iraq does not turn out as the rest of the affair in the Heart of Darkness did.

[andyfox]

Seems you are well-read about and interested in Thomas Jefferson. A new book by Roger G. Kennedy called "Mr. Jefferson's Lost Cause" should be of interest to you. Not very complimentary towards Mr. Jefferson, but engagingly written and thought-provoking.

[John Cole]

Tom,

Here's a link to an NPR interview with Andrew Levy who has written about a much neglected Virginian.

http://www.npr.org/programs/watc/features/2001/antijefferson/010901.antijefferson.html

[Zeno]

Good points multiple M-man. I agree that my initial comparison statement may be taken as somewhat unbalanced. Enjoyed your post.

-Zeno

[AmericanAirlines]

Jefferson... "Self-Government???"

Come on now. The man had slaves. He also was in with the crowd that believed you couldn't have a true democracy because the poor would vote all the money away from the rich.

Jefferson, and all the founding fathers were pretty much rich land owners who set the gov't up to keep in check the "tyranny of the masses".

Despite the prose, they just set up another form of plutocracy.

Granted it's better than the other deals out there. But it's not, and never was a democracy. It's a Federal Republic.

See the CIA world fact book, and page down to the section, "Government"... where it says (notice how they toss the politically correct word "democratic" in there as a to sort of soften the blow that you've been lied to since you were a kid):

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/us.html

Country name: conventional long form: United States of America conventional short form: United States abbreviation: US or USA

Government type: federal republic; strong democratic tradition

The real truth is it's a Rich Ruling Person vs. Worker Bee Person world.

You are in one camp or the other. Period.

Sincerely,
AA

[scalf]

/forums/images/icons/tongue.gif clearly another gr8 educational opportunity for us all..

having grown up in rural segregated virginia,,,i never heard of the guy..did hear of key dates, such as when slaves(and women), first came to the commonwealth....but how would the lawyers get a cut...don't you think, at least part of the problem is our legislators are primarily lawyers; whose whole training is to argue(debate), but not comeup with simple, commom-sense solutions????lol??tia..gl /forums/images/icons/crazy.gif /forums/images/icons/smile.gif /forums/images/icons/club.gif

[matt_d]

I think we can take it for granted that Jefferson did not appreciate the wisdom of Murphy's Law. We must also note O'Toole's caution - "Murphy was an optimist."