Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

thomhartmann

(3,979 posts)
Tue Dec 20, 2011, 02:49 PM Dec 2011

Thom Hartmann: Our Founders were not the 1%!



Debunking the latest myth about the men who ratified the American Constitution.

The Big Picture with Thom Hartmann on RT TV & FSTV "live" 9pm and 11pm check www.thomhartmann.com/tv for local listings
17 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Thom Hartmann: Our Founders were not the 1%! (Original Post) thomhartmann Dec 2011 OP
Um ... I beg to differ. They certainly were the 1%. n/t Laelth Dec 2011 #1
he makes a good case Enrique Dec 2011 #2
I watched it. I wish I hadn't. Laelth Dec 2011 #8
Even Jefferson, the exception, was a plantation owner and slaveholder. TheWraith Dec 2011 #12
Watch the video fascisthunter Dec 2011 #3
It is a strong argument--too strong, I think. Laelth Dec 2011 #10
GW was a multi-millionaire wxgeek7 Dec 2011 #16
they were against having an imperial control and an aristocracy fascisthunter Dec 2011 #17
Where's your proof? Larkspur Dec 2011 #5
great vid fascisthunter Dec 2011 #4
what's comical is that the RWers often use the tales of what happened to the zbdent Dec 2011 #6
Eye-opening! Plucketeer Dec 2011 #7
I would recommend the reading of Howard Zinn's "A People's History of the United States" AnOhioan Dec 2011 #9
Agreed. Laelth Dec 2011 #11
I dont care how many of them were rich or poor... CarrieLynne Dec 2011 #13
K&R!! Mosaic Dec 2011 #14
bad history. Hartmann got just about every fact wrong. provis99 Dec 2011 #15

Laelth

(32,017 posts)
8. I watched it. I wish I hadn't.
Tue Dec 20, 2011, 03:52 PM
Dec 2011

It is a well-intentiond piece of editorial journalism, but I find it sloppy and intentionally deceptive--unacceptably so.

All Hartmann's "fear the rich" quotes come from Jefferson, who was undoubtedly an exception amongst the founders. This piece makes it appear that the founders generally agreed with Jefferson on this, but that's completely untrue. I'm very glad we had Jefferson's voice among the founders, but to suggest that even half of the founders agreed with Jefferson on issues of class relations strikes me as folly.

His suggesting that Washington was no more than a "wealthy squire" in England, while true, is utterly deceptive. We had no nobility here in the U.S. Thus, a "wealthy squire" is the most that one could be in the United States, and that's what Washington was--a wealthy landowner.

His using a historian's analysis of Deleware's delegates is deceptive. He's talking about the Delaware legislators who ratified the Constitution, I think. Most people, when they use the term "founders," are referring to the folks who met in Philadelphia to negotiate the terms of and write the Constitution. Again, intentionally deceptive. The people who could afford to leave their homes for months on end to attend a Constitutional convention were undoubetedly part of the 1%. The 99% could not afford to quit working for that long.

The argument that most of the wealthy people in the colonies (i.e. the 1%) left in the 1760s is over-stated, to put it mildly. Some did leave. Some stayed, and many of them were Tories who suppoted the crown and wanted nothing to do with the Federalists who were busy creating a new Constitution, but that doesn't prove that the Federalists who did attend the constitutional convention weren't part of the 1% themselves.

I understand what Hartmann is doing, I think. The Constitution is not inherently pro-rich, per se, but it certainly appears to me that the government it created serves the rich a lot better than it does the rest of us. This has not really changed.

-Laelth

TheWraith

(24,331 posts)
12. Even Jefferson, the exception, was a plantation owner and slaveholder.
Tue Dec 20, 2011, 04:27 PM
Dec 2011

That alone made him "richer" than almost anyone else in the country at the time. He wasn't ultra-wealthy primarily because he also piled up a staggering amount of debt.

That said, I don't agree with the premise that the US government was somehow built to accommodate the ultra-rich, but it DID reflect the country at the time including the influence of southern plantation owners on the drafting of both the Declaration of Independence (where they objected to Jefferson's language blaming King George for the evils of slavery) and in the Constitution (the famous "three fifths compromise.&quot

 

fascisthunter

(29,381 posts)
3. Watch the video
Tue Dec 20, 2011, 03:11 PM
Dec 2011

His argument is a strong one based on historical accuracy. The 1% fled the country... Washington who was considered to be one of the richest among our founding fathers, but in terms of wealth, the british considered his wealth to be that of a Squire.

Laelth

(32,017 posts)
10. It is a strong argument--too strong, I think.
Tue Dec 20, 2011, 04:06 PM
Dec 2011

Suffice it to say that I was not impressed. It is, on its face, historically accurate, but also intentionally deceptive.

For more, see post #8, above.

-Laelth

wxgeek7

(321 posts)
16. GW was a multi-millionaire
Wed Dec 21, 2011, 04:44 PM
Dec 2011

I think I read somewhere online (about wealthiest presidents) that George, in today's dollars would be worth something like half a billion. I'd say he was one of the, then 1%.

Here's the link:

http://247wallst.com/2010/05/17/the-net-worth-of-the-american-presidents-washington-to-obama/2/

 

fascisthunter

(29,381 posts)
17. they were against having an imperial control and an aristocracy
Thu Dec 22, 2011, 03:44 PM
Dec 2011

that never allowed the poor to climb the economic ladder.

zbdent

(35,392 posts)
6. what's comical is that the RWers often use the tales of what happened to the
Tue Dec 20, 2011, 03:44 PM
Dec 2011

founders AFTER the revolution, saying how many died destitute ...

So, now they'll try to say the founders WERE the 1%ers???

 

Plucketeer

(12,882 posts)
7. Eye-opening!
Tue Dec 20, 2011, 03:51 PM
Dec 2011

Watch and Learn. I think Hartmann's one of THE BEST illuminators at hand. I loved it awhile back - when he revealed (to me anyways) the REAL truth about the Boston Tea Party. Funny, the crap we're fed in schools. Of course, it's all in the interests of propagandizing we poor dweebs.

AnOhioan

(2,894 posts)
9. I would recommend the reading of Howard Zinn's "A People's History of the United States"
Tue Dec 20, 2011, 04:02 PM
Dec 2011

Specifically Chapter 4 - Tyranny is Tyranny, and Chapter 5 - A Kind of Revolution


Most of the Founders were the 1% of their time, and were committed to keeping the status quo in terms of wealth and power.

The 1% have always existed...

Laelth

(32,017 posts)
11. Agreed.
Tue Dec 20, 2011, 04:12 PM
Dec 2011

I should add that Hartmann's explanation for the "secrecy" surrounding Madison's notes and the debate at the Constitutional convention butchered the history of the event. Hartmann suggests that Madison kept his notes secret because the founders knew they were betraying their own class. Utter nonsense. The founders kept their notes secret so that their words and deeds could not be used against them by the crown in the event that their revolution failed.

I am disappointed by the degree to which Hartmann plays fast and loose with history in this piece.

-Laelth

CarrieLynne

(497 posts)
13. I dont care how many of them were rich or poor...
Tue Dec 20, 2011, 10:27 PM
Dec 2011

but my understanding is the revolutionary war was us fighting against the VERY thing were fighting against now...I cant imagine they would wage war to get us free of this and then implement the very same things here...doesnt make sense...

theres no way in hell they intended the same things that they put so much effort into getting away from....

 

provis99

(13,062 posts)
15. bad history. Hartmann got just about every fact wrong.
Wed Dec 21, 2011, 02:21 PM
Dec 2011

1. he got the date of the Revolution wrong. Rich people did not flee America in the 1760s because of the revolution; the American revolution did not even start until 1775, which every schoolkid knows. The Constitutional Convention did not take place until 1787, FOUR years after America became a country.

2. George Washington may have been a "wealthy squire", if you want to call the richest man in America at the time a wealthy squire. It also bears saying that the average American was wealthier than the average Englishman, and the English knew it. That's why so many of them left to emigrate to America, but few Americans left to immigrate into Britain.

3. Washington did not free his wife's slaves because he was poor. He didn't give them freedom until he died; it was in his will.

4. This notion that Jefferson died poor is completely false; he didn't keep money in a bank, because he didn't value wealth that way. So it may be technically accurate to say he died with no money, but it was because all his wealth was in hundreds of slaves and large landholdings! Jefferson died one of the wealthiest men in America.

4. It is nonsense to say that land wasn't worth very much back then. How much land a man owned was the STANDARD for wealth measurement. Banks were not particularly big the way they are now; people kept their wealth tied up in land ownership, rather than stuffing dollars in a bank account.

5. Sure, Delaware's Convention attendees were "farmers", if you want to use that term. A more accurate term is "plantation owners". "Farmer", as applied to the Convention attendees, did not mean "poor peasant", as we tend to think of today.

6.The reason the Madison's notes were held secretly during the Constitutional Convention is that the Framers were essentially committing treason again; this time, not against the British, but against the American government! Between 1783 and 1789, America was ruled by a constitution called the Articles of Confederation; to replace the Articles with the Constitution was to overthrow the existing government, and replace it with a new one with increased national government power.

7. The Jefferson quotes are cute, though taken out of context. Hartmann makes it seem as though all the Framers agreed with Jefferson. Actually, Jefferson was considered kind of a kook by the other Framers; even his friend Madison sought to distance himself from Jefferson during this time, as he considered Jefferson too nutty. If you really want a look at how most of the Framers thought about the wealthy and poor, look at the Alien and Sedition Acts brought in by President Adams, which were specifically designed to suppress peasants like Daniel Shays who led a rebellion against the wealthy and the banks.

8. Hartman is even wrong in his summary statements. He casually mentions that the Founders (confusing the Founding Fathers with the Framers) fought the British. some did, and some sat on the sidelines. Jefferson was notorious for being a coward during the war. While he was governor of Virginia during the war, the British invaded Virginia. Rather than stay and organize the defense, (as his position obligated him to do), he ran out of Virginia faster than a chicken with its ass on fire.

9. He is also wrong that the Framers were against big banks. Actually, one entire wing of the Framers were in favor of switching the country from an agrarian-based economy, to one dominated by big industries and big banks. The agrarian faction was led by Jefferson, the bank faction led by Alexander Hamilton. Although hamilton failed to get a central, national bank as he wanted, he got the ball rolling by making sure the Framers recognized that the national government would dominate the state governments, by making the national government the sovereign over state government debts.

10. He mentions that the Constitution does not say that rich white males are the ones allowed to run the country. He completely glosses over the fact that the Occupy kid was right: the Constitution was created by rich white males to ensure their dominance. First of all, it is disingeneous to say that blacks were allowed to vote. Yes, an extremely tiny number of blacks voted in a handful of northern states; the vast majority of blacks did not vote, BECAUSE THEY WERE SLAVES, which the Constitution recognized. Secondly, women were not mentioned at all in the Constitution, because the Framers took it for granted that women were not equal to men, and should not have the vote. Even today, we don't have an equal rights amendment for men and women. Thirdly, the reason why property qualifications for voting are not in the Constitution is because the Framers agreed that setting property qualifications was to be a STATE ISSUE. The reason it was a state issue is that the northern and southern states disagreed on how to count slaves as property for voting purposes; hence what is called the "Great Compromise".

Very bad segment.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Video & Multimedia»Thom Hartmann: Our Founde...