Thread 17765449

'A standing military force, with an overgrown Executive, will not long be safe companions to liberty.'
- James Madison (founding father)

Americans? Explain.
Having a standing army is in direct contradiction to what the founding fathers wanted.

Please explain.

Many of our founders were insane lolbertarians and we would have not built a functioning country did not reasonable men like Hamilton prevail.

>>17765449 (OP)
You're in direct contradiction to what your parents wanted.

>>17766357
That would mean the American revolution was literally nothing but a bunch of rich boys not wanting to pay taxes.

.

>>17766357
>reasonable men like Hamilton
Hamilton wanted to turn the U.S into Russia, we were incredibly lucky the coolest moderates in the Dem-Reps prevailed and gave us a successful compromise.

>>17766390
His parents didn't want him to admire anime lesbians?

>>17766613
>compromise
Gaaay. Either go full empire or full lolbertarian.
Modern USA presidents are demi-gods who forbid you from calling them 'your highness', despite flying in nuclear-bomb resistant planes. And 'The Beast'? A modern royal carriage.

>>17766630
>go full empire
The issue with Hamilton was that he wanted to do that when the U.S wasn't even a real country with any identity yet and it would've plunged the U.S into the LatAm caudillo/civil war experience similar to what happened with Bolivar and san Martin.
But yes, I love Roosevelt immensely and wished he got his third term. EVERYTHING would've been better.

>>17766646
You mean forth term? Pretty sure he did his third term, that was during the war.

>>17767607
>fourth term
I'm talking about Teddy, not that retarded wheelchair kid. Truman and Marshall deserve far more of the credit than FDR for pretty much everything FDR is credited for.

>>17765449 (OP)
Things change and we're at a point where people will have to understand that what the Founding Fathers wanted is unrealistic.

>>17767620
Agreed, democracy is shit and anybody who's familiar with the history of Greek democracy would know this.

>>17767615
Teddy was cool.
He wasn't a globalist despite wanting the USA to be an empire; he wanted an American empire based in the America's.
For example, he said the Japanese should dominate the Asia's, since 'the Japanese are the only Asians who understand western civilisation'.

>>17767620
But then >>17766402

>>17767627
It's shit when it's a specific variant of democracy that serves a neooligarch class.
It's either gonna end with the country turning into a economic zone controlled by judeochristian technocrats, or a normal place to live.

>>17767632
He also wanted a just peace in Europe that would result in the Concert of Europe being maintained by American diplomatic efforts and occasional intervention, and also wanted to fully commit to supressing the Bolsheviks and fully backing the provisional government in Russia given he rightfully saw the communists as a long-term threat and compared them to the Jacobins.
Dude could've saved the 20th century if him and Taft got along better and he didn't even know it.

>>17766630
>Either go full empire or full lolbertarian.
Why
Maybe the compromise is the best of both worlds

>>17766402
It's true. They were gentry in every way but without any of the accolades. People are gonna have to sit down and honestly ask themselves if that's what this is all about.
>>17767640
The "best of both worlds" is why America doesn't have a respectable domestic industry anymore outside of weapons. The rich will never bring jobs back here to benefit the American Empire.

>>17767645
>outside of weapons
Even then we can't mass produce anything at scale. We can only make high-quality stuff in limited amounts and even then a lot of it is built overseas.

>>17767640
Maybe. But most Americans still lie to themselves that they are still honouring the founding father's wishes.

>>17767635
Most countries running on democracy are already controlled by Boomers and women.

>>17767627
Just reminded that original Athens Democracy didn't allow to vote for women, slaves and foreigners. Just just later democracy term was hijacked.
Return to Democracy original form and "Democracy" problems would go away.
FACT.

>>17768634
Truth nuke.

>>17768634
Unironically American democracy became doomed when Jackson made it so any retard could vote.

>>17768634
Even though true, America was doomed to this current path of democracy because of 'all men are created equal'.
Unless, they literally meant males, which would be funny if they did because then America has really gone far off-course.

>>17765449 (OP)
>is a direct contradiction to what the founders wanted
the problem with that is the founding fathers didn't share the same opinions for everything, for example Washington was heavily in favor of a larger army since he knew from experience how relying on militias was a massive hassle at best

>>17770119
Washington was also a Fed supporter (Federalist Party).

>>17766357
But then there wasn't really a reason for America to become a country separate from Britain.

>>17765449 (OP)
>Explain.
>Having a standing army is in direct contradiction to what the founding fathers wanted.

Founding fathers were against foreign intervention. Having a standing army guarantees a reason to use it will eventually be found. It's a system that ultimately seeks to perpetuate and benefit itself. Systems Theory 101

>>17769999
Digits...I agree, Jacksonian democracy is just veiled direct democracy which is shit because the average persons worldview and reasoning powers are shit

>>17766402
Yes + being mad that the british didn't let them exterminate the indians because that would start more wars that they then would refuse to pay taxes for

>>17766402
>>17767645
That part is true but liberalism was THE thing that every Intelligentsia and enlightenment thinker was raving about at the time. And in the same way McCarthy sicked the dogs on the communists the absolutists demonized them to the point they had to set up secret societies

Hence why there's that overlap of rich gentries and secret societies. Liberalism seemed like nice investment so they sponsored and sheltered said societies.
So it was half actual idealists and half rich gentries not wanting to pay taxes and saw liberalism as a lucrative opportunity to accumulate wealth without having to be part of the aristocracy that the people harbored an ire for.
And that's why most founding fathers were Masons and wealthy land owners.

>>17771222
>Liberalism seemed like nice investment so they sponsored and sheltered said societies.
>So it was half actual idealists and half rich gentries not wanting to pay taxes and saw liberalism as a lucrative opportunity to accumulate wealth without having to be part of the aristocracy
Hmm. That makes sense actually.

'Peoples do never govern themselves. That lunacy was concocted by liberalism. Behind its "people's sovereignty" the slyest cheaters are hiding, who don't want to be recognized'.

.

>>17766402
it was a combination of not wanting to pay taxes, wanting to genocide the indians (evil brits didn't allow them to murder innocent natives), and because they were mad they couldn't be nobles (heavily implied)

>>17766357
>reasonable men like Hamilton
>plants the seeds of the american civil war in your way

>>17771740
God bless the USA.

.

>>17771202
The whole taxes thing was from Britain defending America from the French as well. Like, what the hell did the Americans expect?

>>17765449 (OP)
>Having a standing army is in direct contradiction to what the founding fathers wanted.
Yes. America should have demobilized after WW2

>>17765449 (OP)
They were basing this off of the period after the English Civil War, when the Army and Parliament ended up at loggerheads over the Army's back pay and the Army ended up overthrowing Parliament multiple times. The problem doesn't exist so much anymore because legislatures have gotten more willing to collect taxes to sustain militaries and militaries have gotten better at playing political games within the system to secure funding.

>>17774442
they did, which was why the korea war became a mess for the US since it had to rearm quickly, it was also korea that convinced the US to keep a larger standing army

>>17765449 (OP)
What's there to explain? Modern American Liberalism and Conservatism have nothing whatsoever to do with the Founding Fathers. America has drifted radically from its origins, as can be expected for a country centuries old and this was even predicted by many of the Founders themselves.

There's no mystery here.

>>17774962
The mystery is why does the average American still invoke the spirit of the founding fathers when they talk of rights and shit.

>>17775463
>why does the average American still invoke the spirit of the founding fathers
Because the Founding Fathers are one of the cornerstone national mythologies of the U.S, much like Roman cult of Romulus and Remus or the Persian one around Cyrus.

>>17775476
Isn't that exactly one of the things the founding fathers didn't want to happen?

.