By SJ Otto
This year, as every year,
I plan to light off fireworks and take part in a family cook out with my
family.
While I am a leftist, that doesn't mean I don't like or admire some of
our founding fathers. I like to remind people that there are both and bad
things about the US
revolution. We are talking about a revolution that concluded with the
Declaration of Independence on July 4, 1776, by the Continental
Congress declaring that the thirteen American colonies were to become an
independent nation.
Of our founding fathers, the
Republicans (anti-aristocrats at that time) included both Thomas Paine and
Thomas Jefferson. They differed from George Hamilton and his Federalists who
wanted to create some new kind of aristocracy. In his later writings,
Paine condemned
the Federalists for trying to reverse the US revolution and what it stood
for.
Thomas Paine
I’ve
often enjoyed reading Jefferson . His best
writings were from his letters where he could write honestly about the people
he had to deal with in the late 1700s, both before and after his presidency. I
like the fact that he was not religious; he had an almost Epicurean view, as did Paine.
I share his Epicurean beliefs. Jefferson was
well educated.
I’ll
never forget what he wrote comparing Hamilton
to John Adams in his letters:
“Another incident took place on the same occasion, which
will further delineate Mr. Hamilton’s political principles. The room being hung
around with a collection of the portraits of remarkable men, among them where
those of (Francis) Bacon, (Isaac) Newton
and (John) Locke, Hamilton asked me who they were. I told him
they were my trinity of the three greatest men the world had ever produced,
naming them. He paused for some time: “the greatest man,” said he, “that ever
lived, was Julius Caesar.” Mr. Adams was honest as a politician, as well as a
man; Hamilton honest a man, but, as a politician, believing in the necessity of
either force or corruption to govern men.”[1]
I
would have drawn about the same conclusion about Hamilton , accept I would have been harsher on
him. He seemed a bit of a dolt, to believe the Caesar was the greatest man who
ever lived. Caesar was a tyrant and an imperialist. He had some good qualities,
but comparing Jefferson’s favorites to Hamilton ’s
was like comparing a Harley Davidson Sportster to a tricycle. Hamilton
was clueless as a revolutionary. I don’t share Jefferson ’s
enthusiasm for all of his theoreticians, but at least they are people with
theoretical modern ideas for their time and scientific views as opposed to a
political brute.
As
for the judgment of Jefferson based on his 1700s
writings, I can point to the writings of Antonio Gramsci in his
writings on “Judgment of Past Philosophies;”
“The superficial criticism of subjectivism in the
“Popular Study” leads into a more general question, that of the standpoint
taken regarding past philosophies and philosophers. To judge the whole
philosophical past as madness and folly is not only an anti-historical error,
since it contains the anachronistic pretence that in the past they should have
thought like today, but it is a truly genuine hangover of metaphysics, since it
supposes a dogmatic thought valid at all times and in all countries, by whose
standard one should judge all the past. Anti-historical method is nothing but metaphysics.
The fact that philosophical systems have been suspended does not exclude the
fact that they were historically valid and carried out a necessary function:
Their short-livedness should be considered from the point
of view of the entire historical development and of the real dialectic; that
they deserved to perish is neither a moral judgment nor sound thinking emerging
from an “objective” point of view, but a dialectical-historical judgment. One
can compare this with Engels’ presentation of the Hegelian proposition that
“all that is rational is real and all that is real is rational”, a proposition
which will be valid for the past as well.
In the Study the past is judged as “irrational” and
“monstrous” and the history of philosophy becomes the historical treatment of
teratology, since he starts from a metaphysical point of view. (In fact the
Communist Manifesto contains the highest praise of the dying world.) If this
way of judging the past is a theoretical error and a deviation from Marxism,
can it have any educational significance, will it generate activity? It does
not appear so, because the question would reduce itself to presuming that one
is a special person simply because one was born in the present time and not in
a past century. But at every time there has been a past and a present and being
“up to date” is praise only for jokes.”[2]
Paine went to France to take part in the French Revolution,
for which he wrote The Rights of Man.
He fell out of favor of France ’s
first non-aristocratic leader, Maximilien Robespierre (also anti-aristocratic
and considered an ally of the Republican movement). Paine remained in France until 1802, when he returned to America
on an invitation from Thomas Jefferson, after he was elected president.
Pain condemned Napoleon Bonaparte's coup d' état, overthrowing the French Directory, calling him "the completest charlatan that ever existed."
Pain condemned Napoleon Bonaparte's coup d' état, overthrowing the French Directory, calling him "the completest charlatan that ever existed."
Today the US supports regressive feudal states such as Saudi Arabia
and Bahrain . The US is now the closest thing to the ancient
Roman Empire , controlling almost ALL of the
modern world.
Today we still have a quasi democracy (actually an oligarchy). We have a president, barely elected by people. Today this country takes part in torture, drone assassinations and concentration camps, inGuantanamo Bay .
So there is a lot of bad baggage that this country has today.
Today we still have a quasi democracy (actually an oligarchy). We have a president, barely elected by people. Today this country takes part in torture, drone assassinations and concentration camps, in
And yet some
good came out of the US Revolution, even if that revolution has far less modern
significance than it had 200 years ago.
So the
importance of this holiday for me is the family time, the observance of such
important men as Jefferson and Paine, and
knowing that history follows an important path from regressive to progressive
states of government. The line is not always straight or consistent. But it is
history and we can celebrate it as we want.
No comments:
Post a Comment