this post was submitted on 10 Aug 2024
65 points (89.2% liked)

Ask Lemmy

26890 readers
2482 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions

Please don't post about US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world


Rules: (interactive)


1) Be nice and; have funDoxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them


2) All posts must end with a '?'This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?


3) No spamPlease do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.


4) NSFW is okay, within reasonJust remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].


5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.


Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Tech Support

No Stupid Questions

You Should Know

Reddit

Jokes

Ask Ouija


Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] LunchMoneyThief@links.hackliberty.org 15 points 3 months ago (1 children)

How can anyone live in NYC?

Having read through accounts of Washington and Adams, it would seem that there was a very prevalent dislike of New York city in the colonies. They described NYC residents as lacking in decorum, which I still find fairly fitting today.

[–] BackOnMyBS@lemmy.autism.place 7 points 3 months ago (3 children)

I can't speak on Washington and Adams in regards to their dislike of NYC, but relevantly, Jefferson had a unique understanding of freedom. To him, freedom wasn't a list of established rights protected by government. He was a major opponent of government and would likely agree to many anarchist ideals of today. Most founding fathers would likely agree that when they were discussing freedom, they meant freedom from England and monarchies. Jefferson was on another level though; he was extreme with the idea of freedom. Freedom was the ability for someone to live exactly how they pleased without any outside influence, both physically and mentally. It was a natural right for every single person to do whatever they pleased with their life as long as it didn't affect anyone else's ability to live their life as they pleased. Governments, churches, large companies, etc. were in strict opposition to this ideal of freedom. In practical terms, that means he had a vision of the USA as a land of self-sustaining farmers so that no one would be dependent on others to live or think. He was truly revolutionary in that sense. To him, urban areas were rife with corruption of not only politics and economy, but also ideas. He had a disdain for anything centralized: cities, government, churches, etc. He was the main advocate for the separation of church and state. Fun fact! Last I checked, when someone swears on a Bible in an American court, they swear on a Jeffersonian Bible which has all supernatural phenomenon omitted.

I think that the most influential American in the history of the USA is Jefferson, followed by Adams and then Washington. Jefferson was extreme in his vision of freedom, and those ideals are entrenched in the US Constitution. However, he was somewhat hypocritical with how he lived his life considering he became a president, owned slaves, and even let Louisiana continue slavery. In contrast, Adams was a principled person that truly held to his values and beliefs. He advocated for abolition of slavery and didn't own slaves. He even defended British troops that killed Americans because he was steadfast in his belief that valid legal trials not only protect citizens from government overreach, but that is the only way to achieve legal truth. Washington is famous and popular, but he didn't have the impact on foundational ideals that the other two had. Washington was more concrete and likeable. He was a practical leader. Shit...I'm digressing. Back to Tommy. If Jefferson wasn't involved in the foundation of the USA, I think the country would have turned out to be quite different from what it is today...maybe even unrecognizable. I'm not as confident that would have been the case for Adams and Washington.

And a notable mention for Abigail Adams, whose constant writing back and forth with John appears to have played a major role in developing his own views. Were women allowed into politics during that time, she would have made a fine member of the early US government.

[–] Sarothazrom@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

There's an extremely good Alternate History Hub video that just came out about, what if John Adams died before he became 2nd president?

It's REALLY good and goes deep into the divide between Jefferson and Hamilton. Awesome video from an awesome channel.

[–] BackOnMyBS@lemmy.autism.place 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Do you know what it's called? I couldn't find it through search or in their US playlist.

[–] Sarothazrom@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Here you go! My fault, I forgot the proper title.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=BmM2_x9I4JI

[–] jjjalljs@ttrpg.network 3 points 3 months ago

In practical terms, that means he had a vision of the USA as a land of self-sustaining farmers so that no one would be dependent on others to live or think.

I'm going to fire from the hip here because I'm not a scholar.

First, that is a completely a-historical, unnatural idea of how people and societies work. Humans are social groups and have formed cities since the dawn of history. It's nonsense and sounds like a personal hell for me.

Cities are where stuff happens. A country that's just self sustaining farmers living in isolation is not going to produce a lot. Not a lot of culture, not a lot of science.

Like, I don't think we'd even have writing if cities hadn't been developed.