Swans Commentary » swans.com June 18, 2007  



The Founding Fathers' Fraud


by Philip Greenspan





(Swans - June 18, 2007)  I sometimes find myself in complete disagreement with not just substantial majorities but unanimous beliefs -- self-evident truths that I don't find so self evident. I am aware that I'm somewhat of an eccentric and that might explain the problem. My father often complained that I looked at a problem "ass-ways."

Last week I attended a panel discussion on the fraudulent voting tactics brought about with the installation of electronic voting. I sensed that the audience believed that if fraud were removed the will of the people would be restored. I disagree -- not to eliminating voting fraud -- but with their judgment. Electing the lesser of two evils, Tweedledee instead of Tweedledum, gives essentially the same results. The two-party system is a sham. The system does not need correction. The system itself, the US Constitution on which it's based, must be scrapped! Discarded! Eliminated!

Political problems distressing the public are not caused by what they suspect. Their solutions will not affect a cure. Over and over and over again I hear calls for the impeachment of Bush and company. I hear that he is the worst president. Well, if he is the worst and deserves impeachment why, why, why does he remain in power continually doing more and more of every conceivable thing that the public finds objectionable? The obvious answer is that those who call the shots -- the power elite -- are delighted with what is being done on their behalf and have no complaints whatsoever. And their alternate political arm, the Democratic Party, loyally responding to the elite's demands, continues to ratify the Bush agenda.

This is precisely how the Founding Fathers' Constitution was designed to work. Why, why, why have both liberals and conservatives made those vile men, the Founding Fathers, into saints and their self-serving handiwork, the Constitution, a hallowed document?

The authors of the Constitution were extremely powerful and wealthy men who disdained and feared the common people and therefore opposed the form of government known as democracy. That word, democracy, does not appear in the Constitution, its accompanying Bill of Rights, or in any of the amendments. They explicitly stated on many occasions and in no ambiguous terms their antipathy to that form of government. Accordingly it is not, nor ever was under the Constitution, the law of the land. Yet democracy, democracy, democracy is the term bandied about by all branches and agencies of the government, the media, schools, churches, and by the general public in informal conversations, all of whom insist with no doubts whatsoever that the US government is -- you guessed it -- a democracy. It is deemed to be so worthy of emulation that it is exported to foreign nations -- usually at the point of a gun.

Wealth was available in the New World for those who could exploit its riches. But the strength and energy of hard labor was needed to realize those dreams. Accordingly, the wealthy, through a propaganda campaign, lured poor Europeans to the country -- many came as indentured servants, kidnapped, or prisoners.

In the hundred years up to the Revolution disparities in wealth soared. The richest 1 percent increased their share of wealth from 25 to 44 percent while the percentage of poor adult males climbed from 14 to 29 percent.

Well before the Revolution scores of riots and revolts some that even brought down established governments in Massachusetts, New York, Maryland, Virginia, and North Carolina, frightened the wealthy masters. In revolting, the common people were not merely seeking freedom from the King but liberation from the oppression of the colonial aristocracy. The Founding Fathers opposed those revolutionary tendencies and hoped to maintain the peace by what at a later date would be ridiculed as appeasement.

Because the people rejected the highly centralized, strong national government of Great Britain, when the Declaration of Independence abolished British rule, the political document that unified the colonies (the Articles of Confederation) had only a legislative branch with no coercive powers whatsoever. The people wanted political power close to the local level. A distant, centralized government, was feared and contravened independence.

By 1787, six years after implementation of the Articles, it became apparent to all that defects existed and had to be corrected. A Constitutional Convention was called to amend the Articles and any proposed changes were to be approved by all the states before they could be adopted.

Rebellions were threatening the power of the wealthy elite and therefore they were most desirous of shutting it down. So, they employed every stratagem to become delegates to the Convention. As stated, the Framers feared democracy and were resolved to subdue those obstreperous multitudes. Secrecy, deceit, and even violence were necessary to get their document written and ratified. They defied the stipulations and abandoned the authorization to amend the Articles and designed a Constitution that gave them every possible advantage to maintaining their wealth, power, and control through an entirely new centralized national government.

Well aware that the majority of the people -- even the fractionally small number of eligible voters -- were against the Constitution and that ratification would be difficult, their Constitution specified that it would become effective when ratified by only nine states. They then moved quickly before opposition could organize and build.

Unlawful force and deception were required to secure ratification. In one situation, they defied opponents whose tactical position was to prevent a quorum of state delegates while gathering and augmenting their forces. They forcibly dragged reluctant delegates into their seats to get a quick and early positive vote. Promises were made to delegates in a few states that any proposed amendments would be included upon ratification. In each state, various workable tactics were tried to secure ratification. Not all, but enough of the states were bamboozled.

Yes, a Bill of Rights, the first ten Amendments that protected the individual from acts of the government, was incorporated into the Constitution. But other promised reforms that would have restricted private power -- the capitalists and their corporations -- were ignored.

In time, through massive and long drawn-out demands by the people, changes were effected against the renitent robber barons who enjoyed what their predecessors, the Founding Father elite, created. The possibility of a major revolt during the Depression caused Franklin Roosevelt and the democratic congress to enact his "New Deal" that may have saved -- although it has always been strongly disputed by the aristocracy -- capitalism in America. Since then almost all of his progressive programs have been eliminated and the country again reflects what the Founding Fathers envisioned.

So there it is: A snippet of reality has broken through the veil of deception to expose the double F's and their con, the Con-stitution. If they were alive today they would be ecstatic with what Dubya is doing. His actions and tactics are similar to what they accomplished. And he has crushed those unwanted Bill of Rights that they reluctantly accepted in order to get their show on the road. For all of his accomplishments under a hail of disapproval, they would certainly rate GWB as the very best president!


· · · · · ·


If you appreciate and enjoy our work, please help us financially.

· · · · · ·


Internal Resources

Activism under the Radar Screen

Myths & Realities

Patterns which Connect


About the Author

Philip Greenspan on Swans (with bio).



Please, feel free to insert a link to this work on your Web site or to disseminate its URL on your favorite lists, quoting the first paragraph or providing a summary. However, please DO NOT steal, scavenge, or repost this work on the Web or any electronic media. Inlining, mirroring, and framing are expressly prohibited. Pulp re-publishing is welcome -- please contact the publisher. This material is copyrighted, © Philip Greenspan 2007. All rights reserved.


Have your say

Do you wish to share your opinion? We invite your comments. E-mail the Editor. Please include your full name, address and phone number (the city, state/country where you reside is paramount information). When/if we publish your opinion we will only include your name, city, state, and country.


· · · · · ·


This Edition's Internal Links

The Insurgent Word: Fragments - Gerard Donnelly Smith

A Rudderless, Co-opted Antiwar "Movement" - Gilles d'Aymery

Tangled Web Of Life Or Worse - Carol Warner Christen

Walking The Dog - Humor by Peter Byrne

Artifacts - Poem by Martin Murie

Sundays In Hope - Poem by Marie Rennard

Polyhedron n.3: Moenia Mundi - Poem by Guido Monte & Francesca Saieva

Adam Sisman's The Friendship: Wordsworth & Coleridge - Book Review by Charles Marowitz

New Art And Imperialism In Dublin - Peter Byrne

Blips #52 - From the Martian Desk - Gilles d'Aymery

Letters to the Editor

· · · · · ·


[About]-[Past Issues]-[Archives]-[Resources]-[Copyright]



Swans -- ISSN: 1554-4915
URL for this work: http://www.swans.com/library/art13/pgreen114.html
Published June 18, 2007