"The Founding Fathers of America considered themselves Englishmen in the deepest sense. They went back to the origins of English Common Law when writing the U.S. Constitution, something that the U.S. Supreme Court still does in deciding cases."
Benjamin Franklin on German immigration: "Why should Pennsylvania, founded by the English, become a Colony of Aliens, who will shortly be so numerous as to Germanize us instead of our Anglifying them, and will never adopt our Language or Customs, any more than they can acquire our Complexion."
"... unless the stream of their importation could be turned from this to other colonies they will soon so out number us, that all the advantages we have will not in My Opinion be able to preserve our language, and even our Government will become precarious."
>the founding fathers were racist old white men we already knew that. what's your point, shitlord?
Noah Phillips
The Founding Fathers were English supremacists, not White ones.
Xavier Nguyen
...
Grayson Murphy
They knew what's up tbqh. The eternal Anglo is very stronk.
Nolan Kelly
He was right, PA sucks balls even today.
Parker Murphy
hence why le hwite rice is a meme invented by lower class trailer trash to feel superior for doing nothing other than sucking meth fumes from their plastic bongs
Lucas Lee
I think they despised England and what it stood for. Most notably the financial system. You dont get credit for them when they oppossed everything your country stood for. Yes they were english educated, but the declaration of independence and constiution were leaps ahead of anything England had at the time. They were also very observant of their surroundings in the americas, and some things can be attributed to the iroquois confederacy.
Chase Taylor
And yet they managed to make a country so fucking good that it could wipe out everyone else... it also is being flooded with shitskins, but we'll solve that problem, too.
Really nettles your neurons
Jackson Price
I don't know. I always got the impression that they were proud Englishmen that got shafted by the crown, had the opportunity to break off and start something new, and since they were starting from scratch why not improve on the English system and add in newfangled enlightenment ideas?
Colton Bell
>You dont get credit for them when they oppossed everything your country stood for. Yes they were english educated, but the declaration of independence and constiution were leaps ahead of anything England had at the time
My goodness. What do they teach you in your public schools over there? The U. S. Constitution is a direct copy of English institutions. The rights of freedom of speech, to bear arms, of habeas corpus, trial by jury, prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment, arbitrarily entering people's homes etc. etc. all derive from this country. The President, Senate, and House of Representatives were made in imitation of our Monarch, Senate, and House of Commons. The Founding Fathers were Englishmen who loved the mother country and saw themselves as fighting to gain English rights. In addition a large number of people in England, like Pitt the Elder and Edmund Burke, supported the colonists.
It is amusing by the by however that you call American institutions "leaps ahead of anything England had at the time" in view of the fact that slavery has always been outlawed on English soil (see Somerset v Stewart en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somerset_v_Stewart), while it was freely practised in America until the Emancipation Proclamation of 1863.
>imitation of our Monarch, Senate, and House of Commons
imitation of our Monarch, House of Lords*, and House of Commons
Caleb Reed
Thank you for correcting the record.
Alexander Stewart
>Being this brainwashed
The founding fathers just wanted more power, and thought that some things needed to change such as how power is allocated. If they really hated Britain's finance system they wouldn't have copied it by assuming free market control over all business.
I mean the whole revolutionary war was the American elite vs. the British elite.
More to do with the size and abundance of resources America has (as well as the Anglo-heritage), rather than the socio-political frameworks of the nation.
Tyler Parker
Remind me where I can read your constitution again? I mean, you did write one down right?
Kayden Rogers
Was he really THAT fat , as seen on the painting?
Joseph Watson
You don't need a constitution to set out the institutions and their powers. Most of Britain's political rules are derived in deep tradition and racial-history.
Besides, all of your amendments have some connotation with an English law (or previous English law). For example the Second Amendment is based on the right for all free citizens to wield a weapon; in fact it was mandatory that men owned weapons and practiced them in the case of using their learned skills in war.
Gavin Kelly
Think of it like this: when the next revolution begins in the US, the Patriots will consider themselves the TRUE Americans, while the current government has become...something un-American.
Thus, the founding fathers thought of themselves as true Englishmen fighting for English rights that their current government had restricted. They thought of George III's government had become something un-English.
Kevin Richardson
>The Founding Fathers were Englishmen who loved the mother country
Read up on Thomas Jefferson. You're in for a surprise
Protip: he literally didn't even want to trade with britcucks, that's how much he hated their guts.
Tyler Diaz
George III was (rightly) seen as a German monarch trying to take away rights the colonists had always enjoyed, and which the Founders considered to be their natural rights as freeborn Englishmen.
In the eyes of many of the Founders, philosophically the American War of Independence was not a revolution but a counter-revolution. They were fighting to preserve and restore traditional English liberties against the introduction of Continental despotism by a German king.
Bentley Howard
I am not really sure what he thinks was so nefarious about English financial institutions in the eighteenth century. They had little or nothing to do with the cause of the American Rebellion to my knowledge. He may be mixing up the fact that the Founding Fathers were against paper money and in favour of the gold standard with the fact that Central Banks now issue paper money, and that England at that time already had a Central Bank.
There is also a false and half-baked theory that has traction on the chans and on certain internet forums that the Rothschilds or the Jews nefariously "controlled the British Empire" or "controlled the Bank of England" despite the fact that the British Empire was one of the greatest forces for good in the history of the world. People usually base it however on a fictitious story first circulated by a pamphlet from the year 1846 that the Rothschilds "bought up the whole of England" after our victory at Waterloo, so it could not apply to the late-eighteenth century.
Ryder Morales
>slavery I always love how the US is vilified for slavery by Europeans. It was outlawed on home soil, sure, but it was alive and well in the colonies of England, Spain, and Portugal. England and the US both outlawed the slave trade in 1807 and 1808. England emancipated it's slaves in the 1830s and the US followed a few decades after. Spanish and Portuguese colonies took even longer. Slavery existed in some French colonies into the late 1800s. Other European countries abolish slave trade and slavery at various times in the 1800s.
Conditions and numbers of slaves were also much worse in European colonies in Latin America than they were in the US, and often went on for longer.
Jaxson Scott
So he was a cunt? I mean, I don't think all the founding fathers loved England, but most of them at least respected their roots and had some love for the nation and people.
Jefferson was a cunt though.
>The English hate us waaaaaaaah!
Although he did come to realise his mistakes a bit after the war.
Bang on the money old chap. They felt that their birth rights as free born Englishman were being trampled upon by the Crown of the time that they took the opportunity to preserve them in the new world.
Lucas Martinez
HISTORICAL BURN
Evan Roberts
Precisely. But a large number of Americans supported the mother-country (the Loyalists), while half of England supported the American colonists. The Tory party were the prosecutors of the war; the Whigs were against it. (See Edmund Burke, John Wilkes, etc.) It is duplicitous to make out as if the stock in America was some sort of special stock different from that of the mother-country, as if all of England was against the American patriots and all the Americans were for them. It was a simple case of Englishmen fighting for English rights. We had a Civil War in England from 1642-1651 concerning our rights, but everybody involved was nevertheless English, and we did not somehow become a new people at the end of that war. So the Americans did not become a new people at the close of their war with the Tory party.
America is a different nation now of course, because of the enormous amount of non-British immigration which has overtaken the country in recent years. But that is what makes it so silly for these new immigrants, whose ancestors had nothing to do with founding the country's institutions, to attack Britain and British people and act as if America and Britain have always been two different nations: as if there exists some sort of dichotomy between Britain now, and the Americans during the time of the Founding Fathers. The real dichotomy is between the new immigrants (who are often opposed to or subversive towards American institutions) and Britons plus the founding American stock and their present-day descendants.
Ryan Richardson
>It was outlawed on home soil, sure
Is not this the central point of the discussion however? He said that "American institutions were leaps ahead of English ones," and I pointed out that slavery was outlawed on English soil while in the Thirteen Colonies and later the United States it was freely allowed. He is the one who is making a dichotomy between American institutions and English ones at the time.
Landon Cox
You skipped quartering of troops... oh right
Adam Ortiz
I wrote,
>arbitrarily entering people's homes
Hence why the Declaration of Independence says "He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction FOREIGN TO OUR CONSTITUTION," (i. e. The English Constitution) "and UNACKNOWLEDGED BY OUR LAWS;" (i. e. English laws), giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us."
Hence a pamphlet Protesting excise tax in Massachusetts (1754) wrote: "It is essential to the English Constitution, that a Man should be safe in his own House; his House is commonly called his Castle, which the Law will not permit even a sheriff to enter into, but by his own Consent, unless in a criminal case."
