04 Jul 14
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyIf you knew it was phony, why did you post it again today?
Became aware of Snopes' linkage of the quotation to "the last presidential election" [not my reference] and dismissal of its authorship a week ago when I checked out the quotation [first heard twenty years ago] before posting it to Facebook.
"Claim: Law professor's analysis demonstrates that the results of the last presidential election correspond ...[text shortened]... downfall of democracy." http://www.snopes.com/politics/ballot/athenian.asp#kyuQEvUH7AIkB7PV.99
04 Jul 14
1 edit
Originally posted by Grampy Bobbywhat about this grievance, cited from the deceleration of Independence?
Became aware of Snopes' linkage of the quotation to "the last presidential election" [not my reference] and dismissal of its authorship a week ago when I checked out the quotation [first heard twenty years ago] before posting it to Facebook.
"Claim: Law professor's analysis demonstrates that the results of the last presidential election correspond ...[text shortened]... downfall of democracy." http://www.snopes.com/politics/ballot/athenian.asp#kyuQEvUH7AIkB7PV.99
He (George III) has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.
Is this really true? Were native Americans merciless savages as is alleged? whose only known mode of warfare was an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions? Is that really what we are being asked to believe here? Who really was known for an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions, the Natives of Sand Creek?
or this one,
He (George III) has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States?
Did the British government really endeavor to prevent the population of the states or was it simply that they were unwilling to let the colonists appropriate all the land that they wanted at the expense of Native peoples which eventually happened anyway, at the treaty of Paris, 1783? hmmm
04 Jul 14
Originally posted by HandyAndy"Became aware of Snopes' linkage of the quotation to "the last presidential election" [not my reference] and dismissal of its authorship a week ago when I checked out the quotation [first heard twenty years ago] before posting it to Facebook."
If you knew it was phony, why did you post it again today?
"Claim: Law professor's analysis demonstrates that the results of the last presidential election correspond to a prediction about the downfall of democracy."
http://www.snopes.com/politics/ballot/athenian.asp#kyuQEvUH7AIkB7PV.99
"phony" is your word. Snopes' linkage to "the last presidential election" in no way invalidates the principle of gradual decline.
04 Jul 14
Originally posted by robbie carrobieHi, robbie. These provocative questions would surely make an interesting thread for the history buffs in the Debates Forum.
what about this grievance, cited from the deceleration of Independence?
He (George III) has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.
Is this really tr ...[text shortened]... e expense of Native peoples which eventually happened anyway, at the treaty of Paris, 1783? hmmm
04 Jul 14
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyOuch sussed again! I thought i could get a rise out of that wily o'l trout Handy Andy, but you sussed me out 😀
Hi, robbie. These provocative questions would surely make an interesting thread for the history buffs in the Debates Forum.
04 Jul 14
1 edit
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyYes it was, but Handy Andy was in the vicinity as was Suzzianne! 'sussed', is rather excellent colloquial term for uncovering something by deduction.
..... but mon frère, the reply was made to Boston Lad on Independence Day, 2014. "sussed" a new one on moi.
04 Jul 14
Originally posted by robbie carrobieIs this really true? Were native Americans merciless savages as is alleged?
what about this grievance, cited from the deceleration of Independence?
He (George III) has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.
Is this really tr ...[text shortened]... e expense of Native peoples which eventually happened anyway, at the treaty of Paris, 1783? hmmm
No. There were casinos owned and run by native American entrepreneurs all throughout this land, from sea to shining sea. Unless you meant merciless and savage businessmen, then yes... yes they were.
04 Jul 14
Originally posted by Grampy BobbySpend a little more time researching Snopes. The fatal sequence, or "gradual decline," has no
"Became aware of Snopes' linkage of the quotation to "the last presidential election" [not my reference] and dismissal of its authorship a week ago when I checked out the quotation [first heard twenty years ago] before posting it to Facebook."
"Claim: Law professor's analysis demonstrates that the results of the last presidential election correspond ...[text shortened]... kage to "the last presidential election" in no way invalidates the principle of gradual decline.
reliable source. It is far from being a valid "principle" of democratic government, and no more
than some unknown dabbler's half-baked opinion.
http://www.lorencollins.net/tytler.html
04 Jul 14
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI would answer with the question "Who wasn't in 1776? Were the Brits and the Dutch kind and gentle with the South African peoples? In India, Central, or South America? Did the French bake people lovely desserts when they showed up in their countries? The only difference between what the indigenous peoples did in the Western Hemisphere and the so-called civilized folk did was that the indigenous people were protecting themselves from invaders, not the invaders themselves. That said, they may have taken their share of "wives" and slaves, just as others did in times of war.
what about this grievance, cited from the deceleration of Independence?
snip: , the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.
Is this really true? Were native Americans merciless savages as is alleged? whose only known mode of warfare was an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions?
A bit of hyperbole goes a long way when you're declaring your independence. It would hardly get support to say "Those people won't let us destroy them and it's all your fault, you meanies." Similarly, apparently England tried to put forth all sorts of taxation-WITH-representation plans but the colonists weren't interested because they weren't looking for any sort of solution, just independence.
04 Jul 14
Originally posted by SahuaroInsightful. Thanks.
I would answer with the question "Who wasn't in 1776? Were the Brits and the Dutch kind and gentle with the South African peoples? In India, Central, or South America? Did the French bake people lovely desserts when they showed up in their countries? The only difference between what the indigenous peoples did in the Western Hemisphere and the so-c ...[text shortened]... sts weren't interested because they weren't looking for any sort of solution, just independence.
04 Jul 14
2 edits
Originally posted by SahuaroAye lass, but the entire mantra 'no taxation without representation', itself was fraudulent because who really got representation after independence? Only if you were propertied, that left out women, native Americans, African Americans and most common men.
I would answer with the question "Who wasn't in 1776? Were the Brits and the Dutch kind and gentle with the South African peoples? In India, Central, or South America? Did the French bake people lovely desserts when they showed up in their countries? The only difference between what the indigenous peoples did in the Western Hemisphere and the so-c ...[text shortened]... sts weren't interested because they weren't looking for any sort of solution, just independence.
04 Jul 14
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyIt's not just that no book has been found. I immediately found two sources (there are more) who declare that (a) two quotes from different people were combined into one quote, and (b) Sir Alex Fraser Tytler didn't write either one. They are attributed to a number of other people.
"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largess of the public treasury. From that time on the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with the results that a democracy always collapses over loose fi ...[text shortened]... but no book has been found."
http://quotes.liberty-tree.ca/quote_blog/Alex.Tytler.Quote.4272
Since the governmental models we have today were fledgling when this guy was alive, he's hardly in any position to declare what the future of such a system would be two hundred years later. And he didn't. True, someone at some point said those words. That doesn't make them true. I can declare that it is inevitable that EVENTUALLY my dear Chicago Cubs will not only GO to the World Series (aside from sitting in the bleachers with the other fans), but they will actually WIN. Yes. Win the World Series. The Cubs. It will happen, and the Yankees will sink lower than ever in history. Maybe. It's easy to claim something with no time frame, and if it doesn't happen in my lifetime just claim that it hasn't happened yet but it still will.
If this is something you personally believe is going to happen, then state that, and state your evidence. Quoting dead people's opinions isn't evidence of anything. Where have you seen this cycle happen in a civilization? Why do you believe it is inevitable?
04 Jul 14
Originally posted by HandyAndy"Seven Signs of A Falling Nation"
Spend a little more time researching Snopes. The fatal sequence, or "gradual decline," has no
reliable source. It is far from being a valid "principle" of democratic government, and no more
than some unknown dabbler's half-baked opinion.
http://www.lorencollins.net/tytler.html
http://realtruth.org/articles/070831-002-ssoafn.html
"Societal Collapse"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Societal_collapse
"History of Europe"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Europe
Thanks for your opinion.