John Adams Talking to Thomas Jefferson
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 26 ส.ค. 2024
- This scene from HBO's brilliant John Adams series made me think of the recent Kevin Rudd/Julia Gillard spill where popular public opinion can be quite different to the majority opinion of their elected officials.
"you can not protect the nation by attacking the right of every man to speak freely without fear" what a great line still holds true to this day
Twitter Files just dropped proving that. About that time again
Gahhhh sometimes words can pierce through the soul !
Some truths pass thru all the times
@@derrickstorm6976 or truth withstands the test of time ⏲️ 🤔
Printed on postcards -- hundreds of thousands of them -- and send them to every "Democrat" in DC.
"Cannot protect the nation by attacking the right of every man to speak freely without fear", that right there says it all.
“Cannot protect a platform by revoking the right of every man to speak freely without fear” - has a nice ring to it.
@@Maxq1 What exactly are you afraid to say?
@@Maxq1 It's not even about being on the right side of the fence, but about being able to have your own opinions, politically or otherwise without being chastised for it. We live in a country now where we are being forced to accept different genders, etc.
Eventually, there will be pushback.
@@Maxq1 I think you should let it play out. Why be friends with Dems if you feel like you get beat up for your political views?
It's almost fascinating how many ppl from different points of the political spectrum interpert what Jefferson and Adams said here. "Cannot protect the nation by attacking the right of every man to speak freely without fear" Do you believe speach is just speach or do you think it can move ppl to action? I think Adams was making the point that the US - as an institution - has a moral obligation to do the right thing - through its democratically elected leadership.
@@Maxq1 I'm deeply bothered by our politics. Apathy is deeply entrenched in our "2-party system". We have the evidence and can even see how it effects our citizens and yet we do nothing because we're either afraid to anger our colleagues on the otherside of the aisle or we lack the courage of our convictions to do what is right. Some do but I'm afraid the majority of this country just don't see it or simply do not care.
I'm afraid I do not see the value in conservatism. It goes against progress, it goes against nature even. Everything changes. People, technology, our learning and understanding of human behavior. Even our language changes. We must adapt or we will fall behind. Not a lecture, just my personal thoughts and observations.
John Adams: "What you propose will lead to less freedoms, not more."
Thomas Jefferson: "Fewer"
I am determined to control events, not be controlled by them.
HA! THANK YOU! I was trying to figure out where I recognised Jefferson from. I couldn't place him in the wig!
LMFAO
“I understood that reference!”
- Chris Evans
I'm not a native English speaker but isn't less the correct way in this example?
Everyone is criticizing Adam's decision to support the sedition act, but not for using the table cloth to wipe his mouth.
The not altogether subtle suggestion here is that by supporting the Alien and Sedition Acts he was wiping something else with the Constitution.
Around the late 1770s, it was normal to wipe on the tablecloth. It was a fairly short-lived practice, though.
LMGDAO
At that time table cloths were napkins
Jefferson was thinking to himself, "low class yankee"
The First Amendment wasn't created to protect popular opinion. It was meant to protect unpopular. This battle still goes on today
Exactly. Popular opinion was what the French Revolution was about.
*calls you racist reflexively*
@@appocalypsechild I'll cook you next
The fight has switched from the state blocking speech to big tech companies. Twitter, TH-cam, Facebook silence people all the time.
Too bad the founders didn't foresee that the first amendment would be ignored holy by Big Tech and social media social justice warriors who will seek out to ensure that you are punished in every way possible except criminal for any speech when we have or any speech advocating for free speech of all as if you're some type of sympathizer because you won't ban other speech.
Ah, if we could all just remove ourselves to Monticello
Great scene done with much deliberation and reverence. Jefferson did once call Adams' administration the "reign of witches" but he'd never say that to Adams' face. That wasn't his style. The dispassion in the scene makes up for that. Jefferson is solidly against Adams and will do what it takes to bring him down, but he is not angry with his friend. He is trying to reason with him. Adams was a great man, but he was pushed into a corner and surrounded by loud voices who told him it was his duty to protect the country at all costs.
Because it was his duty to protect the new and weak nation at any cost. Priorities. He was right. French Jeffersonians wrong.
@@pp-bb6jj I don't think there is any justification for the Alien and Sedition Act, but that is easy to say from my chair 230 years later.
@@pp-bb6jj The problem with any such laws, that seek total control, is that they are subject to the whims and subjective opinions of the people in charge of enforcing them. For example, the sedition act, seeking to make it a crime to "print, utter, or publish...any false, scandalous, and malicious writing." Who defines what is false, scandalous, or malicious? You can see the problem with that even today. If you get someone from New York and someone from Texas in the room together, they would both passionately argue that the other is the one spreading false, scandalous, or malicious writing, or utterances.
@@shawnn7502 The Alien and Sedition acts are a complex matter. However, Adams proposed it as a way of managing immigration and providing national security from France in what was a non-shooting war with that country. Still, it was a breech of the First Amendment because the President could have anybody imprisoned for criticizing him or the US Government. The Federalist Party was the anti-democratic party. Jefferson and the Democratic-Republicans won the election of 1800 and let the Sedition part expire and repealed certain parts of it as well. However, the Alien Enemies act is still in place today.
When Adams says, "The people's representatives demanded these acts" is when Jefferson suddenly shifted from being a spirit of the law to a letter of the law kind of guy.
Politics: *exist*
Jefferson: "I shall remove myself to Monticello"
Read you must. Uneducated you are.
Jefferson is probably one of my least favorite Presidents. He complained about how Washington and Adams used the Federal power, then he made some incredibly controversial decisions in his term.
@@ReconRecall Like him or not, he was always right.
@@ReconRecall You've just described every political figure in history.
@@ReconRecall yes but he was the first president who believed in less government involvement. He had a lot of challenges to face and the federalists hated him. I think he did better than most men would in that position
Adams and Jefferson nearly had every argument possible with each other. That relationship molded our nation.
I kinda wish Jefferson had spent more time listening to himself.
They did indeed
This conversation is in reference to the 'Alien & Sedition Act'
When Jefferson became president it was revoked.
It wasn’t revoked... it was set to expire at the end of John Adams presidency, so they could criticize Thomas Jefferson in case John Adams lost the election.
Technically, parts of the act are still in place to this day (just not the same name as the original acts). You should research up on it.
BS Jefferson aggressively used the act to lock up his critics.
John Adams, arguably the greatest of our forefathers, in , arguably, his worst moment in history, proving that, no matter how great and virtuous one may be, all are far from perfect.
Comma man take it easy
Show called john adams
Litterally every other founding father steals the show
@@DougFischer Disagree. There's so many good moments for Adams in the show and Giamatti was the perfect actor for the role.
Agreed, though I really wish they either included more of James Madison or just make a show about him too.
Very well put.
Stephen Dillane is superb in this role.
💯
Adam’s last line highlights quite well that difficult balance between authority, power and control.
Such a great series. Wouldn’t mind a Jefferson series or Ben Franklin series.
But instead we got a ruler who cruelly let his daughter burn.
@@dannythomas417 yeah was gonna say Jefferson got beheaded by Captain Phasma
Could not take Stannis Baratheon seriously..I could only see Thomas Jefferson..Stephen Dillane was absolutely brilliant in this role, and would love to see a mini series as Jefferson.
Heck yeah! That's what I've been sayin.
@@dannythomas417 wait what? Who?
Adams: the sedition act was passed by majority, even if it may result in less freedoms
Jefferson: Fewer.
The 13 colonies are mine, by right. All those who deny that are my foes.
The Brits have played their little trick…they can only play it once.
All the Federalists deny it, from Georgia to Massachusetts
It had to have been painful for these two dear friends to find themselves in the position where they had to confront each other like this. They were so close they were practically a mirror for each other. And in this moment, they had to hold up the mirror to each other where they each faced the darker side of their duties. It was fortunate that they were later able to recover their friendship after they both retired from public office.
Then die on the same day, July 4th, hours apart. Adams thought Jefferson still lived as he died too, think they were his last words.
Wow, this conversation has alot of relevance today
These men didn’t know it but they’d both die the exact same day on 50 years after they made the Declaration of Independence
That was not an accident
It's amazing how in the 18th Century two men can sit down, have a conversation, be in political opposition and respectfully disagree with each other's views, and still leave maintaining their respect for each other without insulting or belittling. This is something people in 2021 need to get educated on.
And yet this is also an era where publishing something in a newspaper someone dislikes can lead to duelling with pistols.
Swings and roundabouts….
I mean in a couple of years the Vice President did shoot the former Security of the Treasury because of political disagreements but, you know, it was better then.
Imagine being able to sit down line that and then neither of the parties breach the capitol and try to overthrow our government
That’s why these are the leaders.
@MasteroMatter this is why Socrates advocated for public education regarding voting. Rather than everyone gets to vote, only those who are actually knowledgeable about the facts of politics could vote. These days that idea would be called racist or elitist probably. They had too many demagogues and feared it above all other leadership styles.
Of the few times I wished to go back in time, to have spent time with Adams and Jefferson, just to listen to these two, would have been one of them
You can come close by reading their (many) collected letters.
Adams straight told Jefferson: "Then get your soft ass on home then, richie rich!" 😂😂😂😂😂😂
John Adams had a point that Congress had passed those laws. The President is supposed to abide by and enforce the law. He could have vetoed the act but then Congress and the media could have accused him of being tyrannical. It was a really shitty time and people were scared.
The old argument of "What's good for the people" verus "what do the people want". Jefferson believes the Alien and Sedition Act would undermine the rights of the people, and yet it is the very representatives of the people that are pushing the act through Congress. Democracy is a fickle thing, an ideal to strive towards and become worthy of.
Democracy is evil. No group should be able to rule over another group, just because they are the majority. That's nothing more than mob rule.
dalton brasier I get what you’re saying. Wouldn’t you say though that it’s not about a group ruling another group as such, but rather about a choice being given to the people it will affect and subsequently taking the course that most people want. That’s why too far left or right is dangerous. More central parties try to accommodate for more people . Supposedly. At the end of the day , get the basic human rights and opportunities covered then after that it’s just about the private interests of parties . Everyone knows this... But that’s another reason why people want decentralisation isn’t it? Open Democracy still isn’t perfect , but it’s better than monarchy or more exclusive Republics.
@@joesteers1940 No one should have a say in what I do with my property and self. If the "decisions" people were making werent dictating what individuals do with their property and self, no one would have an issue because then it would be voluntary.
dalton brasier Okay. In a sense we don’t actually disagree here. So you’re talking about the private rights and freedoms of an individual? Well I can tell you that I wouldn’t want to try tell you what to do with your property or on your property , that is your business, NOT MINE ! So long as it only affects you however. So what system would you have in place instead of ‘Democracy’ such as this system is called.
@@joesteers1940 A completely voluntary system. Where property rights are acknowledged. An anarchist system where everyone is held accountable for their actions with a legal system that is free of politics.
Those two really did have quite a dynamic relationship. I don't think there's been anything quite like it in American history since.
I would kill for a graphic novel about John Adams and Thomas Jefferson. Maybe I could have somebody write the script for me and I illustrate it.
@@bunnybird9342How about just reading a genuine, factual biography?
@@myronlarimer1943 nothing wrong with those but I think a graphic novel would also be interesting
It's not too often you see a scene where two people are arguing and are both right, to some degree.
Personally I take the side of Jefferson in this matter, but to each his own.
Jefferson is definately in the right. You see, part of the reason those yankies ever revolted against the british was because they felt that their rights as stated in the british "constitution" (It's complicated) were being trampled upon. If John Adams were to do such thing then you'd expect that Adams would cause what he desired to avoid, the shattering of the union.
Kind of hard not to take Jefferson's side when Adams was trying to make the Presidency into a dictatorship
Jefferson brought in his own Insurrection Act during his own Presidency. What was not good for the geese was apparently just fine for the gander...
I'm definitely in agreement with you on that. The A&S Act was an act of childishness. Adams was mad because some people were making fun of him so he threw a fit and tried to pass a law to silence them. How such a remarkably intelligent man could do something so inane baffles me. But it also demonstrates how every president since Washington has tried to push the boundaries of his office and abuse the power given him. Every... single... one.
Even knowing the history I can never wrap my head around how Adams could promote such a policy which is so clearly a violation of the constitution. Granted it's the antifederalist bill of rights part of it, but how deporting those who merely express merely a different political opinion seems to me to be abject tyranny.
Jefferson had a claim to the 1st amendment, and he pressed it
A powerful show.
The more I watch and listen, the more I believe the civil war is always an inevitability in a country held together only by ideas written on paper. Most certainly when 2 sides can no longer agree to what those ideas written really mean.
More of a social history of Colonial America than a biography of John Adams
You could also say that a country founded on violent revolution will always have violent revolution lurking around every corner as some romanticized version of history.
@@barrywhite1770 On the scales of history, revolutions with violence far outweigh, peaceful ones. Were there any peaceful ones?
@@barrywhite1770 this is true. Rebellious attitude, and going against the grain are in the DNA of American culture. And that's what makes it strong. Because views are constantly challenged as both sides look for holes and weaknesses in each others platform and thus this allows for refinement. At least that's how it used to be
@@RAAM855 my point was that it wasn’t just about a difference of ideas, it was about the violent tactics to overthrow a government.
I think the whole point to this scene is that you can wipe your mouth with the tablecloth.
Hello 2021 are you listening
I love the accents in this, so, so accurate for the period. Wasnt until Dutch and Germans arrived and merged that the modern US accent developed.
They sound just like people from rural England, the Westcountry etc. as they may have been.
@@MongooseTacticool I was thinking exactly the same. Jefferson sounds like he was raised by the farmer from The Fast Show : "It's the drainage in the lower fields sir".
@@SecondQuantisation I wonder where their opinion on whether it's cream or jam first on a scone would fall? 😂
What i dont get is how these dutch & germans completely abandoned their mother tongue! You would think USA would be a multilingual society because of the ancestry of its citizens or at least have 50% of the population bilingual in german and English but it seems the germans not only spoke english outdoors but made it their mother tongue as well.
@@SecondQuantisation Interesting enough that Stephen Dillane (who portrays Jefferson here) is a British actor.
Since when does Stannis Baratheon not like witches?
[Adams has a] "hideous hermaphroditical character, which has neither the force and firmness of a man, nor the gentleness and sensibility of a woman." - Thomas Jefferson in the newspaper _The Prospect Before Us_ 1800
I thought that was said by Alexander Hamilton
@@markymark829 neither. It was James Callender, who was Jefferson's political hatchet man. Conveniently drowned in 3 feet of water a week before he could testify in a court case that he was paid by Jefferson to undermine the government.
markymark829 Hamilton’s letter was similar to Jefferson’s but it included more of Adams’ insanity and insecurity
johnson ooh,, thanks.
That was read out in this series too by Abigail Adams.
The Alien and Sedition Act was the absolute blackest stain on Adams' reputation, and it has clouded his legacy ever since. It also drove an even deeper wedge into his friendship with Jefferson.
Thomas Jefferson: *Throwing leeches into the fire* The Usurper Alexander Hamilton. The Usurper Aaron Burr. The Usurper Lin-Manuel Miranda.
Not a Jefferson fan, but he was right here. Not one of Adams better moments.
What don't you like about Jefferson?
@nexus1g umm owning slaves and being a hypocrite given the whole “all men are created equal” in a lot of ways Adams was a better man, very against slavery and a good leader
@@jonathanfranck8973 To be fair, Jefferson also didn't own slaves until he inherited them with two plantations from his father-in-law. Regardless, the Founders were well aware of their hypocrisy, and were not ok with it. However, it's similar to a communist saying today in the US that capitalism is evil and enslaves people -- he can't readily get by very well without living within the system he was born into. Even the Adams' dealt with slaves to some degree. When the whole system doesn't change, it's extremely difficult for individuals within it to not live with it.
@@jonathanfranck8973
Weak, moralizing, historian's fallacy.
@@DarkMatterX1 Chronological snobbery would be more accurate.
Jefferson...a giant among men.
I would argue Jefferson was the most important figure since Jesus.
@@JSErwine well not the number one but he is among them
2:21 Where are the napkins?
This was the og purpose of tablecloths!
I shall remove myself to Dragonstone.
John adams called him out nicely for running away to Monticello
Each day, a different liberty benefits the largest body of individuals, that is no justification to remove their freedom piece by piece.
Jefferson was and is right
Jefferson didn't have an answer for "going against the will of the people" but congress wanted it.
@Energised Voyages And yet the people can be a mob, unrestrained by the Constitution. And unscrupulous leaders can use the power of government against the people. It is a tricky balance.
'Will of the people' is fine so long as you don't violate the Constitution which lies beneath it all
Admiral Talax Alien and Sedation Acts were unconstitutional. So it doesn’t matter what their representatives would have wanted, it was a violation. Period. Congress shall make no law. First sentence of the 1st amendment.
The answer was the Constitution itself. They have a list of 18 powers they granted the federal government. Infringing on speech was not therein.
@@MidNiteR32 I didn't say they weren't. I just wanted Jefferson to respond to the congressional question. And congrats on being able to read the bill of rights, like we all can.
I forgo family loyalty and side with Jefferson.
“Most democracies end with a vote”
Funny to watch an exchange between opposing Parties at the executive level. In our first Presidential elections, 2nd place became the Vice President...until Jefferson became President?
Amendment 12, which was ratified in 1804.
Simona Cannizzo , Right, Jefferson was President from 1801-1809. He presided over the change to the Constitution (the 12th Amendment) that changed how our Vice President was chosen.
It was an interesting concept to think of the President having to Govern with a direct rival in charge of the Senate.
people often forget that we are not a full Democracy and in fact are a Constitutional Republic. soo many of the founders did not like a Democracy because it left the 49% in favor of the 51%.
Jefferson was right it all started with Hamilton and his northern idea of power and finance through a central bank at the expense of the southern states.
Which eventually led to the breakout of the Civil War!
@@taylorahern3755 Thomas Jefferson was correct that the Missouri Compromise would only further divide the country on the issue of slavery which would eventually result in a war to end it and less than 40 years after his death he was correct
@@taylorahern3755 Yet Jefferson would plant the seeds of nullification/secession with the Kentucky Resolution
A respectful chess match, superbly played. But Adams reminds me of a serious Larry Fine.
Schopenhauer, minus his muttonchops.
1:44 - Valuable lesson here: sometimes what the people want is not in the best interest of their country. Before and even during the American Civil War, the majority of American citizens did not support the end of slavery. When Lincoln announced the Emancipation Proclamation, a lot of his generals and people in the North were like, "Wait, what?! That's not what we're fighting about!" Lincoln knew that the only way the Union was going to continue and eventually win the Civil War both on and off the battlefield was to take the moral high ground, and he did just that by pivoting the War to a mission to end slavery rather than just preserving the Union. Even though the majority of the people didn't want it, and his administration never much cared for it, Lincoln signed it because he knew this was the right thing to do for the country as a whole. That's one of the reasons why he was assassinated: Booth (the guy who shot him) claimed he was a tyrant because the Emancipation was seen in the South as a power mad tyrant doing what HE wants and not what his PEOPLE wanted. Hence why Booth screamed "Sic Semper Tyrannis" to Lincoln when he shot him.
Just goes to show you: The People are always right in a Democracy, until they are wrong. Also, a good leader gives people what they NEED, not what they WANT.
All of us are like sheep; scattered and each going our own way...
Note the word: all.
Lincoln didn't issue the Emancipation Proclamation to gain any moral high ground. It was a weapon of war against the South. Why do you suppose he didn't free the slaves in the north, the ones under his own control?
The civil war wasn't about slavery however
@@jshepard152 He most certainly did do it to get a moral high ground, which in turn kept any European powers from entering on the side of the CSA. They had all already outlawed slavery in its entirety, but were cordial with the South because of its lucrative trade goods. By officially setting the narrative of the war as one of emancipation Lincoln made supporting the CSA morally unjustifiable to Europe.
He never needed to free the slaves in the North, as slavery had already been officially abolished in those states by 1804, and all remnants of it had disappeared by the time of the war.
The Emancipation Proclamation most certainly was a strategic play on Lincoln's part, but it was also a moral one. The two are not exclusive.
@@DovahFett
Perhaps then you can explain for us why there were 451,021 slaves counted in the 1860 census in the union states?
Can you imagine Americans pulling down the statues of these patriots.
When they’re being bombarded by propaganda at their schools and in the culture? Yes, I can easily see them doing it. A mix of lies, propaganda, and some immoral ideas about what is acceptable and you get antifa and blm
None one is pulling down these statues.
Stephen McGann yep, BLM is pulling down every statue they see. No matter who it is. You living in a cave? 🙄
@@StephenMcGann Where have you been lately? Under a rock?
@Spiteful Ogre That is the worst bullshit excuse making I've seen. The people pulling down the current statues either do not care about their origins or they look at the entire country as evil. This goes beyond the Confederate statues (which I agree with pulling down). There are no confederate Statues in San Francisco but there is one of Grant, that got pulled down. By the way, those statues were not erected 100 years ago, they were erected 50 years ago. You don't even have your history correct.
-------> "Study Jefferson, you ignorant degenerate: "I hold it that a little rebellion, now and then, is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms are in the physical."
You mean the same Jefferson who foolishly supported and even meddled in the politics of the French Revolution which led to the reign of Terror and the rise of Napoleon? You mean the same Jefferson who was irresponsible with money and died with his estate in debt because he loved lavish things? The same debt that prevented him from freeing more than 6 slaves out of the 600 hundred he owned? Jefferson could be stubborn and over opinionated which is why he feuded with Hamilton a lot (and even Adams). He was wrong on his opinions of greater state power over the federal government. As far as revolution, Jefferson was so drunk with the success of the American Revolution that he overlooked that most revolutions have end results that are worse than the tyrant being overthrown. The revolutionaries are more tyrannical than the tyrant they overthrew (as what happened in the French Revolution). America was the exception to the rule of revolution. Jefferson did many great things, but he was not GOD.
The way he chews is really funny. HiIs lower jaw goes backwards and forwards, not up and down.
Wow that collection of pixels sure told that other collection of pixels!
Oh to be part of this part of history! The founding of a nation. Exhilarating yet terrifying
Times are not too different today.
So the crux of the issue isn’t the act itself, but that such an act could be signed into law by the President having gone through the channels of the Legislative branch, the “voice of the people” which drew them up and voted on them. Now sure you could argue that the system was put in place out of naivety or downright sinister intentions.
An argument still being made today. My position on objectionable political speech is that if you don't like an idea, then argue your counter position. You don't ban books.
The answer is yes -- not even the people should have this jurisdiciton.
The hilarity of Jefferson - he who is against Adams actions in regards to the Sedition Act…would use his executive powers as President in an attempt to not only expand them but use them in giving blank pardons in regards to the actions of his Vice President Burr, but go beyond what Adams did
It’s easy to criticize the office, but not so when you hold it
Jefferson was attempting to thwart the Burr conspiracy; liberty is not the synonym of anarchy. Liberty secures the rights of everyone equally, while tyranny is the imposed prejudices arising from anarchy.
And 240 years later, we still have to have this argument over and over again, every damn day. It's all so senseless and depressing!
Yea
No, that's how balancing power works. Balance is not something you achieve and leave alone. It's something you have to work at all the time.
Jefferson was an enigma, he talked about kicking slave ownership but owned slaves. He's my favorite founding father but I question his thinking on owning people.
MrKajithecat I believe Jefferson himself saw the dilemma and knew it couldn’t be solved within his lifetime at least. If I’m not mistaken, he was quoted as saying “The issue of slavery is like holding a wolf by the ears; it’s dangerous to hold on, but it’s just as dangerous to let go.”
@@SovreignHost, you think by freeing his own slaves he would put himself to danger?
sounds like a hypocrite.
@Association of Free People of course he was. But what about his own slaves? There were >600, you know
John Henry He didn’t believe in religion or an afterlife
Remember that this was before the seventeenth amendment.
"But it will be said, it is easier to find faults than to amend them. I do not think their amendment so difficult as is pretended. Only lay down true principles, and adhere to them inflexibly. Do not be frightened into their surrender by the alarms of the timid, or the croakings of wealth against the ascendency of the people." - Thomas Jefferson
The wiping of the mouth with the table cloth...a thing Mr. Jefferson found off-putting
STANNIS BARATHEON 2024
On the Fourth of July 1776, both will have to tell each other: “hey, in exactly 50 years we both will have to go”. 😂
What a great movie
It's a miniserie
I love how although they are at opposite ends with Adams stressing security and Jefferson stressing liberty, both men claim to be listening to and acting on behalf of "the people." Nothing has changed. No matter what the policy is or which party they belong to, politicians are always claiming to be acting in the best interest of the people. They are always telling me what "the American people" want and think when in reality it is what they want and think. As far as I am concerned, none of them speak for me.
Did you want a single president to remain in power indefinitely? Did you want Barbary pirates to enslave and abuse you? Thomas Jefferson acted in the people’s best interest, even if they may be too neurotic to understand.
people who complain about being cancelled and losing freeze peach - this is REALLY what losing the 1st amendment looks like - the government coming after you for what you said. the 1st amendment protects you from the government, not from your employer or other fellow citizens - then it just turns to facing the consequences of your actions. if you don't want to be treated like an asshole, then don't be one.
Even this early on, it was quite plain to see that it would be impossible to restrain government -- as it always had been elsewhere in the past. Unfortunately, figures like Gustave de Molinari and Lysander Spooner would not come along and publish their treatises for several decades (1850 or so), and by then it would be far too late to change America's course. Moreover, Marx debuted around the same time, and achieved massive impact whereas the aforementioned two -- to this day -- remain mere blips on the radar screen. Which makes a very sad statement about human nature.
Lol those f*cking Dutch angles. I mean, I know some of the Founding Fathers were Dutch, but... Damn. 😅
None of the Founding Fathers were Dutch; all but 18 of them were born in the Thirteen Colonies, and those that weren't were from elsewhere in the British Empire.
When they debated about human rights, they idolized an average human. Also, every right can be misused.
Damn thomas! you are hot for your age! 😂
With all the reading I've done on Thomas Jefferson I've fallen in love with him. Talk about being emotionally unavailable! LOL
He's a Baratheon
Jefferson would go on to violate the US Constitution as well...
All presidents do.
It's up to Congress to hold them accountable.
Total frenemies. Jefferson was a man of constant paradox. It must have been difficult dealing with him. He could truly hold two countervailing thoughts at once and appear ambivalent and opinionated at alternate times.
Yeah John Adams was a bit crazy at the end of his 1st term
He only had one term so I think you mean his presidency
@@bunnybird9342 that too
I love your guises videos
why is Paul Giamatti having dinner with Stannis Baratheon
this show makes no sense
Alien and Sedition Act.
That hair.
So that’s stannis Baratheon
Don’t forget Marty Wolf from Big Fat Liar. Also Brutal Howell from The Green Mile is in this show too.
The problem is, we're not angels.
Children of Johannesburg, guess chess.
Two Titans.
John Adams is one of our greatest founding fathers. If not for him we wouldn't have had a constitution or a first amendment. Yet here he disregarded those rights for which he fought.
Thomas Jefferson once wrote "all men are created equal"... yet he owned many men, and considered them inferior.
Both heroes. Both hypocrites. Thus it is with most of our founders. The founding of the US is truly fascinating.
Jefferson freed his slaves. And I don't believe there is any written words by him that would indicate he believed they were inferior. Jefferson also wanted to tackle the issue of slavery while writing the declaration of independence. He was probably one of the biggest proponents for ending slavery.
@@Dutchman294 1) through his entire life he freed a grand total of 2 slaves despite being willed money specifically to buy freedom for slaves. When he died 130 of his slaves were auctioned off by his family, and his sex slave (who was kept) wasn't even freed.
2) he wrote at length and in multiple places that he thought that "the blacks, whether originally a distinct race, or made distinct by time and circumstances, are inferior to the whites in the endowments both of body and mind. It is not against experience to suppose, that different species of the same genus, or varieties of the same species, may possess different qualifications." - Thomas Jefferson, Notes on the State of Virginia
Jefferson was a vile hypocrite. Enlightened enough to know what he was doing was evil, but too cowardly or sociopathic to stop.
@@Dutchman294 and another thing. He was NOT one of the biggest proponents of ending slavery. He became completely silent about the topic as time went on, and he actively opposed measures that would make states free because apparently it might threaten the union. Well, he set the stage for the civil war, which definitely threatened the union.
He conveniently convinced himself that slavery would go away on its own... Meanwhile investing in slaves because he knew their value was increasing.
Yes, they were hypocrites. Just like every human being.
I like John Adams better than Thomas Jefferson
You don't like freedom of speech and expression? Lol ok.
Adams was a jerk. This show makes him seem too nice.
@@LittleImpaler Read his biography, you dipshit
@Energised Voyages Come up with a better rebuttal, pseuwoke
Can I join the comment reply argument?
A matter of internal security,
The age old cry of the Oppressor.
Tom was a smart dude.
To hear the story of why and how the Declaration of Independence happened and the effects it has had on America and the world, go to Peter Fenzel, Episode 11: The Declaration of Independence on TH-cam - no distortions, Pure History!! You will love it !!!!
In the end each country must defends it people otherwise it will be overun and there will be no country.
Stannis the Mannis!
Tom my slaves are house servants!!!!!!!!!!
The more I watch this the less I think of Thomas Jefferson.
The representatives are not the people, and as men of power can use their influence to once elected to subvert the rights of the people to maintain personal power, hence the right of the state to poll the public. Jefferson seems to look at the majority as a possible aristocracy arising in the law-making body that the POTUS must see through and extinguish with his authority for the sake of the people, and likely sees Adams using the majority vote as an excuse. Some things should not be held to popular vote; the freedom to critique government doings freely without fear of persecution is something that can be unanimously voted against, yet should never be allowed to occur; an eternal protection. This, I believe is Jefferson's argument here; the senate itself should be removed and replaced of members before such measures are ever taken. Adams is following a strict study of the rule of law rather than applying ethical and foresighted understanding through their shared experiences. This opposing nature of Law not necessarily synonymous with Righteous is a modern dilemma, and likely a permanent one.
where can i get the dialogue?
1st of all that was the majority opinion of the government not the people, which are not always the same. 2nd of all so what if its the majority? The minority deserves free speech too
The nation will always be on the precipice of division. Adam's philosophy of protecting the nation's safety runs counter Jefferson's belief that the president's obligation is to protect the rights of its citizens. Through the separation of powers, the president's job is to protect the interests of the citizenry against the exploits of the other branches of government. Adams' belief is timely in that I hear this same mantra again and again, meanwhile the individual rights of the citizenry continues to erode. This is the difference between Adam's belief in protecting the government machine versus Jefferson's belief in protecting liberty. As usual, Jefferson was right.
History hasn’t been kind until recently esp regarding the alien and sedition acts
I get where Adams was coming from with these acts, but it was a bit much.
Sad to see Adams like this: both he and Jefferson sat at the Continental Congress during a time of division, and knew they couldn't bully other states into agreement. Now Adams is acting like the tyrant and authoritarian all of his enemies claimed he would be.
1:58
Jefferson: th-cam.com/video/_MHusGl9BeM/w-d-xo.html