View single post by Joe Kelley
 Posted: Wed Nov 7th, 2018 04:30 pm
PM Quote Reply Full Topic
Joe Kelley

 

Joined: Mon Nov 21st, 2005
Location: California USA
Posts: 6290
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
I am working on a second book, but in that work, I have been inspired to dig deeper into research which may reinforce my conclusions, or contradict my conclusions. I found a source that offered a reference to additional letters from Richard Henry Lee. The author of the reference to additional letters from Richard Henry Lee offered an opinion about those additional letters. The opinion offered was to suggest that there was nothing new in the additional letters, and the opinion offered also suggested that the letters were poorly written.
Keep in mind that the letters from Richard Henry Lee are letters from a so-called "Founding Father" of the United States of America. Richard Henry Lee was the one who wrote the original document that rejected British authority over Americans. Lee was also the 6th President of the United States of America before the Federation was criminally turned into a Nation State in 1789. Those who desire absolute power will be those who do not want people to know about Richard Henry Lee. Here is a portion of the information in those additional letters from Richard Henry Lee:
"But if I am right, it is asked why so many respectable men advocate the adoption of the proposed system. Several reasons may be given—many of our gentlemen are attached to the principles of monarchy and aristocracy; they have an aversion to democratic republics. The body of the people have acquired large powers and substantial influence by the revolution. In the unsettled state of things, their numerous representatives, in some instances, misused their powers, and have induced many good men suddenly to adopt ideas unfavourable to such republics, and which ideas they will discard on reflection. Without scrutinizing into the particulars of the proposed system, we immediately perceive that its general tendency is to collect the powers of government, now in the body of the people in reality, and to place them in the higher orders and fewer hands; no wonder then that all those of and about these orders are attached to it: they feel there is something in this system advantageous to them. On the other hand, the body of the people evidently feel there is something wrong and disadvantageous to them; both descriptions perceive there is something tending to bestow on the former the height of power and happiness, and to reduce the latter to weakness, insignificance, and misery. The people evidently feel all this though they want expressions to convey their ideas. Further, even the respectable part of the democracy, have never yet been able to distinguish clearly where the fallacy lies; they find there are defects in the confederation; they see a system presented, they think something must be done, and, while their minds are in suspence, the zealous advocates force a reluctant consent. Nothing can be a stronger evidence of the nature of this system, than the general sense of the several orders in the community respecting its tendency; the parts taken generally by them proves my position, that notwithstanding the parade of words and forms, the government must possess the soul of aristocracy."