King Charles and Queen Camilla

mentsch1,
first, those were not “our founding fathers”, unless your ancestors were accountants on the Mayflower. For the rest of us – we were accepted by this country when we ran away from other, less welcoming, places. So, some of our fathers made a heshbon that this country is worth it.

I do agree with you that early America was full of wild and unsavory characters. No reason to contrast with Britain, where most of those future rebels either ran away from or were sent from for their crimes.

But this makes it even more interesting to see how those rebels were able to envision a better place … if you disagree with their vision, maybe you can start with the running criticism of the federalist papers rather than snarky remarks.

Always
The only thing snarky is your founding fathers statement
I am simply presenting an alternative understanding of the founding fathers (happy now?) actions through, what I believe, to be the lens of the torah
It is very easy to buy into the idea that somehow america was founded by people rising up against a brutal regime (an idea expressed by a poster)
but it simply isn’t true
In some respects the “brutal ” monarchy we were fighting against was certainly more humane than the govt we created. Slavery, trail of tears, Jim crow. We could be a very brutal country. On the slavery subject we were many years behind the more civilized monarchy.
It was certainly a haven of sorts for the yidden but only to an extent. We all can agree the closed borders in 1939 where catastrophic. And those yidden that arrived before the war were decimated by assimilation. I stand by what I said.

mentsch1: Slavery is a supported Torah value.

mentch > I am simply presenting an alternative understanding of the founding fathers

I am not objecting to alternative theories, I am proposing that you show how your theory applies to what those people actually proposed. They left lots of writings and you are showing no sign of addressing their arguments. As they were successful at building a reasonable society, we should certainly inquire at how they were able to do it. This is not to deny the negative sides of American then and later.

Always
First. Whether or not their political theories were of value it doesn’t change the fact that they were mored bmalchus and started a war that killed thousands for political reasons.
Two their written reasons (federalists papers) aren’t going to be intellectually honest and say “hey we want to keep slavery”
I found this nice quote about the fathers complaining they were “slaves” because of a lack of representation
The irony in using this sort of language was not lost on many British Tories, who called out these rebel hypocrites. “We are told, that the subjection of Americans may tend to the diminution of our own liberties; an event, which none but very perspicacious politicians are able to foresee. If slavery be thus fatally contagious, how is it that we hear the loudest yelps for liberty among the drivers of negroes?” wrote Dr. Samuel Johnson in 1775. Indeed, these sentiments not only labeled many of the American leaders as hypocrites, but it also took a swipe at the very notion that America was founded on principles that were universal for all humans

Mentch,
out of all modern political experiments, American one seems to be most successful, stable, and least bloody. Compare with French, Russian, Chinese experiences. It may be in part due to relatively benign British rule (that evolved over time to a very similar democracy, after all, without any revolutions) and to remoteness from the centers of violence. Still, given the success, you can’t dismiss their theories as simple hypocrisy to cover up slavery.

I suspect people who dismiss American thinkers not only are trying to build up their own theories, but are also covering up their own lack of education. I measured readability level of various authors last year with kids: recent Presidents come up at 6 to 10th grade level, James Madison – as 38th grade … So, maybe people who refuse to read and engage with those arguments simply may not be able to read them.

Always
Or America is really a failed experiment as indicated by our ignorance and values
We did have a brief moment. But we seem to be in quick decline
In either case
My point has always been that the Brit’s were ahead of us as a social /political “enlightenment “. I do not dismiss British evils. They continued expansion into the early 1990’s. But they where still ahead of us. They weren’t a Wild West Country all they way through the 1800,s. They didn’t fight a civil war that killed half a million (their civil war was in the 1600’s) had we stayed as colonies in all likelihood many of the early evils of America would either not have happened or came to an end earlier. In stead it was their example that was a light unto the nations and forced the reckoning that caused the war to finally end evil.
And you can’t dismiss that the founding fathers were hypocrites

Mentch1

Your cherry picking. Is Russia crime free?

Besides, democracy and freedom of choice has consequences, people will make bad choices. But having a few decide for the many is bad.

Communism resulted in the death of millions.

Re AAQ’s comment of 10/2/22, 7:59 pm: Your comment overlooks the fact that there were substantial numbers of Jews in Britain’s American colonies in the 1770’s. They were mostly from Spain and Portugal. Your comment also contains what I consider an anti-Semitic stereotype, i.e., that Jews are accountants. Jews are plenty of things (including accountants), but your comment buys into the notion that very many of us are accountants. (I do like Jackie Mason’s joke that the Jews who become accountants are not smart enough to be doctors or lawyers, but, of course, I am a lawyer.)

huju, I accept your addition, unless your ancestors were Sephardim in the colonies or were possible illegitimate father of Hamilton.

FYI, R Arye Lebowitz YU says that his smarter brother was supposed to be a doctor and he only a lawyer and then he switched to Rabbanut. By free association – Saul Lieberman offered Elie Wiesel a smicha so that he could get a job if journalism does not work out, to which EW answered “I am not suited to be a Rabbi”. SL replied “me too”.

Women in power is not a good thing.

I am not so sure that Queens have advantage over Kings. There were way more Kings in history and so there are more memorable Kings famous for their misadventures. In Jewish history, there was were good Queens during Chashmonaim times, but then there was Jezebel…