Great Quotes II: Source and Context are Key

[GoodSarmatian]

Does anyone remember that one quote from a founding father about how non-land-owners should be given money from them/the govt to help bridge that gap?

Could swear I've read it before but can't seem to find it here.

I know that Thomas Paine wrote something like this. Is he considered a founding father ?

"The earth, in its natural state … is supporting but a small number of inhabitants, compared with what it is capable of doing in a cultivated state. And impossible to separate the improvement made by cultivation from the earth itself upon which that improvement is made, the idea of landed property arose from that inseparable connection; but it is nevertheless true that it is value of the improvement only, and not the earth itself, that is individual property. Every proprietor, therefore, of cultivated land owes to the community a ground-rent, for I know no better term to express the idea by, for the land which he holds. …Cultivation is one of the greatest natural improvements ever made. . . .But the landed monopoly that began with it has dispossessed more than half the inhabitants of every nation of their natural inheritance." [Thomas Paine, Agrarian Justice, 1797]

Was it something Thomas Jefferson drunkenly said to one of his slave mistresses in the heat of the moment?

I only found this from Jefferson. Don't know if he was drunk when he wrote it.

“Wherever, in any country, there are idle lands and unemployed poor, it is clear that the laws of property have been so far extended as to violate natural right.” — Thomas Jefferson, Letter to James Madison, 1785

 

[cardgame]

It's pretty similar to the Paine quote but closer in length to Jefferson's and directly mentions a figure of currency like 25 schillings.

 

[Flying Pig]

“Wherever, in any country, there are idle lands and unemployed poor, it is clear that the laws of property have been so far extended as to violate natural right.” — Thomas Jefferson, Letter to James Madison, 1785

Which shows a total failure to understand the concept of crop rotation.

 

[Cutlass]

Which shows a total failure to understand the concept of crop rotation.

Not following your point......

 

[Flying Pig]

Being slightly flippant; idle fields are an essential part of crop rotation, without which farming is immensely less efficient: it's not a failure of a society to have that system and unemployed people at the same time.

 

[Tee Kay]

Not following your point......

I get it... unfortunately.

Edit: crosspost

 

[hobbsyoyo]

Being slightly flippant; idle fields are an essential part of crop rotation, without which farming is immensely less efficient: it's not a failure of a society to have that system and unemployed people at the same time.

I suspect he was talking more about the idle lands to West. He ran a plantation after all.

(I know, Native Americans were using it)

 

[Cutlass]

Being slightly flippant; idle fields are an essential part of crop rotation, without which farming is immensely less efficient: it's not a failure of a society to have that system and unemployed people at the same time.

Well, not directly comparable. Those people could be employed, for the most part. But just lack the opportunity to do so. Ironically, in no small part because of people like Jefferson who monopolize the land for cash crops instead of allowing small farmers to produce subsistence crops.

 

[Flying Pig]

I suspect he was talking more about the idle lands to West. He ran a plantation after all.

Well, not most of them - one of the big obstacles to business deals and interaction between the Americans and the nomadic native tribes was that the natives regarded as theirs far more land than they actually occupied at any given time; each tribe had its own 'patch' in which it would hunt, following the herds around as they moved on. The Americans didn't understand how these people could be so upset about their people building roads or merely walking on totally unoccupied land.

Well, not directly comparable. Those people could be employed, for the most part. But just lack the opportunity to do so. Ironically, in no small part because of people like Jefferson who monopolize the land for cash crops instead of allowing small farmers to produce subsistence crops.

Cash crops still need growing, so people can be employed to grow them.

 

[Cutlass]

Well, not most of them - one of the big obstacles to business deals and interaction between the Americans and the nomadic native tribes was that the natives regarded as theirs far more land than they actually occupied at any given time; each tribe had its own 'patch' in which it would hunt, following the herds around as they moved on. The Americans didn't understand how these people could be so upset about their people building roads or merely walking on totally unoccupied land.

While true, I think it largely misses Jefferson's point. I don't think Jefferson was referring to the lands not yet taken from the Indians, because that was not seen as the property of the Indians in the same way that English property rights were understood. And so when he was talking about excessive property rights, "in any country," which clearly is not a reference to the colonial American experience, I don't see how you can assume that Indians were his consideration. I think it much more likely that he was considering the Enclosure Movement, which forced a lot of substance agricultural laborers off the land. After all, many of America's immigrants in Jefferson's era were people who had been forced out of work and off land in Britain.

 

[Flying Pig]

The enclosure movement didn't keep the farmers away from the empty lands, though.

 

[Cutlass]

Neither did the Indians. And Jefferson didn't recognize Indian rights any more than he did Negro rights.

 

[Zack]

Less silly debate, more quotes.

 

[bugwar]

During WWII, the surrounded and outnumbered British forces at Arnhem are approached by an SS officer bearing a white flag.

SS Panzer Officer: My general says there is no point in continuing this fighting! He wishes to discuss terms of a surrender!

British Officer: We haven't the proper facilities to take you all prisoner! Sorry!

SS Panzer Officer: [confused] What?

British Officer: We'd like to, but we can't accept your surrender! Was there anything else?

 

[Dachs]

Funnily enough, those British forces ended up surrendering.

 

[bhsup]

That makes me think of the BBCAmerica commercial about British English and American English. This would be the American half of that commercial if they were using WWII quotes...

To the U.S.A. Commander of the encircled town of Bastogne.

The fortune of war is changing. This time the U.S.A. forces in and near Bastogne have been encircled by strong German armored units. More German armored units have crossed the river Our near Ortheuville, have taken Marche and reached St. Hubert by passing through Hompre-Sibret-Tillet. Libramont is in German hands.

There is only one possibility to save the encircled U.S.A. troops from total annihilation: that is the honorable surrender of the encircled town. In order to think it over a term of two hours will be granted beginning with the presentation of this note.

If this proposal should be rejected one German Artillery Corps and six heavy A. A. Battalions are ready to annihilate the U.S.A. troops in and near Bastogne. The order for firing will be given immediately after this two hours term.

All the serious civilian losses caused by this artillery fire would not correspond with the well-known American humanity.

The German Commander.

----------------------------------------------
To the German Commander.

NUTS!

The American Commander

 

[holy king]

i think that actually happened.

 

[bhsup]

Of course it actually happened. I wouldn't put a fake quote in the quotes thread. That's what signatures are for.

 

[holy king]

oh, i got the impression because you mentioned it was part of a commercial.

 

[bugwar]

From that classic American film 'Aliens':

Hudson: Hey Vasquez, have you ever been mistaken for a man?
Vasquez: No. Have you?