If the Founding Fathers appeared today...

[Carpet_pissr]

Not sure why I have had this recurring mental...image repeat in my head over the past several years, but I suspect it's due to the vast amount of mostly right wing media shouting about judicial interpretation. Could also be the popularity of "Hamilton", or my several trips to DC, who knows.

Anyway, it's weirdly specific, and is essentially me imagining one of the Founding Fathers riding in the car beside me. What would they think? Just the technology aspect alone is a hoot to imagine, but then my brain gets to the real fun...the modern poilitics...the country, etc.

What in the WORLD would they (let's assume we aggregate them into one, which I know is problematic) say and think?? My best guess is: "OH SHIT!". Well, probably "BLOODY HELL!" "What hath we wrought?!"

Then you can go down the even more interesting rabbit hole of having one of these long dead men in power. Book idea for the budding authors among us.

So let's say one of the founders appears before us (AND that everyone totally believes they are the legit, reincarnated, time traveled, whatever, dude), and revered as they are, they get elected to president or at least some position of power.

What do they do?
How do people respond?

For my entire life, I've read and heard about how ingenious the Founders were and their wisdom, etc. in designing the framework of the Constitution. And I am not doubting that. The interesting thought experiment is assuming they WERE the political geniuses everyone claims they were, what would they do now, to save the country? What would they suggest?

I bet the first thing they would be appalled by would be the gun violence and 2a. Probably a "WHAT THE HUBBLE-BUBBBLE?! YOU COMPLETELY MISUNDERSTOOD THAT, YOU DILBERRIES!"

[hepcat]

Honestly, I think you'd probably find them more in agreement than you'd like to think. They came from a more puritanical time, after all. But just as we eventually realized as a nation that slavery was utterly wrong, we can't rely on the mindset of yesterday to be right...or even morally right....today.

[Carpet_pissr]

Honestly, I think you'd probably find them more in agreement than you'd like to think. They came from a more puritanical time, after all. But just as we eventually realized slavery was utterly wrong, we can't rely on the mindset of yesterday to be right.

Maybe that's why it seems like most of the Founding Father reverence comes from the right in general.

[hepcat]

They do seem to defend flying the confederate flag a lot....

[dbt1949]

I can't imagine them being too fond of the restrictive laws of today. I'm not sure abortions were even viable back then but I'd bet they'd be against them. For the most part they were pretty religious back then.

[hepcat]

Also, they probably be REALLY alarmed by the giant metal flying birds.

[Daveman]

My first thought was a scene from the Sleepy Hollow TV series, with Ichabod Crane transported in time to present day. At one point he sees a sales receipt for coffee and donuts or something like that and is appalled at the 6 or so percent sales tax, saying they went to war over a fraction of that.

[Isgrimnur]

I can't imagine them being too fond of the restrictive laws of today. I'm not sure abortions were even viable back then but I'd bet they'd be against them. For the most part they were pretty religious back then.

NPR

One of the more surprising areas Franklin wanted to demystify for the average American? At-home abortions.

Molly Farrell is an associate professor of English at the Ohio State University and studies early American literature. She authored a recent Slate article that suggests Franklin's role in facilitating at-home abortions all started with a popular British math textbook.

Titled The Instructor and written by George Fisher, which Farrell said was a pseudonym, the textbook was a catch-all manual that included plenty of useful information for the average person. It had the alphabet, basic arithmetic, recipes, and farriery (which is hoof care for horses). At the time, books were very expensive, and a general manual like this one was a practical choice for many families.
...
But as Farrell describes, the most significant change in the book was swapping out a section that included a medical textbook from London with a Virginia medical handbook from 1734 called Every Man His Own Doctor: The Poor Planter's Physician.
...
"[The book] starts to prescribe basically all of the best-known herbal abortifacients and contraceptives that were circulating at the time," Farrell said. "It's just sort of a greatest hits of what 18th-century herbalists would have given a woman who wanted to end a pregnancy early."

"It's very explicit, very detailed, [and] also very accurate for the time in terms of what was known ... for how to end a pregnancy pretty early on."

[Carpet_pissr]

Also, they probably be REALLY alarmed by the giant metal flying birds.

I know, right?! That's mostly the kind of thing I thought was amusing. Hell, they might not even survive the shock that would ensue.

"What did you do to Ben Franklin!!!"
"Nothing! I was just showing him my iPhone and he grabbed his chest and keeled over!"

They would probably turn into air-con sucking, couch-sitting, Netflix-binging, Facebook-posting lumps of human coal very quickly.

[gilraen]

I bet the first thing they would be appalled by would be the gun violence and 2a. Probably a "WHAT THE HUBBLE-BUBBBLE?! YOU COMPLETELY MISUNDERSTOOD THAT, YOU DILBERRIES!"

[Kraken]

For starters, I think they'd be appalled that we let anybody but propertied white males vote. They were pretty clear about not putting the rabble in charge.

[malchior]

For starters, I think they'd be appalled that we let anybody but propertied white males vote. They were pretty clear about not putting the rabble in charge.

This. Maybe they could be convinced about letting other classes of people vote but definitely not everyone. They were afraid of exactly this result happening.

[Smoove_B]

I think they'd initially be upset about a lot of things but would eventually get too distracted by internet porn to care.

[dbt1949]

[Jaymann]

My guess is they would be most impressed by vending machines. Followed closely by watching Will Smith strike Chris Rock - and still get an award!

[Unagi]

Oh, I'm pretty sure that eventually, they would conclude that we should be excellent to each other.

Spoiler:

[noxiousdog]

""I am certainly not an advocate for frequent and untried changes in laws and constitutions. I think moderate imperfections had better be borne with; because, when once known, we accommodate ourselves to them, and find practical means of correcting their ill effects. But I know also, that laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths disclosed, and manners and opinions change with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also, and keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy, as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors." - Jefferson to H. Tompkinson (AKA Samuel Kercheval), July 12, 1816" - Jefferson to H. Tompkinson (AKA Samuel Kercheval), July 12, 1816

[Carpet_pissr]

Fantastic.

And at the same time, so sad that we seem to have mostly ignored that wisdom.

[LordMortis]

""I am certainly not an advocate for frequent and untried changes in laws and constitutions. I think moderate imperfections had better be borne with; because, when once known, we accommodate ourselves to them, and find practical means of correcting their ill effects. But I know also, that laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths disclosed, and manners and opinions change with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also, and keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy, as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors." - Jefferson to H. Tompkinson (AKA Samuel Kercheval), July 12, 1816" - Jefferson to H. Tompkinson (AKA Samuel Kercheval), July 12, 1816

Like

[malchior]

Fantastic.

And at the same time, so sad that we seem to have mostly ignored that wisdom.

We mostly followed that philosophy. The wheels came off the bus in the last 5 years. And wow did it fail fast.

[YellowKing]

I'm currently reading the Ron Chernow Washington biography and it's really fascinating. On the one hand, you have contemporaries singing his praises long before he became President and while he was still a novice general. These aren't posthumous accounts that saw him through rose-colored glasses, but actual letters and documents written at the time he was a young man. Those accounts seem to bolster the American myth that he must have been anointed somehow for greatness.

On the other hand, you also have plenty of examples of his flaws. Washington had many disastrous battles as a general, and he rubbed some people the wrong way. He could be petty, jealous, and sometimes even cruel. It's in these accounts that you start to see the very human side of the man.

I don't really have an answer as to how they would react today, but I think the truth of all of these historical figures lies somewhere in a complex middle ground. Were they special? Absolutely - they had to be, to some extent, to accomplish what they did. On the other hand, they were absolutely human and suffered the same failings we all do.

[Holman]

I don't really have an answer as to how they would react today, but I think the truth of all of these historical figures lies somewhere in a complex middle ground. Were they special? Absolutely - they had to be, to some extent, to accomplish what they did. On the other hand, they were absolutely human and suffered the same failings we all do.

They were remarkable people (most of them), but we do history (and America) wrong when we revere them as geniuses whose solutions to problems of government are presumed correct.

Mainly they were LARPing at political philosophy, putting structures into place that later generations have had to adapt and correct through laws, norms, and amendments. Try to name a piece of the government established by the Founders that hasn't had to be significantly altered since the very early 19th century. Other than the Post Office, you probably can't.

And of course they were masters of kicking the can down the road on absolutely pressing issues (even at the time) like slavery and the influence of political parties.

They saw their Constitution as a muddled, flawed, partial solution that would probably have to be replaced by something better. Really only in this were they more correct than later generations of statesmen have been.

[Unagi]

I don't really have an answer as to how they would react today, but I think the truth of all of these historical figures lies somewhere in a complex middle ground. Were they special? Absolutely - they had to be, to some extent, to accomplish what they did. On the other hand, they were absolutely human and suffered the same failings we all do.

They were remarkable people (most of them), but we do history (and America) wrong when we revere them as geniuses whose solutions to problems of government are presumed correct.

Mainly they were LARPing at political philosophy, putting structures into place that later generations have had to adapt and correct through laws, norms, and amendments. Try to name a piece of the government established by the Founders that hasn't had to be significantly altered since the very early 19th century. Other than the Post Office, you probably can't.

And of course they were masters of kicking the can down the road on absolutely pressing issues (even at the time) like slavery and the influence of political parties.

They saw their Constitution as a muddled, flawed, partial solution that would probably have to be replaced by something better. Really only in this were they more correct than later generations of statesmen have been.

You are totally right.

But, for the challenge you put forth, I think the Preamble to the U.S. Constitution would be my submission. I know it's not really what you meant when you said 'a piece of the government established' ... but I think it's something they gave us that is so often blown off when Constitutional matters are argued. It's a graceful summary of what should follow, or at least should be the focus.

Spoiler:

“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

[Carpet_pissr]

I don't really have an answer as to how they would react today, but I think the truth of all of these historical figures lies somewhere in a complex middle ground. Were they special? Absolutely - they had to be, to some extent, to accomplish what they did. On the other hand, they were absolutely human and suffered the same failings we all do.

They were remarkable people (most of them), but we do history (and America) wrong when we revere them as geniuses whose solutions to problems of government are presumed correct.

Yeah, we definitely seem to have a collective hero worship problem here, and not just for the Founders.

[YellowKing]

Just to clarify, I wasn't implying that hero worship of the Founders was appropriate. More that they should be appropriately lauded for their accomplishments, but that praise should be tempered by the knowledge of their flaws.

[em2nought]

They would put on their war paint, and throw us all into Boston Harbor.

[Carpet_pissr]

Just to clarify, I wasn't implying that hero worship of the Founders was appropriate. More that they should be appropriately lauded for their accomplishments, but that praise should be tempered by the knowledge of their flaws.

Yeah, sorry, my post was cryptic. I was implying that we as a country seem to not just ignore flaws of the flawed humans that we as a society choose to lionize, but actively pounce on anyone who chooses to mention the flaws. Founding fathers, soldiers, police, etc.

I question whether that’s a specifically American trait, though.