Was Alexander Hamilton a good guy or a bad guy? I am watching John Adams miniseries and he seems like a dick, not as based as Thomas Jefferson. Thoughts?
Was Alexander Hamilton a good guy or a bad guy? I am watching John Adams miniseries and he seems like a dick...
Benjamin Butler
Other urls found in this thread:
lookingglassnews.org
en.wikipedia.org
youtube.com
youtube.com
marcottelab.org
wnd.com
wsj.com
csmonitor.com
monticello.org
en.wikipedia.org
youtube.com
washingtonpost.com
cap-press.com
wallbuilders.com
historynewsnetwork.org
washingtonpost
unvis.it
twitter.com
Lincoln Powell
He was the root cause of all of our problems. His economic knowledge came from reading mercantile pamphlets.
Gavin Phillips
He was a pawn of the Rothschilds.
Adam Morales
Can't say I've heard a single good thing about Hamilton, given that he was shilling for a central bank from the beginning
Brody Morris
Was he federalist or antifederalist. I just realized George Washington allowed the first bank of america to start up fractional reserve banking when they decided to build dc near virginia and improve the value of his lands.
Jackson Allen
What do you mean the root cause of all of our problems?
Andrew Sanders
Jefferson was part black
Isaac Butler
>What do you mean the root cause of all of our problems?
allowing the British financial system to exist in any form
Aaron Gutierrez
total dick. he responded "could i laugh harder" (in french, no less) regarding the 2nd amendment before it was voted on. ironic he got shot
Austin Walker
Yep! Hamilton was a Rothschild stooge. Bad guy.
Cameron Sanchez
National debt, the influence of wall street on our political system, and an elite political class that views itself as superior to its constituency. The dindus that love the musical have no idea that he wanted to have the capital on wall street.
Brody Watson
Hamilton was a good guy, he hated non whites and foreigners and believed in nationalist economics.
>le Rothschild stooge
That's a retarded bit of slander.
Hunter Rogers
One of the best facial aesthetics of all the founders
Carter Perez
Hamilton's Bank was a great idea, and it wasn't like the Bank of England it was like the old American colonial banks that England shut down before the revolution. Hamilton believe in using the national bank to help the country just as he believed in protectionism, internal improvements, etc.
Most people that hate Hamilton have no idea what they're talking about.
Jack Ross
>Hamilton spends years upon years studying European economies figuring out what common factors lead to dynamic, powerful economies
>advocates for industrialization while Jefferson continues to be an autist about MUH NOBLE YEOMAN FARMER
>Jackson comes along 40 years later
>gets rid of the BUS
>makes land only buyable in specie
>also takes all the specie from the actual economic centers to deposit in banks
>nobody has the money to buy land
>banks no longer have the money to issue loans and start going belly up
>the economy collapses for the next decade
>Hamilton is the evil one
>Jackson is worshipped by small government AnCaps/lolbs
>Jackson is hated by libs... for Indian Removal, not crashing the country's economy like a retard
>conservatives love Jackson because libs hate him
>libs love Hamilton not for being the single most visionary Founding Father but because of a line in Chernow's biography about how he maybe (MAYBE) would've kinda sorta been okay with a racially integrated society... maybe leading to a shitty Broadway play
Michael Wright
lookingglassnews.org
Hamilton was a Rothschild operative. Period. He set up their bank even though the constitution forbid it.
James Wright
Hamilton was pro 2nd amendment, dumbass
>
[I]f circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude[, ] that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens, little, if at all, inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their own rights and those of their fellow-citizens.[75][76]
In other words, he said that private citizens need to be armed to prevent a standing army from violating their whites. It doesn't get any more black and white than that.
Bullshit
Hamilton's bank was a national bank which aided America as a country, it wasn't used to profit merchants or speculators, but the nation as a whole.
Hamilton's Bank of the United States (BUS) was nothing like the Federal Reserve (FED) and Jackson was a fucking retard for ending the BUS.
Cameron King
Don't throw pearls before swine.
Alexander Gutierrez
>unlike the Bank of England, the primary function of the bank would be credit issued to government and private interests, for internal improvements and other economic development, per Hamilton's system of Public Credit. The business it would be involved in on behalf of the federal government—a depository for collected taxes, making short term loans to the government to cover real or potential temporary income gaps, serving as a holding site for both incoming and outgoing monies—was considered highly important but still secondary in nature.[8]
en.wikipedia.org
This is almost identical to the "public credit" system Hitler and the National Socialists set up in the 1930s. Were they "Rothschild Agents" too?
Joseph Bennett
Do you like bankers?
Jaxon Nelson
this.
Owen Brown
David Moore
He supported federal government overreach before it was cool.
Pro-tip, at that timeframe, anyone who wasn't an anti-federalist were the bad guys.
Justin Fisher
(((John Adams Miniseries)))
Where his wife's superior intellect is the real star.
Get the fuck out of here
Levi Roberts
>muh banks muh economy muh money
shut the fuck up kike
Adrian Torres
woops wrong memeflag
Matthew Morris
>not as based as Thomas Jefferson.
Thomas Jefferson was a confused individual, he owned slaves and bred with them but didn't do anything to stop the practice while at the same time speaking out against it.
Daniel Gonzalez
Hamilton is one of the authors of the fucking Federalist papers. Read a book before you come here and shitpost about a topic.
Because he thought such a thing would never be infringed upon retard.
>Jefferson continues to be an autist about MUH NOBLE YEOMAN FARMER
He was right
Uncle Ted did nothing wrong
>Jackson crashed the economy
>land speculators playing kike games with the banks dindu nuffin
>the drop in demand for American goods by England didn't happen
pls
>Hamilton was down with the brown
no
James Sanchez
They were all gray characters and assholes. I still love 'em.
Isaiah Edwards
Imagine if the United States properly industrialized and had a strong professional army and navy like Hamilton wanted along with a powerful economy. We would've controlled the western hemisphere a lot sooner for sure.
Easton Harris
>he owned slaves and bred with them
Fucking kys you propaganda eating mouthbreather
youtube.com
>he didn't stop the practice
The balance of political power between the north and south relied on the institution existing.
Robert Richardson
From what I have learned, Hamilton was more of a halfway guy. He wanted a National United States Bank.
Jackson Brown
what do you think?
Nolan Moore
the only one that mattered was Jackson. thats why they put him on the most important fucking bill. but new America cant handle the fact this white dude was on the most common bill anymore and got tired of seeing his fucking face. now we get niggerbills. this is why i no longer live in America
Nicholas Brown
The USA always shouldve been more than some Republic. If it became a new Empire type state it couldve easily exerted its power and become a much larger power earlier on. Why do you think things are so fucked up? It waited too long to go full on Imperium and now it has rights and civil liberties to work around
Jack Wright
And you picked thailand?
Samuel Sullivan
Hamilton's a butthurt little autistic fag. Jackson literally never cared about anything other than occasional bouts of murder.
Dylan Kelly
Jackson being on the $20 bill is a slap in the face to his legacy. He hated the banks and hated the Jews. He actually did too, unlike us he truly used his power to tell the Jews to go fuck themselves and their banks.
Hudson Richardson
this
Hamilton was based, libertarians are just too retarded to realize it.
Dylan Davis
I think that that is a picture with some text on it.
kys
Lucas James
Jackson legitimately cared about his fellow Americans wholeheartedly.
Luis Foster
One you paraphrased my words to push your own opinion, I strictly said
>Thomas Jefferson was a confused individual, he owned slaves and bred with them but didn't do anything to stop the practice while at the same time speaking out against it.
And two
>American Renaissance
That's a own partisan pro-white organization that isn't intellectually credible.
Asher Cruz
didn't emancipation only lose by one vote under Jefferson? Or am I thinking of something different
Brayden Rodriguez
He was a good guy and fuck that musical.
Gavin Evans
>this is what libertarian actually believe
and so did Hamilton
But Hamilton wasn't dumb enough to think that national banks are a bad idea.
Central banks are a bad idea, and Jackson destroying the national bank led to the central bank.
Ryder Richardson
>getting rid of this bad thing means we had to establish something worse.
Landon Hughes
Childhood is believing that Jefferson was the greatest Founding Father.
Adulthood is realizing that it was actually Hamilton.
Jefferson was one of the first proponents for universal suffrage, which was later implemented under Jackson, because he was high on Locke and the Enlightenment and thought the average citizen would actually keep himself informed
Hamilton wanted to make sure we didnt have mob rule and is part the reason why we even have the Electoral College in the first place
As a political system, elitism is the best. The problem is that the (((current elites))) dont have our best interests in mind
Nathaniel Peterson
I agree. I was just pointing out that Jackson did believe he was helping Americans by getting rid of the banks. It was misguided of course.
Andrew Watson
Are you literally retarded?
1. He didn't breed slaves, as the video you wrote off references the official ruling by the Thomas Jefferson Society officially ruled that it didn't happen.
2. AmRen has to exist because people like yourself run around parroting kike revisionism.
3. He didn't believe in slavery, but understood it couldn't be abolished or it would leave the south to be abused by the industrialized north.
How exactly did I misrepresent your original post?
Benjamin Adams
lol Sup Forums
he supported a strong central government and wanted the state to have strong influence over banking and capital to prevent the situation we are in now with the (((Federal Reserve)))
Hudson Johnson
Hamilton was a faggot traitor and it's the reason why he's still endeared by them to this day. Aaron Burr literally did nothing wrong
Aaron Martinez
National Banks are good though. Its within the cultures best interest to keep their production domestic and used for themselves using their coin
Colton Cooper
It would have been harder for Wilson to establish the FED if the BUS was still around.
And the BUS was never a "bad thing", it was nothing like the FED at all.
Samuel Brown
Betraying the constitution right after the establishment of it is a great precedent to set, btw. Has really done us well.
Blake Bell
Hamilton was a fucking jew, look into it.
Aiden Roberts
>Constitution is pope level infallible
Jackson Bennett
>hey guys, lets ignore the constitution when it doesn't fit us XD
>oops, now the commies are in power and I'm dying in a gulag
Daniel Moore
>Hamilton was a faggot traitor
For what? Being too nationalist? Loving your country too much?
>betraying the constitution
Except Washington signed the national bank into law and the Supreme court never ruled the BUS unconstitutional. We could (and should) bring it back today to replace the FED
Justin Diaz
>Except Washington signed the national bank into law and the Supreme court never ruled the BUS unconstitutional.
Everyone makes mistakes.
Jayden Nguyen
One the video sites no sources, two it's just Jared Taylor who would is a dishonest source talking to you say what he thinks based off of his so called "proof" which are opinions. And like I American Renaissance isn't a credible source because of its own agenda and partisanship. And three he didn't believe in it but still partook in it and Sally Hemmings among others were "loved" by him. And let me ask you this, why does it matter if he did or didn't it appears to create a spark because of some racial feelings if you will?
Leo Lopez
It’s a shame George Mason isn’t a household name. He’s one of the main reasons we even have a Bill of Rights.
Luis Brown
...
Hunter Ward
He was a white and part British part French and part Scot, born within the British Empire.
not a drop of Jewish blood.
It wasn't a mistake, and it was never ruled unconstitutional by the supreme court or anyone else.
Owen Adams
It was made to be interpreted and the entire existence of modern America in all its shit right now is thanks to the elastic powers the constitution allows to happen. Also when the Supreme Court can grant ITSELF the power to interpret what can and cannot be constitutional, according to the constitution, the system and constitution are broken.
>Underwood is on my side XD
Juan Phillips
Agreed, but that's sort of George Washington's fault.
Chase Miller
oh ffs
>official retraction by the party responsible for the original claim
marcottelab.org
How many other sources and historians do you want for confirmation?
wnd.com
wsj.com
csmonitor.com
monticello.org
Carson Wilson
>why does it matter
Because the intentions of the Founding Fathers are meaningful and important.
Luke Howard
>It wasn't a mistake
It was
>and it was never ruled unconstitutional by the supreme court
And during which court case did the supreme court rule on that?
>or anyone else
you mean you?
>It was made to be interpreted
What do you even think this statement even fucking means?
>thanks to the elastic powers the constitution allows to happen.
The constitutions is inelastic. It's supporting traitors to our nation like Hamilton in positions of power that they have successfully set a precedent for this supposedly "elasticity."
Eli Campbell
this post alone makes me wish we had some sort of "here here!" button
Angel King
Elitism is not the best, you always end up with (((elites))
Jaxon Diaz
>The constitution is inelastic
Article 1, Section 8 disagrees.
Christian Morris
>It was
No, the real mistake was Jackson being a retard and killing the BUS, thus paving the way for the FED
>And during which court case did the supreme court rule on that?
It never even got to the supreme court, lol
Luis Taylor
And that leads us back to our boy Hamilton smearing Mason.
Colton Bailey
Plus there is proof straight from the Thomas Jefferson foundation itself that refutes what Jared Taylor was saying. The only revisionism going on is by partisan ideologically driven Neo-Nazis who can't win every battle when they try too which is why they always lose. Pick and choose sometimes people.
>en.wikipedia.org
>monticello.org
And you referenced a source that I am also referencing because it is for my opinion of history which is factual, you obviously didn't read it. And the Christian Monitor isn't a intellectually reputable site and we all know the Wall Street Journal is also partisan as well. And world wide daily is unknown wouldn't trust their opinion. The only documents I would trust are directly from the Jefferson foundation seeing that they handle his history and background.
Christopher Hughes
...
Jaxon Bailey
But how does this imply intentions and forgo meaningfulness if he lay with a black person?
Luis Parker
>It was made to be interpreted
proof? It took Marbury v. Madison/McCulloch v. Maryland for precedent to declare the federal government had the authority to make any action that wasn't specifically listed in the constitution.
Henry Morales
>killing the BUS, thus paving the way for the FED
The kinds of people who supported one supported the other. And the fact that the first ever got thru is precedent to make the second.
>It never even got to the supreme court, lol
Correct. So to say something like "the supreme court didn't say it's unconstitutional!" as an argument for it being constitutional, when they never even heard a case on it is intellectually dishonest.
The fact is EVERYTHING they've ruled as unconstitutional had a period before it where they had not ruled on it. But that doesn't it mean it was constitutional then, it just means they hadn't ruled on it.
Sebastian Jackson
his mother was a jew, he was educated his first 17 years in a jewish school he was a fucking jew
Aiden Miller
>Only this soruce is allowed to be used in an argument.
Incorrect, the Jefferson Society is kiked out, they are the most partisan source available, eat shit.
Carter Bell
This.is.from.the.original.source.of.the.claim.after.it.was.retracted.
marcottelab.org
The DNA analysis of Y-chromosome haplotypes
used by Foster et al.1 to evaluate
Thomas Jefferson’s alleged paternity of
Eston Hemings Jefferson, the last child of
his slave Sally Hemings, is impressive. However,
the authors did not consider all the
data at hand in interpreting their results.
No mention was made of Thomas Jefferson’s
brother Randolph (1757–1815), or of
his five sons2,3. Sons of Sally Hemings conceived
by Randolph (or by one of his sons)
would produce a Y-chromosome analysis
identical to that described by Foster et al.
Further collaborative data (for example, the
whereabouts of any of those who might have
been involved at conception) are needed to
confirm that Jefferson did indeed father his
slave’s last child, as claimed in the title. We
know Thomas Jefferson was there, but how
about Randolph Jefferson and his sons?
Grayson Scott
He was based, he was the most progressive founding father. Advocated Central Banking, a Monarch, opposed gun nuts, supported stronger Federal Government
Rothschilds are based as fuck.
GOOD
Educate yourself
youtube.com
Dude, Hamilton was an immigrant
Dominic Morgan
>The kinds of people who supported one supported the other.
t. someone who doesn't know the difference between central banks and naitonal banks.
A central bank is far closer to your ideal version of the "wildcat banking" system than a national system. If anything Jackson was the real Central banker because his actions led to the FED. I guess his face does deserve to be on the 20.
> EVERYTHING they've ruled as unconstitutional had a period before it where they had not ruled on it
Yeah no shit. The difference is the BUS never got ruled unconstitutional, ever.
She was half brit half french huguenot
she was 0.00% jewish
Luke Taylor
It never got ruled on at all. But it was unconstitutional.
Liam Perry
The way that is was written by some of the most successful lawyers in history? They would've written it differently if they didn't want its content subject to debate, fluidity, and interpretation
Adam Phillips
see
>Thomas Jefferson Foundation itself refutes it
weird, because this is taken straight from the website
>Questions remain about the nature of the relationship that existed between Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemings; whether she had a child at Monticello shortly after they returned from France in 1789; and whether there is anything to connect Jefferson, Hemings, and Thomas Woodson.
>muh Sally Hemings wiki
Bentley White
So the site that represents Thomas Jeffersons memory and available to more information on the topic then everybody else isn't the most reputable one and in your words "kiked out". Also you didn't answer my last question.
A single page in Macmillan Magazine from 1999 if this is true why didn't you post this first?
Elijah Long
>opposed gun nuts
>was an immigrant
>Advocated Central Banking
terrible b8 literally none of this is true
1. Hamilton supported the 2nd amendment
2. Hamilton was born in the British Empire and moved to....the British Empire
3.A National Bank is not a Central Bank
kekistan is cancer
>it was unconstitutional
That was never ruled as such by any court of law.
Noah Parker
>They would've written it differently if they didn't want its content subject to debate, fluidity, and interpretation
Yeah, if they didn't want it subject to fluidity and the whims of however people wan't to read it that day they may have had to write a system by which it can be amended or changed.
Oh wait, they did. Because it's not suppose to mean something today and something else tomorrow. If you need it to mean something else tomorrow then you fucking amend it tomorrow.
Ryder Johnson
>That was never ruled as such by any court of law.
Yes. That's an intellectually dishonest argument, as I explained.
Landon Howard
Read the whole article before posting.
Easton Hill
>A national bank is not a central bank
Had me up until there, your trolling needs improvement, really shitty bait.
Colton Young
>A single page in Macmillan Magazine from 1999 if this is true why didn't you post this first?
Dude, what in the holy hell are you talking about? It's the first source right hereThat's nature magazine, and this is where the official retraction was published. You can take it up with these gentlemen that you assblasted that "L3 nahtzees" are correct
E. A. Foster*, M. A. Jobling†, P. G. Taylor†,
P. Donnelly‡, P. de Knijff§, R. Mieremet§,
T. Zerjal¶, C. Tyler-Smith¶
*6 Gildersleeve Wood, Charlottesville,
Virginia 22903, USA
e-mail: [email protected]
†Department of Genetics,
University of Leicester, Adrian Building,
University Road, Leicester LE1 7RH, UK
‡Department of Statistics,
University of Oxford, South Parks Road,
Oxford OX1 3TG, UK
§MGC Department of Human Genetics,
Leiden University, PO Box 9503,
2300 RA Leiden, The Netherlands
¶Department of Biochemistry,
University of Oxford, South Parks Road,
Oxford OX1 3QU, UK
1. Foster, E. A. et al. Nature 396, 27–28 (1998).
2. Mayo, B. & Bear, J. A. Jr Thomas Jefferson and his Unknown
Brother (Univ. Press of Virginia, Charlottesville, 1981).
3. Brodie, F. M. Thomas Jefferson: An Intimate History (Norton,
New York, 1974).
4. Randall, W. S. Thomas Jefferson: A Life (Holt, New York, 1993).
5. History of Todd County, Kentucky (1884).
Luke Ortiz
I did you fucking retard.
Speculation, speculation, speculation, inconclusive ending, all based on a study that was done in 1998, for which I gave you the official retraction of said studies conclusion.
Blake James
So then you agree that it can be interpreted and thus is subject to change?
Jeremiah Wright
??
So wrong, can't tell if it's satire or if it's retarded.
Jason Adams
Article 5 is the mechanism by which the document can change.
The document can not change by claiming it's "fluid" or a "living-document" or by interpreting it a different way based on a whim, or whatever.
Jace Kelly
washingtonpost.com
cap-press.com
“The problem [in misinterpreting the DNA evidence] lies not only with a news media prone to over simplifying and sensationalizing complex stories. Numerous prominent scholars have contributed to the misunderstanding by characterizing the DNA study as ‘confirming’ or ‘clinching’ the case for Thomas Jefferson’s paternity.”
wallbuilders.com
historynewsnetwork.org
All sources sure as hell sound inconclusive to me, I don't know about you user.
Nathaniel Hall
Archived
>washingtonpost com/wp-srv/local/daily/may99/critics010699.htm
unvis.it
Liam Cruz
Have you ever taken a class on the Constitution? Studied it? Have you ever cross referenced writings on it? Or have you simply developed your own opinion based on whats been fed to you? I'm not arguing for the "living constitution" theory, I'm stating that yes, it is for all intents and purposes written as to be interpreted and if its seen by the people to not be in accordance with what they support, it can be legally changed as guaranteed by the Constitution itself.