Son's of Liberty - History Channel - 3 Part Series - Looks Like It Could Be A Good One


Selene

Recommended Posts

Thanks much Adam.

Didn't see that when I glanced thru the tv listings this A.M.

I'll tip the next glass of skunk juice, in appreciation, your way.

-J

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Joe:

One of my favorite shock facts about our Revolution is the race of the first Colonist killed by the British scum in the Boston Massacre.

On March 5, 1770 the dreadful day came. A mob of people went in front of the Customs Office in Boston Massachusetts and started to throw stuff and give insults at the soldiers. As a result to this so-called harassment the soldiers fired on the crowd. The first to die was an African-Amercan man named Crispus Attucks. He was a native of Frainghan, Massachusetts. He escaped from slavery in 1750 and had become a sailor. Crispus Attucks is considered the first martyr of the American Independence. The four others who died were Samuel gray, a rope maker; James Caldwell, a sailor; Samuel Maverick, a seventeen year old apprentice and Patrick Carr, a leather worker and Irish immigrant. All in which were unarmed and brutally murdered.

A kinda cosmic chuckle considering that slavery is our "original sin," which is debatable.

A...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Crispus Attucks Museum and website - http://www.crispusattucksmuseum.org/

It is believed that Attucks was born a slave in Framingham, Massachusetts in 1723. Both his parents were slaves owned by Colonel Buckminster from Framingham, Massachusetts. Documents describe Crispus as a man of mixed parentage; his father, Prince, was an African slave and his mother, Nancy, was a Wampanoag or Natick Indian forced into slavery. Crispus Attucks was named after the word “attucks” that comes from the native Wampanoag language and means small, male deer.

Amazing, his mother was a "native American" kinda double negative Karma...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By the way, I hope you are watching Sons of Liberty because a coin is at the center of the Sons code...

A...

No TV in the house. We never upgraded to digital. We have a big(ish) screen, but use it to watch DVDs (no Blue Ray, yet). However, we do have a slew of computers, routers, and whatnot, networked and all that, and stuff in boxes for building tests - none of this is mine… well, this one is… Oh! We just bought McGiver Season One on DVD today. We never saw it in the original.

Do you ever read books? Allow me to recommend Citizen Tom Paine by Howard Fast, and John Adams by David McCoullogh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Joe:

One of my favorite shock facts about our Revolution is the race of the first Colonist killed by the British scum in the Boston Massacre.

...The first to die was an African-Amercan man named Crispus Attucks. …

A kinda cosmic chuckle considering that slavery is our "original sin," which is debatable.

You need a history lesson. Negro slavery was a "peculiar institution" for many reasons. Slavery was rare in the Catholic world of the Middle Ages. The loss of slaves was an issue in the Christianization of Hungary c. 1000. in the ancient world of the Greeks and Romans, it was a legal status and social status only. In ancient Athens the slave Pasion became a millionaire banker. In Muslim Cairo c. 1600, a Bosnian slave woman sued in court three men who tried to cut her out of a deal with her owner. No free woman in London or Paris of the time had a similar right.

In colonial British America of the 1600s, some jurists argued that the children of slaves were born free: the condition of slavery was not their doing.

However, after the Revolution, waves of repression struck the Negroes as individuals and as member of a so-called "race." The Black Laws of Ohio (1807) are one example. Oregon of the 1840s-1850s is another here.

This was a crazy-quilt of ad hoc laws that only reflected the subjective, even amorphous, status of slaves in British North America.

1782. Chapter XXXII. Because great inconvenience has arisen from persons permitting their slaves to go at large and hire themselves out, under promise of paying their owners money in lieu of services, it is enacted that if slaves are permitted to go at large, they may be sold and disposed of by the sheriff. Twenty-five per cent of the amount of the sale shall go toward lessening the county levy, five per cent to the gaoler and the rest to the owner of the slave.

1785. Chapter LXXVII. No person shall henceforth be a slave in Virginia, except such as were so on the first day of this Assembly and the descendants of the females of them. Slaves hereafter brought in and kept one year shall be free.

​[…]

1805. Chapter 12. It is declared that it is not unlawful for masters to permit slaves to accompany them, or any part of the family to religious worship if it is conducted by a white minister.

1806. Chapter 63. Slaves brought into this state and kept one year shall be forfeited by the owner, and the right to the slaves shall rest in the overseers of the poor, who shall apprehend such slaves for the benefit of the poor.

Black Laws of Virginia Website here: :http://www.balchfriends.org/Glimpse/BlackLawsofVA.htm

Freedom came and went (and came and went…), but it mostly sucked to be a Negro in colonial America. I am pretty sure that we are still not over the problem of "race" (so-called) yet, the Man in the White House notwithstanding (and not being a Negro).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Joe:

One of my favorite shock facts about our Revolution is the race of the first Colonist killed by the British scum in the Boston Massacre.

...The first to die was an African-Amercan man named Crispus Attucks. …

A kinda cosmic chuckle considering that slavery is our "original sin," which is debatable.

You need a history lesson.

Based on what statement that I made?

Again, you would have to have the capacity to attribute that which is mine to me and that which is in a link in my post, and know the difference.

You know, it is kinda a rendering thing. Render that which is God's to God and what is Caesars to Caesar.

A...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thoroughly enjoyed the series. There was much about the "Founders" I didn't know...how they each contributed.

What a group they were, these Band of Brothers. I'll be adding the DVD to my collection.

-J

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thoroughly enjoyed the series. There was much about the "Founders" I didn't know...how they each contributed.

What a group they were, these Band of Brothers. I'll be adding the DVD to my collection.

-J

There were two (2) beautifully subtle parts of the movie that got to me.

The first was when Franklin is offering drafts of wine? to Hamilton, John Adams and then to Sam Adams.

Adams makes a no thanks gesture with his hand and I went - ah he stopped drinking.

Then his other riveting character development is when he is on his way to Boston to mete out revenge. He stops and looks skyward as he struggles with a decision based on what Hamilton said. He resolves to go back.

Then he makes that fine speech and is given the honor of casting Massachusett's vote.

The other scene is when Franklin sells Hamilton on him presiding over the meeting of the Colonies.

He says, that he knew his uncle and that Franklin had been living in France for a decade. Franklin whispers to Hamilton that he knows where he came from and where he is now. And. that he is the right man for the job.

I went, uh oh, there is something about Hamilton that I don't know. Sure enough...

Caribbean Son

The island of Nevis in the Caribbean is a volcanic cone approximately five miles in diameter and 1,300 miles away from New York City. Today, its primary tourist attraction (perhaps its only tourist attraction) is the house in Charles Town where Alexander Hamilton was born. His parents were James Hamilton, an unsuccessful Scotch businessman, and Rachel Fawcett Lavien, who was still married to another man when Alexander was born (she was divorced from John Lavien in 1758). Although she and James Hamilton started a family together, they never married.

In 1765, shortly after the family moved to the island of St. Croix, James Hamilton, who had never succeeded in his various business ventures, abandoned Rachel and the two boys, Alexander and James. Rachel opened a small shop in the main town, James was apprenticed to a carpenter, and Alexander, then 11 years old, took work as a clerk at the trading post of Cruger and Beckman. The main export of St. Croix at this time was sugar, the main labor force slaves.

These early experiences helped shape critical facets of Hamilton's later thinking. Having spent his entire youth outside the American colonies (he moved to New York at the age of seventeen), Hamilton never developed the kind of state or regional loyalty that characterized so many of his colleagues. He could envision the United States as a single entity in which partisan regional interests would be subsumed to the health and stability of the whole.

At the same time, Hamilton witnessed the brutal system of slavery which drove the economy of St. Croix. Slave rebellions occasionally erupted, occasionally resulting in deaths of whites, but they were always crushed, the slaves forced back into lives of unremitting and unrewarded toil. As an adult, Hamilton consistently opposed slavery, served as an officer of the New York Manumission Society and tended to hold the southern planter class in low regard. It should be noted, however, that, as a true pragmatist, he was willing to compromise on issues of slavery in the interests of strengthening the union. The South's slave-based economy, after all, provided the raw materials that drove the economic engines of the North, which Hamilton regarded as the essential foundation for the country.

Being brought up completely away from the Colonies, and, being a didactic learner who was brilliant, he perceived the Colonies as a unit.

He avoided developing the regional rivalries that folks from the North had, folks from the central states and the Southern slave states.

Very interesting man.

http://xroads.virginia.edu/~cap/ham/hamback1.html

A...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those are fascinating observations for sure, Adam. My favorite among my favorites (there are many) was when Franklin was asked by someone (can't recall who) during or just after the delegates voted, how they would proceed. His answer was, "start a new country".

I was amazed by how involved Revere was... & not, as is usually only portrayed in school history books...at least the ones I was issued... as just some patriot on horseback screaming "the Red Coats are coming"

I loved it when Hancock said he signed the Declaration in large script so the King could read it and it added a final emphasis (that was drift I got from it). Perhaps a continuation series will be done, detailing the several yrs after the signing and up to the day England was finally kicked off our shores.

On another note I'm looking forward to seeing the History channel's presentation of Texas Rising, scheduled for this Memorial Day.

http://www.history.com/shows/texas-rising

-J

P.S. Viva la Coin!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Being brought up completely away from the Colonies, and, being a didactic learner who was brilliant, he perceived the Colonies as a unit.

He avoided developing the regional rivalries that folks from the North had, folks from the central states and the Southern slave states.

Very interesting man.

http://xroads.virginia.edu/~cap/ham/hamback1.html

A...

He was also the Statist from Hell.... He and Jefferson had a different view of how American society should develop. Jefferson lost and Hamilton won and is still winning. He was the original "neo Fascist"

Ba'al Chatzaf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Being brought up completely away from the Colonies, and, being a didactic learner who was brilliant, he perceived the Colonies as a unit.

He avoided developing the regional rivalries that folks from the North had, folks from the central states and the Southern slave states.

Very interesting man.

http://xroads.virginia.edu/~cap/ham/hamback1.html

A...

He was also the Statist from Hell.... He and Jefferson had a different view of how American society should develop. Jefferson lost and Hamilton won and is still winning. He was the original "neo Fascist"

Ba'al Chatzaf

Bob:

I have heard you make this statement several times.

Care to flesh it out with some argument versus just labels?

A...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah! History channel is re-running "Sons of Liberty"... Fri. @ 6PM (PT)...the entire 6 hours.

-J

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah! History channel is re-running "Sons of Liberty"... Fri. @ 6PM (PT)...the entire 6 hours.

-J

Excellent - thank you very much...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bob:

I have heard you make this statement several times.

Care to flesh it out with some argument versus just labels?

A...

He constructed Crony Capitalism. Creating political favors for the rich at the expense of others. AND most of all he and George lead 13,000 Federale thugs against the yoemen of Pennsylvania during the 1794 Whiskey Rebellion. I will never forgive him for that. If only he had been killed then, instead of ten years later in a duel with Aaron Burr who was a political charlatan.

Details enough for you?

Ba'al Chatzaf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bob:

I have heard you make this statement several times.

Care to flesh it out with some argument versus just labels?

A...

He constructed Crony Capitalism. Creating political favors for the rich at the expense of others. AND most of all he and George lead 13,000 Federale thugs against the yoemen of Pennsylvania during the 1794 Whiskey Rebellion. I will never forgive him for that. If only he had been killed then, instead of ten years later in a duel with Aaron Burr who was a political charlatan.

Details enough for you?

Ba'al Chatzaf

Not quite Bob.

I have problems with the Whiskey Rebellion and I will comment at another time.

As to the Crony Capitalism statement. All government has an aspect of corruption/cronyism.

I would like to see how he "constructed" that.

A...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bob:

I have heard you make this statement several times.

Care to flesh it out with some argument versus just labels?

A...

He constructed Crony Capitalism. Creating political favors for the rich at the expense of others. AND most of all he and George lead 13,000 Federale thugs against the yoemen of Pennsylvania during the 1794 Whiskey Rebellion. I will never forgive him for that. If only he had been killed then, instead of ten years later in a duel with Aaron Burr who was a political charlatan.

Details enough for you?

Ba'al Chatzaf

Not quite Bob.

I have problems with the Whiskey Rebellion and I will comment at another time.

As to the Crony Capitalism statement. All government has an aspect of corruption/cronyism.

I would like to see how he "constructed" that.

A...

True. But Jefferson's version was slower poison

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hamilton proposed life terms for both the president and senators, which would have made the first U.S. government a dictatorship.

Hamilton is the father of U.S. public debt, and thus of deficit spending.

Hamilton is the father of central banking in America, opposed by Madison and Jefferson, and thus of government manipulation of the currency.

Hamilton argued against Adam Smith's theory that a nation's interests could be advanced by government staying out of the economy. Hamilton advocated protectionism.

It was Hamilton who put the choke hold on American free traders by creating the U.S. Revenue Cutter Service.

It was Hamilton who helped create the inglorious history of U.S. government snooping of citizens through the Whiskey Tax, which would require inspections of private warehouses.

Hamilton is the father of "implied constitutional powers" which gives the government the right to do virtually anything it perceives to be in its interest.

Hamilton, despite the fact that he bought slaves, is the spiritual godfather of Barack Obama and every other power grabber that has ruled America.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hamilton proposed life terms for both the president and senators, which would have made the first U.S. government a dictatorship.

Hamilton is the father of U.S. public debt, and thus of deficit spending.

Hamilton is the father of central banking in America, opposed by Madison and Jefferson, and thus of government manipulation of the currency.

Hamilton argued against Adam Smith's theory that a nation's interests could be advanced by government staying out of the economy. Hamilton advocated protectionism.

It was Hamilton who put the choke hold on American free traders by creating the U.S. Revenue Cutter Service.

It was Hamilton who helped create the inglorious history of U.S. government snooping of citizens through the Whiskey Tax, which would require inspections of private warehouses.

Hamilton is the father of "implied constitutional powers" which gives the government the right to do virtually anything it perceives to be in its interest.

Hamilton, despite the fact that he bought slaves, is the spiritual godfather of Barack Obama and every other power grabber that has ruled America.

Sorry, but Hamilton needed help. He may have been the head of the body but how he seemed to get his way is an open question with many unstated and unfound answers.

--Brant

the impulse to statism in human existence: imposition and acceptance--the seeking of (it's easier to get a bunch of thugs together for statism than a bunch of individualists for freedom for collectivism goes collecting adherents while freemen go their own individual ways--or, statism is the natural gravity of human existence and few brains are needed)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The glaring inaccuracies or outright lies in "The Son's [sic] of Liberty" are detailed here.

I've never seen a History Channel treatment of a U.S. war that was not false on one or more critical points, so why should this movie be any different?

I stopped watching after episode one.

I didn't like the depiction of the battle of Lexington and Concord--the British retreat. I can think of two reasons: it would have been too expensive to hire more extras and put them in British army uniforms and it would have been sympathetic to the poor soldiers trying to get back to Boston with snipers constantly depleting their ranks. None of the actual retreat was depicted except some panic out of the farm where the munitions were.

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now