was shay's rebellion just?

[Anarchist420]

i think so because bowdoin was using the office to steal money... he loaned in fiat currency, then wanted to get paid back in silver by people who never agreed to loan to him in the first place. and so the productive, especially the independent farmers, rebelled because they couldnt afford to pay 1/3 of their income for Bowdoin's corruption.

why they didnt go after Bowdoin directly boggles my mind though.

anyway, i cant believe how much smarter the early U.S. Citizen was... they must have been about 21 IQ points higher than the average U.S. citizen today considering how independent the early ones were and the fact they always knew what the State was up to. but today, most in the u.s. dont want to restore confederalism... boggles my mind that most u.s. citizens dont mind seeing any of the u.s. public debt paid back.

i mean, when the next president is expressly consented to by only 1 in 5 eligible voters, then what good is the executive State? what good will the u.s.d. be then?

 

[Newell Steamer]

Colonial America was a bunch of rich people with guns that wanted to stop feeding any one other than their own pockets.

And, there are plenty of militias out there that somehow feel that the government is out to get them. But, when "the wall" (or whatever) comes down, they will be nothing more than fat folks getting picked off by professionals or die of too much sodium in their diets (canned food isn't good for you, you know).

Brittle bones from lack of vitamin D will do them in as well - hidding in a bunker prevents you from soaking in the sun and getting your body to produce it.

Anyway - if we took the mentality of colonial America and applied it today, there would warring between the rich. Some rich would hire/side with the government to finish off the other rich. And, the middle/lower classes would be soldiers in their private armies. We are better off without the colonial American mindset.

 

[glenn1]

I'm glad A420 is back to discussing political topics of relevance from 2 centuries ago. What next, your book review of Thomas Paine's "Rights of Man" and anarcho-capitalist critique of it?

 

[Thebobo]

I'm glad A420 is back to discussing political topics of relevance from 2 centuries ago. What next, your book review of Thomas Paine's "Rights of Man" and anarcho-capitalist critique of it?

It has relevance for today with the talk on these boards of rebellion in america. Made me open Google and take a history tour on a part of our history I completely forgot about. Or maybe you didn't like it because the rebellion was crushed,

 

[norseamd]

I'm glad A420 is back to discussing political topics of relevance from 2 centuries ago. What next, your book review of Thomas Paine's "Rights of Man" and anarcho-capitalist critique of it?

what is wrong with discussing things from 200 years ago. the intellectual thoughts behind such things are always worthwhile

 

[IronWing]

Shays' rebellion and its suppression show the dangers of putting states' rights above civil rights. Without the protections later enshrined in the Constitution the rebels had no legal protection from the suspension of habius corpus and the predations of the wealthy elite who ran the commonwealth.