Thomas Jefferson

This book enlists not only historical but also legal and philosophical analysis to arrive at the conclusion that Jefferson, Madison, and other founders had the most correct view of the relationship between religion and government (church and state).  Such founders sharply delineated the public (governmental) and private spheres and placed freedom of conscience squarely in the private sphere.

Thanks in part to the explosive issue of race relations, Anglo-Saxon studies took on contours of their own in nineteenth-century North America. Instructive in this regard are the different perspectives of the southerner Lewis F. Klipstein, who regarded people of Anglo-Saxon descent as a kind of master race, and the northerner Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, a cosmopolitan poet and essayist who rejected racist ideologies but who set a high value on America's cultural heritage going back to Anglo-Saxon times. This chapter reviews this ground with attention also to Thomas Jefferson's attempt to make the study of the  Old English language a foundational aspect of the American system of higher education.

With a vignette, 'Thomas Jefferson and the teaching of Old English' (pp. 292-97).

Bu kitap Amerika Birleşik Devletleri’nin kuruluşunun tarihini anlatmaktadır. Bu tarih beş yüzyıldan uzun bir süreye yayılan olağanüstü bir hikâyedir. Bir ulusun çok çeşit halkların yaşadığı bir kıtaya nasıl yayıldığını ve bu halkıların özgürlük ve eşitlik ilklerini temsil eden bir bayrağın altında nasıl birleştiğini açıklayan bir hikâyedir.

This outline was prepared for the May 16, 2019 meeting of Discussion Group 2 of the Pittsburgh Freethought Community.  Its purpose is to cite and (where possible) link selected primary and secondary sources on freedom of conscience and church-state separation.  The end of each section poses questions for the consideration of the reader.

This article argues that Thomas Jefferson's "Notes on the State of Virginia" should be understood as a work of statistics, part of the paradigm shift from a classical model of sovereignty to a modern biopolitics. In the eighteenth century, statistical writings were descriptions of states and colonies that used numerical data to analyze and forecast economic and demographic developments. In "Notes on the State of Virginia," Jefferson considers both the maintenance of a "healthy" ratio between settlers and territory and the ensuring of a demographic majority of the white settler population to be vital to the well-being and long-term survival of Virginia. Reading "Notes" as statistics allows it to become legible as a program for a settler colonial biopolitics, including Jefferson's proposal for a biospatial exchange of populations and the absorption of indigenous and mixed-race persons into the dominant settler collective.

In this paper I consider the ideas of the American Founders about the
“unalienable” aspect of rights and argue that this concept is inherently consistent with a pro-life perspective. The idea of unalienable rights that the Founders espoused implies a rich philosophical anthropology in which rights and duties cannot be justly separated from one’s self. Consequently many pro-choice arguments, such as those in favor of allowing voluntary euthanasia, are in contradiction with the Founders’ conception of rights. Their concept of unalienablility can be re-articulated to address the new circumstances that bioethics confronts in the twenty-first century and is an enduring important aspect of American public philosophy.

Since the advent of the War on Terror, the Barbary War (1801-1805) has become a point of fascination for groups which argue for the existence of a perpetual 'Clash of Civilisations' between the so-called Islamic World and the United States of America. This dissertation examines recent historiographical developments in the study of the Barbary War and evaluates the extent to which politically motivated readings of the conflict have derailed the popular understanding of this historical moment. This discussion is particularly relevant in the context of the understanding how 'alt-right' and deeply prejudiced groups distort and instrumentalise the historical record to promote an anti-Islamic agenda.

Penerjemah Al-Qur'an tersebut adalah George Sale (1696-1736), seorang pengacara dan penganut Anglikan, menggambarkan Nabi Muhammad sebagai "legislatif kaum Arab", kata-kata yang pasti membuat Jefferson langsung terpikat sebagai seorang pengacara. Perlu dipertegas bahwa sejak abad ke-12, para penerjemah dari Kristen secara umum menggambarkan bahwa Al-Qur'an itu bukan wahyu Allah sebagaimana orang Islam wajib imani, melainkan sebagai perkataan Nabi Muhammad dan khazanah umdang-undang agama Islam.

This paper explores the possibility of finding natural law theory in philosophical Taoism (Daoism). It emphasizes the importance of a Zhuangzian virtue ethics, tian [zhi] dao in the Laozi, Yang Zhu's thought, Taoist individualism, and the relation between Tao (Dao) and Te (De). The research goal of this paper is to develop Taoist-libertarian natural rights and to assess their similarity to Jefferson's „Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.”

One of the revolutions I discuss in my forthcoming book, "The First Revolutions in the Minds of the People," is “the Party Revolution.” This five-year long event began when James Madison, with the support of his mentor, Thomas Jefferson, began organizing an opposition to the commercially-oriented system Treasury Secretary Alexander Hamilton was promoting to his mentor, President George Washington. The nation was then in the grip of a post-war economic depression and many, including its first President, feared it would collapse. Washington therefore endorsed his Treasury Secretary’s plan to empower the nation’s central government to facilitate trade and economic growth.
In this chapter, I trace the evolution in the thinking of Thomas Jefferson and James Madison as they groped for an effective way to obstruct Hamilton’s “federalist” plan. Opposition evolved into Resistance, and finally into Subversion. By the spring of 1791, the two agrarian ideologues understood  their success rested on building a political majority. The story of the party revolution is therefore the story of how Madison, with Jefferson's beyond-the-veil support, divided the American people against themselves then organized his faction and expanded it into a voting majority.
Madison’s effort unfolded in a series of initiatives, each of which was guided by a new and more effective theme. In his first campaign, Madison condemned commerce and the financial corruption that accompanies it. In the second, he (and his allies) blamed “monarchists” for trying to undermine the republic. In the third, a phalanx of partisan scribes exposed cunning plots of “monocrats” to rob the people of their rights. During one short-lived period in the summer of 1793, the focus was on drawing individual republicans into political affiliation. Ultimately, however, Madison decided that the best way to gain control of the government was to use politicians to shape the opinion of the people. This, Madison concluded, would be the most effective way to build the voting majorities he and Thomas Jefferson gain control of the nation’s Federalist government. Madison unveiled the winning theme in the congressional elections of1794.  The Republican Party then configured itself as the Liberty Party.

Thomas Jefferson spent ten years conducting what he euphemistically described as “the second American Revolution.” In my forthcoming book, The Next New Thomas Jefferson, I explain why this event is more accurately characterized as “Thomas Jefferson (harebrained) coup d’état.” In this chapter, which I call “Completing Jefferson’s (Harebrained) Coup d’État, I reconstruct how Jefferson completed his coup and became the third President of the United States. Readers with learn that Jefferson’s victory was won not by Jefferson or by his brilliant cohort, James Madison. It was won instead by Aaron Burr, who won it by out-maneuvered Alexander Hamilton in New York City during the winter of 1800. Specifically, in March of that year, the slate of Republican presidential electors chosen by Burr defeated the Federalist slate chosen by Hamilton. In December, all twelve of Burr’s men voted for him and for Jefferson. Their votes were the margins of Jefferson and Burr’s victories over Adams and Pinckney. It seems Jefferson was as surprised as everyone else when the final tally showed that Burr had received the same number of electoral votes as he had. Indeed, all the men who voted for Jefferson also voted for Burr! In this chapter, I follow Burr’s relationship with Jefferson from its promising start in June of 1791, through Burr’s heroic efforts to win the presidential election in 1800, to its bitter end, which occurred in mid-February 1801. The members of the House of Representatives voted then thirty-six times to break the electoral tie between the two Republican candidates. Months before this, the brinksman from New York had decided that his running mate from Virginia could not be trusted. Burr therefore rolled the political dice. He lost when Jefferson played a card that he had up his sleeve. This man, the partisan intriguer who won the presidential election of 1800, is the next new Thomas Jefferson.

Thomas Jefferson befriended several women during his five years in France. William Howard Adams identifies them as Abigail Adams, Angelica Schuyler Church, Anne Willing Bingham, Comtesse de Tessé, Madame de Tott, Madame de Corny, Madame de Bréhan, Madame d’Houdetot, and Maria Cosway.
Mr. Adams’s list is a good one, but he misrepresents Jefferson’s relationships with the women he names by suggesting they were all Jefferson’s regular companions. I explain in the following pages that Jefferson flirted with two of these women, being Angelica Schuyler Church and Anne Willing Bingham; that he had a brief romance with another, being Maria Cosway; and that he became close to Abigail Adams, Comtesse de Tessé, and Madame de Corny.
In addition to providing brief biographies for each of the women Mr. Adams identifies, I explain how Jefferson met them and the nature of his relationships with them. It is commonly believed that his most intimate friendship was with Maria Cosway. I explain, however, that his friendship with Madame de Corny was far more important, being as she was Jefferson's confidante and parental partner. His friendship with Comtesse de Tessé was nearly as close. The friendship he shared with the comtesse was perhaps the longest he had with a woman.

Thomas Jefferson befriended several women during his five years in France. William Howard Adams identifies them as Abigail Adams, Angelica Schuyler Church, Anne Willing Bingham, Comtesse de Tessé, Madame de Tott, Madame de Corny, Madame de Bréhan, Madame d’Houdetot, and Maria Cosway.
Mr. Adams’s list is a good one, but he misrepresents Jefferson’s relationships with the women he names by suggesting they were all Jefferson’s regular companions. I explain in the following pages that Jefferson flirted with two of these women, being Angelica Schuyler Church and Anne Willing Bingham; that he had a brief romance with another, being Maria Cosway; and that he became close to Abigail Adams, Comtesse de Tessé, and Madame de Corny.
In addition to providing brief biographies for each of the women Mr. Adams identifies, I explain how Jefferson met them and the nature of his relationships with them. It is commonly believed that his most intimate friendship was with Maria Cosway. I explain, however, that his friendship with Madame de Corny was far more important, being as she was Jefferson's confidante and parental partner. His friendship with Comtesse de Tessé was nearly as close. The friendship he shared with the comtesse was perhaps the longest he had with a woman.