Generational Sovereigty

[narwhal]

So I am writing a paper on Thomas Jefferson's view of the modern world. And I came across something in a book that I go to often for resource.

"Generational Sovereignty" which is a Locke thought but Jefferson establishes it deeper in a few letters to James Madison in 1789. But it's the basic principal (in Jefferson's head) that goes along with the notion "the earth belongs to the living".

Here are some quotes from the letter:

""The course reflection in which we are immersed here on the elementary principles of society," he explained Madison, "has presented the question to my mind." The question itself was not entirely new. it was "Whether one generation of men has a right to bind another," which Jefferson claimed had implications that had not been sufficiently appreciated in either Europe or America."

"I set out on this ground," he announced, "which I suppose to be self evident, that the earth belongs to the usufruct to the living."

Huge debate is over the true meaning of what Jefferson is saying...but it comes from Constitutionalist minded ones...from what I can see.

"We seem not to perceive,: as he put it to Madison, "that by the law of nature, one generation is to another as one independent nation is to another."

"the earth belongs always to the living generations"-that all personal and national debts, all laws , even all constitutions, should expire after that time."

I thought it was really interesting.

Thoughts? Pros vs Cons?

[cruskim]

Locke wrote that all worldly possesions (material things, nature, one's own body) all belong to god so no one should take anything from another because he is taking something from god. you can't kill yourself cause that would be stealing god's possesion, etc.

he also wrote that god gave the world to men all the same but meant for inequality to arise (cause he gave men reason and virtue). so by applying work to something, one could make it his possesion. Jefferson studied locke so maybe Jefferson applied that idea to slavery. sort of like, "by capturing and taking advantage of these people from Africa, we're "applying work to them" so they become our possesions and slavery is ok"

[cruskim]

sorry if thats not exactly what the thread is about but my roommate is watching "the real housewives of new york" and it is impossible to think straight with that ringing in my ears

[narwhal]

It's a Locke concept but a Jefferson idea. This idea goes against what you are saying though. God is not in the letters what so ever, and for once nothing about Slavery. (strange in Jefferson's letters)

[narwhal]

It's a Locke concept but a Jefferson idea. This idea goes against what you are saying though. God is not in the letters what so ever, and for once nothing about Slavery. (strange in Jefferson's letters)

[ZapBulletRider]

Locke is on Lost lol

[cruskim]

yea i know this was mainly about jefferson but since he studied locke a lot i thought that might be the basis for his generational sovereignty theory

[narwhal]

Almost all of the great thinkers ideas at the time reflect Locke. (IE: Paine, Jefferson and a mass of FF)

edit: So what's your point?

I only mentioned him due to I did not want to make it sound like it was a complete original idea to Jefferson.

[cruskim]

yep

[Dzan]

Re-writing the constitution every 20 years was another one of Jefferson's crackpot ideas that thankfully never came to pass.

[cruskim]

i was just reading Rousseau's discourse on the origin of inequality and he was talking about inheritance which got me think about the generational sovereignty idea. In reality, it holds no merit cause people inherit wealth and power (and debt) from their parents so when born, children are not all on the same playing field because of their inheritances. generational sovereignty would also be implausible in my opinion because it could lead to people acquiring debt because when they die, the debt would expire with the person. in other words, people could easily screw one another by simply putting things off until death because then everything acquired by them would vanish

[narwhal]

Re-writing the constitution every 20 years was another one of Jefferson's crackpot ideas that thankfully never came to pass.

The number is more like x3 that. (around 60 years at least) (Marquis de Condorcet wrote in some depth about mathematical side of the idea) The thought is not really saying, "rewrite the entire govt every x amount of years." It can just be sections of the government. Paine and Lafayette favored the measure at that level. Lafayette even submitted in his "Declaration of Rights" the similar thing. (most historians think Jefferson wrote the majority of the document though) I am still looking in to it at more depth...don't have an overall idea yet. I figured you being a Hamilton man you would speak in disgust at first sight. Jefferson had some interesting ideas on time and government. I always hear you down cast Jefferson for his rural desire for the US, and how it would not work now. (well Jefferson himself stated that several times)

[cruskim]

in fact, Jefferson's rural ideas, like that of civic virtue, contributed to the industrialization of america. basically, by trying to avoid cities and factories and such, Jefferson's policies facilitated the creation of those things

[narwhal]

i was just reading Rousseau's discourse on the origin of inequality and he was talking about inheritance which got me think about the generational sovereignty idea. In reality, it holds no merit cause people inherit wealth and power (and debt) from their parents so when born, children are not all on the same playing field because of their inheritances. generational sovereignty would also be implausible in my opinion because it could lead to people acquiring debt because when they die, the debt would expire with the person. in other words, people could easily screw one another by simply putting things off until death because then everything acquired by them would vanish

Well the idea is established in small little forms of American Government. Bankruptcy. It's almost a clean slate...better than the latter form of the past.

Heres a quote from Gem on what I agree with:

"that one generation of men in civil society have no right to make acts to bind another, is a truth that cannot be contested."

In theory binding others to debt in various forms is wrong, yes. But really not alot cannot be done with it. (what I think Gem is saying in plain "American".)

[cruskim]

In theory binding others to debt in various forms is wrong, yes. But really not alot cannot be done with it.

exactly what I was thinking as I was reading your post

[Dzan]

in fact, Jefferson's rural ideas, like that of civic virtue, contributed to the industrialization of america. basically, by trying to avoid cities and factories and such, Jefferson's policies facilitated the creation of those things

That's a stretch.

[narwhal]

That's a stretch.

Yeah I would agree. Jefferson's ideas as he saw it would expire. He stated several times if the United States grew then his economic ideas should be forgotten.

I find the different political parties trying to gather Jefferson's name as funny. (he would be closest to an Anarchy party) I think Jefferson would laugh and be disgusted with his modern day fame.

[Dzan]

I also think Jefferson was fortunate to have Madison around, since Madison was like a more practical, realistic version of Jefferson and he really helped temper his ideas into something for the real world.

[narwhal]

They both played off each other well. Madison was lucky to have Jefferson in several situations. (probly one of the best political partnerships)