Slashdot Mirror


Spectral Imaging Reveals Jefferson Nixed 'Subjects' for 'Citizens'

Jamie points out this excellent piece, well timed for America's Independence Day, that says spectrographic evidence has established that the one word Thomas Jefferson fully blotted out from an early draft of the Declaration of Independence was not "resident," or "patriot," but rather "subject." This, he replaced with "citizen."

32 of 360 comments (clear)

  1. When will the government ever learn... by Kaenneth · · Score: 5, Funny

    That redacting documents by simply putting a opaque block over them dosn't removing the unlaying data?

  2. Don't worry by roman_mir · · Score: 5, Interesting

    they have correct that correction some time ago now, you are not citizens, you are consumers - inmates - terrorists - child molesters - unique serial numbers - organ donors.

    1. Re:Don't worry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      When you're a Chinese criminal, for suitably bizarre values of "criminal".

    2. Re:Don't worry by Abcd1234 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Then they can opt-out. The fact is *most* people *don't* have "religious objects or objects to the organ donation system itself", so why the hell should the law assume they do, particularly if it means more lives saved due to an increase in available organs?

    3. Re:Don't worry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Nature performs its own desecration. It's called rot. Or incineration. Or consumption. Any way you choose, you will be "mutilated." The difference between them is time, a concept that loses all meaning without life.

    4. Re:Don't worry by Jedi+Alec · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So what you are saying is that you don't think the US is as civilized as a good chunk of western europe? We've had opt-out donorship for quite a while now, and yet somehow our authoritation pinko commie cradle to grave goverments have yet to implement their "harvesting organs for fun and profit" programs.

      Fact of the matter is that most people can't be bothered to give it thought until the time when either they or one of their loved ones needs a donor organ. By making it opt-out the sheep/lazy folks(I fall into the latter category) don't have to give it any thought, and for those who consider it an issue there's the option to opt-out.

      --

      People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.
  3. Considering the mindset of the era by linumax · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Considering the mindset of the era, this actually is a good indicator of how Jefferson and other founding fathers understood that there was something wrong with the status quo and managed to change it.

    1. Re:Considering the mindset of the era by insufflate10mg · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Absolutely. You would think more people on /. would be replying seriously to this article. It's incredible to think that that one ink blot had such a profound effect on the US today. Think of how much of a core element the word "citizen" has become; it's like a symbol of our freedom and unity.

    2. Re:Considering the mindset of the era by Darkness404 · · Score: 4, Insightful
      ...And we still have the status quo today.

      But when a long Train of Abuses and Usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a Design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their Right, it is their Duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future Security.

      The History of the Present King of Great-Britain is a History of repeated Injuries and Usurpations, all having in direct Object the Establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid World.

      He has endeavoured to prevent the Population of these States; for that Purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their Migrations hither, and raising the Conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

      Hm, sound like the immigration mess we have today?

      He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the Tenure of their Offices, and Amount and Payment of their Salaries.

      Hm, appointing unfair judges for life... Based on the will of ~0.000033667% of the people? Sound familiar?

      He has erected a Multitude of new Offices, and sent hither Swarms of Officers to harass our People, and eat out their Substance.

      Sound familiar? DEA, Homeland Security, etc.?

      He has kept among us, in Times of Peace, Standing Armies, without the consent of our Legislature.

      Well, thats a bit different now, because we seem to think that there can't be any times of peace so instead we have a standing army always and find new conflicts to fight.

      For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from Punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

      Hm, people in the police force and the armed forces getting off easy for abuses of citizens, that of course has never happened in the USA... right?

      For cutting off our Trade with all Parts of the World:

      And today we have embargoes that not only harm our own citizens but keep some parts of the world in poverty because we disagree with their government... -cough- Cuba -cough-

      For imposing taxes on us without our Consent:

      Lets see, Ben Franklin estimated taxes in the colonies at around 12.5%... Today we have a 15% income tax at the realistic minimum (unless you are like a kid at a summer job or something then its only 10%) and up to 35% if you are successful at what you do! Plus, the income tax is actually unconstitutional! (Thats why they needed to pass a constitutional amendment for it to be in effect today)


      All the abuses of King George III on America are very similar to the abuses we suffer under our recent presidents and congresses.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    3. Re:Considering the mindset of the era by Jafafa+Hots · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well, I was going to say that with the Declaration, Jefferson DID change subjects into citizens, and I'm not talking about word replacement.

      --
      This space available.
    4. Re:Considering the mindset of the era by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Besides - most people here aren't citizens, they're subjects of whatever country they are from.

      Most people who live in most countries are citizens rather than subjects. The use of the word "citizen" is hardly unique to the USA.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    5. Re:Considering the mindset of the era by IorDMUX · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's incredible to think that that one ink blot had such a profound effect on the US today.

      I'm... not so sure about that. Jefferson's mindset had a profound impact on the formation of the US and its laws and liberties today, and this inkblot itself gives us insight into his thoughts, but the article itself notes that the entire line was removed from the final draft. The actual Declaration of Independence does not include this text, altered or otherwise, at all.

      --
      >> Standing on head makes smile of frown, but rest of face also upside down.
    6. Re:Considering the mindset of the era by am+2k · · Score: 4, Interesting

      All the abuses of King George III on America are very similar to the abuses we suffer under our recent presidents and congresses.

      That's because the government structure is very similar. Back then, you had a king appointed by nobody that did whatever he wanted. Nowadays, you have two puppets up for a pseudo-election, while the real legislative power is directed by people most citizens don't even know about (see Bilderberg Group for example). Since they're operating in the dark and are not elected, they also can do whatever they want.

      Maybe that sounds a little bit tinfoil-hattish, but that's the most straight-forward way I could think of to explain the US government's behavior in the last decade.

    7. Re:Considering the mindset of the era by JoshuaZ · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Much of what you said above takes things out of context or makes massive confusions about differences in scale. Let's look at two of them:

      He has kept among us, in Times of Peace, Standing Armies, without the consent of our Legislature.

      Well, thats a bit different now, because we seem to think that there can't be any times of peace so instead we have a standing army always and find new conflicts to fight.

      You are missing the point here. The primary objection is "kept among us"- this is an objection to quartering soldiers in private homes (which was then not allowed by the Third Amendment).

      He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the Tenure of their Offices, and Amount and Payment of their Salaries.

      Hm, appointing unfair judges for life... Based on the will of ~0.000033667% of the people? Sound familiar?

      But that's not at all the same. The judges being objected to weren't appointed for life. They were appointed to serve at the pleasure of the King. That's a very different circumstance. Hence the phrasing " on his Will alone, for the Tenure of their Offices."

      And of course almost all your objections ignore the fact that these events have all occurred with the consent of the legislator you voted for. That's very different then when things occur by an unelected monarch and a parliament which one can't vote.

    8. Re:Considering the mindset of the era by Jafafa+Hots · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Well, of course. It was a major change in philosophical mindset... it's PRACTICAL effect was much more limited, not the least of which because of the failings of the very same people who wrote it to implement it as they claimed they would.

      --
      This space available.
    9. Re:Considering the mindset of the era by Darkness404 · · Score: 4, Insightful
      That is a very dangerous mindset to have and a mindset that the founding fathers avoided like the plague. That is why we have the constitution (which is basically ignored which is why we have a government comparable to King George III which ignored the rights that colonists had as English citizens) to limit the government so it doesn't -matter- who is elected, in short the founding fathers had a version of the Debian Free Software Guidelines called the "tentacles of evil test"

      "The Tentacles of Evil test". Imagine that the author is hired by a large evil corporation and, now in their thrall, attempts to do the worst to the users of the program: to make their lives miserable, to make them stop using the program, to expose them to legal liability, to make the program non-free, to discover their secrets, etc. The same can happen to a corporation bought out by a larger corporation bent on destroying free software in order to maintain its monopoly and extend its evil empire. The license cannot allow even the author to take away the required freedoms.

      Only the founding fathers changed it a bit with limited government with the constitution basically saying:

      "The Tentacles of Evil test". Imagine that the people have voted in a dictator and, now that he/she is elected, attempts to do the worst to the citizens of the USA: to make their lives miserable, to make them stop using their freedoms, to expose them to domestic or foreign harm, to make the citizens non-free, to expose all citizen's secrets, etc. The same can happen to a government bought out by a corporation bent on destroying free software in order to maintain its monopoly and extend its evil empire. The constitution cannot allow even the government to take away the required freedoms.

      If you look at dictators, a -lot- of them were voted in, the constitution is designed to prevent a voted-in dictator from taking freedoms. Our rights are natural rights, they should never be voted away like you are suggesting.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    10. Re:Considering the mindset of the era by Reziac · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "You should not examine legislation in the light of the benefits it will convey if properly administered, but in the light of the wrongs it would do and the harm it would cause if improperly administered."
          -- Lyndon Johnson, 36th President of the U.S.

      "The world needs to be reminded that all human ills are not curable by legislation, and that quantity of statutory enactment and excess of government offer no substitute for quality of citizenship."
          -- Warren G. Harding

      "The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed."
          -- H. L. Mencken

      "Formerly, we suffered from crimes. Now, we suffer from laws."
          -- Tacitus

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    11. Re:Considering the mindset of the era by Alsee · · Score: 5, Funny

      when was the last time you wrote code that lasted more than two centuries with less than 30 patches?

      Six thousand years ago.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    12. Re:Considering the mindset of the era by Volante3192 · · Score: 4, Funny

      That's only because you refuse to fix the bug report code!

    13. Re:Considering the mindset of the era by Alsee · · Score: 4, Funny

      Platypus is closed as WONTFIX.
      All remaining bug reports are closed as PEBCAK.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
  4. Morphing by tomhudson · · Score: 5, Funny

    Tthe task was made more difficult by the way Jefferson sought to match the lines and curves of the underlying smudged letters with the new letters he wrote on top of them.

    "It's quite amazing how he morphed 'subjects' into 'citizens,' " she said. "We did the reverse morphing back to 'subjects.' "

    Figures. The government has been trying to do that for years ...

  5. Well... by djupedal · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Since the actual ability within the populace to write went missing years ago (image the Constitution as a tweet), and since today's culture may not know this, let me be reiterate that the document was 'drafted', meaning the author wrote and thought at the same time. It used to be a common practice to write a statement, and then to consider it in context with the expectation that changes were likely to occur. This doesn't mean he f'd up or someone was holding a gun to his head forcing him to change his mind.

    Thinking about what you write and why and how it should be cached for your audience used to be a worthwhile goal.

  6. Re:Very interesting. by Trepidity · · Score: 4, Informative

    Yeah, in that era "citizen" had strong republican (i.e. anti-monarchist) connotations, which would be made even clearer in the revolution a few years later in France, where "Citizen so-and-so" became the common mode of greeting (to emphasize that all titles were abolished, replaced by a single title, "Citizen", that everyone possessed), and was featured prominently in such texts as the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen.

    I don't believe it had quite as radical a connotation in 1776, but it was still a clear shift from "grievances of subjects who feel their king is unjust" (which was the sentiment of some of the colonists) to a more explicit declaration of anti-monarchism.

  7. Re:He should have kept the paragraph banning slave by Darkness404 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If he kept in the paragraph banning slavery, we probably would have 13 independent countries rather than any sort of union, especially for the southern states which required the extra labor for agriculture. The founding fathers all had to make compromises in order to get the thing passed, otherwise we would still be a confederacy of independent states. (No, I'm not talking about the CSA, I'm talking about having 13 independent nations with a loose affiliation)

    --
    Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
  8. Re:The Irony is.... by insufflate10mg · · Score: 5, Insightful

    LOL, really? When has a "Federal Officer" ever stopped you as you were travelling within the state and asserted his authority to make you turn around and go home?

  9. Re:The Irony is.... by Abcd1234 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What the hell does that have to do with a "Federal empire"? Christ, that's *specifically* a state-level law, enacted by a state, on behalf of the state's people. It's literally the antithesis of federalism (as the term is typically used in the US).

  10. Re:He should have kept the paragraph banning slave by Darkness404 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Right, because we all know how the north loved their Africans right? Everyone thought that the African race was inferior to the European races whether in the north, south, in Europe, etc. for quite some time.

    --
    Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
  11. Re:The Irony is.... by Volante3192 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Look at the US Code, says the same thing (except it's just not enforced.)

    http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sec_08_00001304----000-.html
      1304. Forms for registration and fingerprinting

    (e) Personal possession of registration or receipt card; penalties

    Every alien, eighteen years of age and over, shall at all times carry with him and have in his personal possession any certificate of alien registration or alien registration receipt card issued to him pursuant to subsection (d) of this section.

  12. Re:You left out the most important label by CRCulver · · Score: 4, Insightful

    BTW, this isn't limited to the United States. Lots of countries have made official victimhood the most desirable status one can aspire to. Unfortunately, their additional experience with leeching taxpayers to pay their victims has created a dearth of taxpayers. Funny how that happens.

    If you're referring to welfare states, they are a lot closer to financial solvency than the US, which prides itself on its can-do, American dream, pull-youself-up-with-your-own-bootstraps anti-welfare spirit, but is saddled with debt unimaginable in a place like Finland or Sweden.

  13. Re:He should have kept the paragraph banning slave by westlake · · Score: 4, Informative

    ROFL, wow, interesting take... the south favoured slavery, not because they were filthy bigots who felt Africans were inferior, but simply because the poor bastards "required the extra labor for agriculture".

    The abolition of slavery moved very slowly even in the North.

    The percentage of colonists - all races and both sexes - who arrived as slaves, prisoners, or more or less voluntarily indentured servants, was around 1/3.

    1777 Vermont Republic (constitution)
    1780 Pennsylvania "An Act for the Gradual Abolition of Slavery" Frees adult children of slaves born after 1780.
    1783 Massachusetts (judicial decision - state constitutional law)
    1783 -1784 New Hampshire, Connecticut, Rhode Island (children of slaves) (statute)
    1799 -1804 New York, New Jersey (children of slaves) (statute)
    1817 New York - emancipation for all slaves on July 4, 1827
    1827 New York Children born of slaves between 1799 and 1827 are indentured until age 25 (females) or age 28 (males)
    1847 Slavery ends in Pennsylvania. Those born before 1780 are freed - perhaps 100 surviving.

    Abolition of slavery timeline

    From the beginning, the plantation South was raising labor-intensive, non-edible, non-perishable, crops for the export trade. It was one of the few sources of hard currency - gold and silver - the colonies possessed. Which matters if you are seriously bent on waging a war against Great Britain.

  14. Re:You left out the most important label by CRCulver · · Score: 4, Informative

    The Norse countries

    Norse? What is this, the 12th century?

    I was thinking of the insolvent welfare states such as Greece, Spain, Portugal and Italy.

    The problem of Greece has a lot to do with corruption in the minority of people who work in administration and very little to do with a welfare state, which is pretty negligible, actually. And taxation is fairly low there as well. Looks like you haven't read any more about the problem than the stereotypes posted around news sites recently, which blamed a generally mythical lazy, non-working, early-retiring Greek people for everything.

  15. Old Norse Sources on Trolls by neoshroom · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The Norse countries

    Norse? What is this, the 12th century?

    Old Norse:
    Ráðumk, ér Loddfáfnir, en ú ráð nemir, -
    njóta mundu, ef ú nemr, ér munu góð, ef ú getr -:
    rimr orðum senna skal-at-tu ér við verra mann
    oft inn betri bilar,
    á er inn verri vegr.

    Shakespeare Era Translation:
    I rede thee, Loddfafnir! | and hear thou my rede,--
    Profit thou hast if thou hearest,
    Great thy gain if thou learnest:
    With a worse man speak not | three words in dispute,
    Ill fares the better oft
    When the worse man wields a sword.

    20th Century Translation:
    Even three words of quarrelling you shouldn't have with an inferior.

    21st Century Translation:
    Don't feed trolls.

    Some things never change.

    --
    Big apple, new Yorik, undig it, something's unrotting in Edenmark.