Guys, I've thought about this question for a while, and

>>2289043
They would've thought it was great being no. 1 nation but subhuman immigrants would've been a huge turn off for them.

>>2289810
Actually this. America being #1 would tickle their fancy, but they would get sickened seeing the race relations in the country

>>2289043

These people were smart enough to conceive of some future state of affairs that might be more benighted and duller for the influence of racial admixture. And so perhaps they might have privately considered some diminished future America, exactly because they were also students of history, and knew a bit about Rome, etc.

Still, to use an old excusing chestnut, they were trapped in their immediate circumstances, and wanted to try something new, according to a protestant and new philosophical sensibility. I am happy that they did. But obviously the race thing is baked in to the whole country, sadly.

As for other cultural degeneracy, some of them might have privately conceived of a world of BDSM sex dungeons and private infamies - they did mostly own slaves, and the Marquis de Sade was their contemporary. But they had to maintain appearances. Sade at least proves that a very particular and private form of modern degeneracy was at least imaginable back then, to the late 18th century mind.

I don't believe, for example, that the late 18th century American mind had much conception of what we now regard as SJWs, beyond some general conception of sensitive, whining, effeminite, unpleasant people.

I think one purpose of the OP's is to transport a founder to today's world, and hear them say, "I didn't sign up for this shit." This might be quite right.

Perhaps the OP has a negative opinion of Trump, whose verbage is objectively inferior, and I did enthusiastically vote for him.

>>2289043
They would be shocked by the magnitude of the economy and power the US has garnered but would probably not examine that too closely because they would likely see something of the US (emperialism) that would disgust many of them.

Is there anyone from a few hundred or more years ago who wouldn't despise the first world values of today?

>>2289840
>I did enthusiastically vote for him.

your focus on "degeneracy", race mixing, and SJWs made that obvious

File: 506.jpg (60KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 500x500px

>>2290148
Not him but, I only voted for Drumpf b/c I didn't want large swathes of Muslims from a destabilized country coming in here and starting problems.

If Drumpf wasn't elected, Shillary would've fucked us over. And honestly, he was literally the least worst out of all the candidates.

Here, let me give you a quick rundown:
>gary johnson
>literal weed addict, couldn't desribe what aleppo was, and was irrationally hostile against reporters

>jill stein
>inherently good person but is an idiot, vandalized property in the name of "environmentalism"

and the last one
>Evan McMullin
>former CIA agent who essentially has the same platform as Hillary if we look at it closely

Considering the alternatives, this was a nasty election and we couldn't really get anybody else better than Drumpf so I'm afraid you're gonna have to lay off your remarks on my fellow voter, tyvm.

>>2289043
The founding fathers were sick of what the US had become already in their own lifetimes.

First the federalists after the Jeffersonian revolution, and then even Jefferson's new Democratic-Republicans when Andrew Jackson enfranchised the mob.

Nobody at the time of the framing of the US constitution had industrialization and the 19th century middle class in mind when they were envisioning the future. They imagined that there would be a rural natural aristocracy who would be elected not by running for election but by being the most esteemed man of the populace. Formerly politics had been discussed in the letters of the well-born country aristocrats, who would casually slip between English, French, and Ancient Greek in their enlightened correspondence. By the time of their old age politics was almost entirely in the domain of the newspapers to be debated by the up and comer middle class in the tavern halls. The old era of high ideals couldn't survive in the burgeoning age of mass-politics.

The founding fathers grew old and died in a world they didn't understand, and many regretted having a hand in making it.

File: 1457189932794.jpg (15KB, 270x200px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 270x200px

>>2290171
>The founding fathers were sick of what the US had become already in their own lifetimes.

>The founding fathers grew old and died in a world they didn't understand, and many regretted having a hand in making it.

Sources?

>>2290200
John Adams:
>Shortly before he died, Adams reflected his growing pessimism in a letter to Thomas Jefferson: "Public affairs go on pretty much as usual: perpetual chicanery and rather more personal abuse than there used to be...Our American Chivalry is the worst in the world. It has no Laws, no bounds, no definitions; it seems to be all a Caprice."

Hamilton:
> "I disclose to you without reserve the state of my mind. It is discontented and gloomy in the extreme. I consider the cause of good government as having been put to an issue and the verdict against it."

Jefferson:
>I regret that I am now to die in the belief, that the useless sacrifice of themselves by the generation of 1776, to acquire self-government and happiness to their country, is to be thrown away by the unwise and unworthy passions of their sons, and that my only consolation is to be, that I live not to weep over it. If they would but dispassionately weigh the blessings they will throw away, against an abstract principle more likely to be effected by union than by scission, they would pause before they would perpetrate this act of suicide on themselves, and of treason against the hopes of the world. To yourself, as the faithful advocate of the Union, I tender the offering of my high esteem and respect.

File: pessimistic-owl.png (33KB, 300x250px)

33KB, 300x250px

>>2290247
Okay well, was there anyone amongst the Founding Fathers who had praised what the US had become?

File: one of you.png (84KB, 260x312px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 260x312px

>>2290247

Sources?

>>2290125
This
probably utter disappointment

The founding fathers were land owning gentry who imagined the United States as a country of small land-owners.

Industrialization was against that very idea. Thomas Jefferson hated factories and basically said that wage labor is anti-freedom and create dependence and immorality.

Think about the early united States government as intended for a medieval yeomanry society in an era were that very concept was dying.