If you know any college-educated liberals who can read through sophisticated stuff like this, please show them "The Humanitarian with the Guillotine" by Isabel Patterson.
I first heard about her in a speech by Friedman, check this one out.
http://mises.org/story/2739
it would be great if mises.org made pastable links (dynamic links often get rejected from message boards) to their "authors" pages.Quote:
Originally Posted by BarryDonegan
Bump for a great essay.
It's a great book, only $1.99 on kindle!:
http://www.amazon.com/The-God-Machin.../dp/B002VBWIME
Quote:
"Having read Isabel Patterson [sic], I was not only influenced but convinced that a philosophy that embraced personal liberty, private property, and sound money was the only political philosophy worth championing." -- Ron Paul in "End The Fed"
The God of the Machine "does for capitalism what Das Kapital does for the Reds and what the Bible did for Christianity." -- Ayn Rand
In "The God of the Machine," Isabel Paterson makes a comprehensive case arguing in favor of individual rights, free trade, and free markets. Considered a foundational work on the subject of individualism and libertarianism, it is said to have influenced Ayn Rand, Russel Kirk, William F. Buckley, and Ron Paul.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BarryDonegan
Baloney.Quote:
...they could not have come by the power at all except with the consent and assistance of good people...
See also: HOSTILE TAKEOVERS.
Mistake not POLITE/"civilized" hostile takeovers for CONSENTING.
So a very tiny, tiny number of people are somehow managing to boss and push around hundreds of millions of people who are all actively refusing to cooperate with them?Quote:
Originally Posted by cheapseats
How is that possible?
Quote:
Originally Posted by helmuth_hubener
How is it possible that HOUSE OF WINDSOR, rooted in Hostile Takeover, is acknowledged by British millions and global billions to have a RIGHT to the throne of England...INCLUDING bejeweled finery and an other-era empire?
Beats me.
I'll grant there is some consent-read-that-acceptance of imperial crapola now/still, but British citizens protested bankster bailouts just like we did and they protested the Iraq War HARDER than we did...for all the good it did them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by helmuth_hubener
Point me to ACTIVE REFUSAL TO COOPERATE.
It is a good article. The problem is that many Socialists believe this to be about others.
Exactly. There's nowhere (or very few places) for me to point. The people are not actively refusing to cooperate. Thus, the rulers can rule.Quote:
Originally Posted by cheapseats
The rulers need at least tacit consent. At least the level of consent that says "I'm going to go along with this, I'm not going to stick my neck out." Without at least that minimal level of support, the rulers can't rule. Even the most totalitarian state, the Soviet Union for example, ultimately depends on the cooperation of the people. Lose that, and your rule collapses.
Good people have enabled evil people throughout history, by asking them to initiate force on their behalf. Most people in the United States support the idea of there being a nation-state ruling over them. We need to change that. If we do, history changes. Good things happen. Freedom ensues.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cheapseats
Point me to ACTIVE REFUSAL TO COOPERATE.
You conflate ABSENCE OF ACTIVE REFUSAL with CONSENT. When eviscerating fines &/or incarceration (with all that THAT implies, including Torture & Indefiniteness) are the options to going along, going along does NOT constitute tacit consent.Quote:
Originally Posted by helmuth_hubener
By your reasoning, rape victims who do fight/resist unto their deaths had TACIT CONSENSUAL SEX.
Good people have enabled evil people throughout history, and are doing so as I type.Quote:
Good people have enabled evil people throughout history, by asking them to initiate force on their behalf.
When you say good people ask evil people to initiate force on their behalves, you are myopically referring to TAXES FOR SOCIAL SERVICES. Certainly SOME people wanted/applauded the invasion of Iraq, but I don't think a majority. NOTHING like a majority asked for TARP, and millions of Americans strenuously objected.
A little something Anarchists should bear in mind, particularly when election seasons are in full swing.Quote:
Most people in the United States support the idea of there being a nation-state ruling over them.
It's not actual consent, as in libertarian theory and "the consent of the governed," but it's something. I called it "tacit consent" or cooperation or support. Real consent can make things legitimate, true. It's not that type of consent which I and the quote you objected to were necessarily talking about.Quote:
Originally Posted by cheapseats
However, there is some actual consent going on as well. Most people support most of the things that the government does. Make a big long list of a thousand things that gov't does, and ask people to mark the ones they think gov't should stop doing. You will not get many marks.
You bring up the Iraq War. Actually, opinion polls at the time showed Americans overwhelmingly supported the war. I remember. It was disgusting. You are right about TARP and the bailouts, opinion polls showed people were overwhelmingly against that, but how against it were they, really? Most voters voted for one of two candidates for President who had been very pro-TARP and pro-bailout. Anyway, it's at least an encouraging sign that the people were against TARP and the bailouts, however half-hearted or short-term-memory that opposition turned out to be.
PERIOD.Quote:
Originally Posted by helmuth_hubener
It's the COERCED end of Coercion, the EXTORTED end of Extortion, the BULLIED end of Bullying, the ABUSED end of Abuse of Power.Quote:
...but it's something.
It's the TERRIFIED end of TERRORISM, I do believe.
We ARE tacitly refusing to stand up to them. Considering the potential penalties, COWARDICE is a little harsh...but Cowardice is closer to the truth than Consent.
Fear of getting BADLY-to-reeeeeally-badly hurt is RATIONAL. Doing what it takes to NOT get badly-to-uber-badly hurt is SOMETHING, as you say, but it is not Consent.
The latest back-room "deal" (no consent, no representation, no participation) gave millions of dollars of "relief" to RUM PRODUCERS in Puerto Rico & the U.S. Virgin Islands. I'm sure Rum Producers, Puerto Ricans, Virgin Islanders & an elite few others were onboard with that discriminatory windfall, but "THE GOOD PEOPLE" can hardly be said to have consented.
Well put. I do agree with all of this. But you and I will keep fighting them, and more and more seem to be joining our ranks all the time. Here's to the day when institutionalized coercion, bullying, abuse, and terrorism end.Quote:
Originally Posted by cheapseats