Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: "The Humanitarian with the Guillotine", a tool to help bring liberals to our side

  1. #1

    "The Humanitarian with the Guillotine", a tool to help bring liberals to our side

    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
    Follow me on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram
    I am an investigative journalist for Ben Swann's Truth in Media
    Check out my liberty-friendly experimental rock/punk/metal band Look What I Did



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    Quote Originally Posted by BarryDonegan View Post
    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.
    Dude, I'm rich! Check out this tin can! Uber wealth, ftw!

  4. #3

  5. #4
    It's a great book, only $1.99 on kindle!:

    http://www.amazon.com/The-God-Machin.../dp/B002VBWIME

    "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.
    Based on the idea of natural rights, government secures those rights to the individual by strictly negative intervention, making justice costless and easy of access; and beyond that it does not go. The State, on the other hand, both in its genesis and by its primary intention, is purely anti-social. It is not based on the idea of natural rights, but on the idea that the individual has no rights except those that the State may provisionally grant him. It has always made justice costly and difficult of access, and has invariably held itself above justice and common morality whenever it could advantage itself by so doing.
    --Albert J. Nock

  6. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by BarryDonegan View Post
    ...they could not have come by the power at all except with the consent and assistance of good people...
    Baloney.

    See also: HOSTILE TAKEOVERS.

    Mistake not POLITE/"civilized" hostile takeovers for CONSENTING.
    Last edited by cheapseats; 01-15-2013 at 01:47 PM.

  7. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by cheapseats View Post
    Baloney.

    See also: HOSTILE TAKEOVERS.
    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?

    How is that possible?

  8. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by helmuth_hubener View Post
    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?

    How is that possible?

    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.
    Last edited by cheapseats; 01-15-2013 at 03:58 PM.

  9. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by helmuth_hubener View Post
    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?

    Point me to ACTIVE REFUSAL TO COOPERATE.



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    It is a good article. The problem is that many Socialists believe this to be about others.
    The wisdom of Swordy:

    On bringing the troops home
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    They are coming home, all the naysayers said they would never leave Syria and then they said they were going to stay in Iraq forever.

    It won't take very long to get them home but it won't be overnight either but Iraq says they can't stay and they are coming home just like Trump said.

    On fighting corruption:
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    Trump had to donate the "right way" and hang out with the "right people" in order to do business in NYC and Hollyweird and in order to investigate and expose them.
    Fascism Defined

  12. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by cheapseats View Post
    Point me to ACTIVE REFUSAL TO COOPERATE.
    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.

    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.
    Last edited by helmuth_hubener; 01-15-2013 at 03:03 PM.

  13. #11
    Originally Posted by cheapseats
    Point me to ACTIVE REFUSAL TO COOPERATE.
    Quote Originally Posted by helmuth_hubener View Post
    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.

    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."
    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.

    By your reasoning, rape victims who do fight/resist unto their deaths had TACIT CONSENSUAL SEX.


    Good people have enabled evil people throughout history, by asking them to initiate force on their behalf.
    Good people have enabled evil people throughout history, and are doing so as I type.

    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.


    Most people in the United States support the idea of there being a nation-state ruling over them.
    A little something Anarchists should bear in mind, particularly when election seasons are in full swing.
    Last edited by cheapseats; 01-17-2013 at 11:39 AM.

  14. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by cheapseats View Post
    You conflate ABSENCE OF ACTIVE REFUSAL with CONSENT.
    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.

    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.

  15. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by helmuth_hubener View Post
    It's not actual consent,
    PERIOD.


    ...but it's something.
    It's the COERCED end of Coercion, the EXTORTED end of Extortion, the BULLIED end of Bullying, the ABUSED end of Abuse of Power.

    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.
    Last edited by cheapseats; 01-15-2013 at 07:49 PM.

  16. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by cheapseats View Post
    It's the COERCED end of Coercion, the EXTORTED end of Extortion, the BULLIED end of Bullying, the ABUSED end of Abuse of Power.

    It's the TERRIFIED end of TERRORISM, I do believe.
    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.



Similar Threads

  1. Maine Gov. LePage: Bring back the guillotine
    By Suzanimal in forum Maine
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 01-26-2016, 07:46 PM
  2. Pentagon Report Reveals US "Created" ISIS As A "Tool"
    By Origanalist in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-25-2015, 11:22 AM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-01-2013, 02:43 PM
  4. "I've got one tool, that tool is to beat people up and take them to jail."
    By Anti Federalist in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 07-11-2013, 10:11 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •