On Thu, Mar 24, 2005 at 07:31:04AM -0500, paddy wrote:
> Paul M Foster wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 08:14:04PM -0500, Dylan Hardison wrote:
> >
> >
> >>On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 18:42:02 -0500, Paul M Foster
> >
> >
> > <snip>
> snip, snip
>
> If I may throw my $.02 in here the major difference, as I see it, from
> an American vs. European view is contained in the basic documents of
> this country and the philosophies of John Locke and Thomas Hobbs.
>
> The American foundation is found in our Declaration of Independence with
> these words;
>
> " We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created
> equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable
> Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
> --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men,
> deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."
>
> Since the inception of the various European States i.e. governments,
> these considerations were not available to the ordinary or "common" man.
>
> The term commoner itself is derived from those who subsisted from what
> could be grown on land, the use of which was granted by the nobility to
> common people. Ownership of land was reserved to the nobility or other
> robber barons, i.e. the church. That is why ownership of land was
> equated with freedom, because only free men were allowed to own land.
> Others were in various forms of servitude, Middle English vilein, feudal
> serf, person of coarse feelings or serfdom or other not so subtle forms
> of slavery.
>
> The object of European government is and always has been to elevate a
> certain class above all others. Who that class may be varies from time
> to time but the underlying principal of class is omnipresent in Europe.
>
> At the present time the ruling class appears to be the bureaucracy. The
> insidious and ravenous desire of government to tax, tax and yet more
> tax, especially the loathsome Value Added Tax (VAT) is the prime example
> of how European governments reduce the "common man" to a state of
> servitude and elevate the bureaucrats to their rightful peerages, in
> their minds at least.
>
> Thomas Hobbs believed that men are evil by their very nature therefore
> government must be very strict and many laws must be enacted to control
> men or chaos would be the result. People must be made to serve
> government because government was wiser than the individual.
>
> John Locke, on the other hand felt that man was noble by nature and
> governments existed for the purpose of doing collectively what we would
> find difficult trying to accomplish individually.
>
> The same mindset exists today in America and Europe. Europeans have
> never felt free and sovereign (in England the Queen is Sovereign) but
> are used to being subject to government.
>
> Americans are by their constitution, free men and women and government
> is a servant to the people who retain the right to change that
> government whenever they feel the necessity.
>
> The power of regulation is the abandonment of the power to create laws
> by the Legislative Branch of Government to the Administrative Branch.
>
> The end result is the hired hand i.e. "public servant", government
> employee, who is not responsible to anyone, not elected by anyone,
> making laws under which we live and setting conditions of same by permit.
>
> Free men and women by definition have no master. If freedom grants us a
> master less state who then is it that has the right to permit us to do
> anything? Is it the Government? If that is so, then what does the
> state of freedom mean? Free is unconditional. Who then has the right
> and power to add conditions or to put it another way, limitations upon
> our freedom. Surely it is not the government, the institution we create
> and support with our taxes to serve our collective needs? Have we
> granted this power to the people we hire to carry out these functions of
> government? Have we surrendered our freedom to the "hired hands" and if
> so, where is it stated in law or in the constitution?
>
> Both America and Europe have fallen into the trap of regulation being
> good for you. The European has fallen much quicker because they do not
> recognize regulation as a trap as much as a natural condition of
> existence.
>
> The politician likes the idea that they do not have to draft laws that
> are fair, well thought out and equitable. Just a few scribbles on one
> page and let the bureaucrats figure out the details. Then he or she can
> come home to their constituencies and tell everyone what a bang up job
> they did and how they should be sent back and by the way, please add a
> bob or two, oops Euro, to the kitty for the reelection expense, you know.
>
> Socialism sucks! The lazy bastard will always slack off and take at the
> expense of the useful and productive person. I like a world where if
> you don't work, you don't eat. I give to those I feel are in need and I
> give generously, but I damn well know I can figure out how to spend my
> money a lot better that some government employee scum.
I normally wouldn't include an entire post in my reply, but you said
what I meant much more eloquently than I, and from a deeper
understanding of the philosophers of the time than I have. I might
quibble that the classes in Europe are being reduced to the same level,
but I see your point about there being an elevated bureaucratic class.
And just to add a bit more, the Constitution indicates that the rights
of Man are inalienable, not granted by government. The Constitution was
written to delineate and limit the government. A lot of people in this
country instead read our Constitution to mean that certain rights are
granted to us by government, something the Founders would have been
horrified about.
Paul
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 20:02:15 EDT