Would *you* sign this statement?

[crashm1]

I recognized it also, mostly because TFL and THR have made me much more politically conscience and forced me to examine my beliefs and how they line up with the founders. I have always tended to be a libertarian (probably from reading too much Heinlein as a kid) but have gotten much more so in the last few years. I would sign it and be proud to do so.

[larvatus]

I am suggesting that we, including the self-identified libertarians, have sure moved a long way away from the kind of thinking that founded our nation.

Our nation was founded in 1776 by self-identified liberals hewing to the thought of James Harrington, John Locke, and Charles de Montesquieu. Political libertarianism was first articulated over a century later. What reasons can you offer for believing that a failure to endorse its doctrines represents a move away from the kind of thinking that founded our nation?

[azredhawk44]

What reasons can you offer for believing that a failure to endorse its doctrines represents a move away from the kind of thinking that founded our nation?

I don't think she's talking in abstract political philosophies... she's talking about specific incidents that could be construed as "a long chain of abuses and usurpations," and the dichotomy of our response today to it versus the responses of our forefathers 233 years ago.

She's talking about the Coercive/Intolerable Acts compared against the Patriot Act. The Stamp Act or Tea Tax versus the proposals of certain congresscritters to nationalize 401(k)'s or double the capital gains tax. She's talking about the 1774-75 seizure by Cornwallis of local militia cannon, powder and shot versus the 86 FOPA, the 94 AWB and a potential 2009 AWB-II.

How did the Colonials respond?

Intolerable Acts: They held their meetings in pure spite of the law, passed their own regulations/rules and governed themselves... the Crown be damned.

Tea Tax: They maliciously destroyed the entire shipment of the East India Trading Company as protest.

Arms Seizure: We all know what happened on April 19th, 1775. And folks... it wasn't about individual muskets or the 1/2 pound of powder in each home. It was about large stores equivalent to the guy who has 100K rounds of ammo and a gross of SKS's in his garage. It was about cannon. It was about implements of war. Basically, it was about the equivalent of class 3 weaponry and assault rifles.

How do we respond now? Consider our responses so far.

[johnwilliamson062]

There were only about 2500 or so troops in New England in 1775. Most of them were stationed in Boston at the barracks there or in the Navy's fleet

Enlisted men were not quartered. Many officers were with wealthy families.

http://www.usconstitution.net/declarsigndata.html
What was the second most common profession of signers of the DoI?
Merchant, actually wholesalers of imports. Many of the other signers were involved in the trade through stocks. They were getting pinched as domestic supplies, although inferior, became more popular.

Tea Tax: They maliciously destroyed the entire shipment of the East India Trading Company as protest.

Do you propose we destroy a whole shipment of food stamps? Turn over car transports if they bail out "not even trying to be competitive Detroit" AGAIN.
I might be willing to play.

It was about cannon. It was about implements of war.

The only thing US civilians would really need at this point is shoulder fired missiles to attack helicopters. Even that can be gotten around by bump firing an air net. The Vietcong and Al Quaida proved that, at least with full auto rifles. Accuracy is not imperative for an air net, so imagine bump firing would be effective. It just isn't pretty. At a price of about $38,000 I doubt too many would be laying around anyways. If it comes to it enough GIs would be interested in bars and industrious women a few would show up.

[larvatus]

How do we respond now? Consider our responses so far.

Our real responses tend to go both ways. The security of our mortgages and retirement funds is inextricably intertwined with grossly leveraged financial instruments that precipitate trillion dollar bailouts and catalyze double digit tax increases. Is any of that unconstitutional? I fully expect the Supreme Court to hand down its rulings in the wake of its restaffing by the current crop of redistributionist officials.

[Tennessee Gentleman]

I didn't realize that it was the DOI rewritten in modern english usage and I will be honest about it. But it really doesn't matter as I would not sign it today.

The problem with history however is always context when applied to current times.

In 1776 the document had meaning, but to use it in 2008 is out of historical context. We are not suffering under anything remotely the same as we did as a colony of England with zero representation in government in 1776. Today our government is elected by us and it was not in 1776.

[johnwilliamson062]

Internationally the American Revolution is often referred to as The Revolution of babies or whiners.
The American Revolution launched long before other revolutions have(condition wise). I still agree that we are currently at a much higher standard of living than in 176, and until that changes there will be no revolution.

[Wildalaska]

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

WildonlytheuniverseisetenralandnoteventhatAlaska TM

[King Ghidora]

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

That's the most relevant undocumented quotation I've seen in this thread yet. Seriously we have crossed the bridge of self governance long ago and found ourselves lacking in many ways. If you pay attention to one of the regular "who's the vice president" man in the street polls that we are entertained with you'll know that if democracy (or a constitutional republic) is failing it's because ordinary citizens will not do their part if their life is soft enough.

Most of the revolutionaries in 1776 were driven by a daydreamer's politics instead of greed. Yes they were upset with certain things not the least of which was having officers quartered in private homes. It wasn't so much the number of officers so lodged but rather the manner in which they acted in those private homes treating the owners as part of their staff of servants. The tax levels might have been low but so were profit margins. For many a 3% tax meant the difference in Monticello or the ghetto.

But by far the revolution was a romantic endeavor spurred on by Thomas Paine's "Common Sense" which was ubiqutous in the colonies. Very few colonials had read Locke or Hume but almost all of them could quote the romantic writing and thinking of Paine. It was as much about class envy as anything else but in their case they had reason to envy the upper classes. That's the one thing that stands out as the greatest accomplishment of the revolution. We were given the chance to rise above class distinctions. It isn't easy now but it certainly is possible.

It was classical liberalism. It bears little resemblence to modern liberalism. In fact modern conservatism is closer to it. Today the man who wants to "conserve" the values of our past is the one who's trying to hang on to the revolutionary values of days gone by.

What we quickly learned was that the new boss was just as corrupt as the old boss. By the time of Andrew Jackson corruption in Washington was set in stone. From the violation of treaties with the Native Americans to land grabs in the Appalachians and beyond the Washington scene was quickly dominated by lobbyists and politicians. Witness the quote of Davey Crockett after his old friend, Andy Jackson, had stabbed him in the back politically and caused him to lose his seat in Congress. He said, "You all can go to hell, I'm going to Texas." And he took much of the old romantic republican spirit with him and it died with him at the Alamo.

What we should be concerned about is what follows the mess we have now if we should happen to revolt. The great thing about the American Revolution is that there was a well known plan for a new style of government that was extremely popular in the colonies. If we only have the desire to overthrow a corrupt government we'll quickly disintegrate into a banana republic mold where one revolution follows another with the results always being the same. "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss".

It might become necessary to overthrow the government some day but that will be the beginning of a very tough time in America. We just can't guarantee a moral government will be instituted here. In fact we can be sure it won't be. That's just human nature and swapping one set of corrupt politicians for another won't change a thing.

We have about the best government any country can have here in the USA. That might not always be true but sadly it is true now. I wish it weren't so but it is. The land of milk and honey we all dream of is on the other side of the River Jordan where the streets are paved with gold and you enter through a pearlescent gate.

Would I sign it? Probably because it's true. It just isn't practical. Still I wouldn't want to be the one that stood in the way if it did turn out to be possible.

[larvatus]

That's the most relevant undocumented quotation I've seen in this thread yet.

Peter Townshend, The Who, "Won't Get Fooled Again", 1971

[Bartholomew Roberts]

I am suggesting that we, including the self-identified libertarians, have sure moved a long way away from the kind of thinking that founded our nation.

Have we? I think one significant difference is that the citizens of the colonies had no representation in Parliament and no vote in the affairs of the day. Would our Founding Fathers have felt as outraged if most of their fellow citizens had voted for such a tax?

As you already noted, many of the men involved in the Revolution were leaders of their communities. They played an active role in their local governments and were skilled at the logisitics and communications necessary to succeed in politics at that time. Had they been allowed a vote, there is no question they would have represented a significant faction even in a parliamentary system.

I think this is another reason our Revolution was successful when so many others were not. Not only were we given a structure and a stable environment to slowly develop a "shadow" government in the midst of the same government we would later oppose, we also learned the logistics and communications that are necessary to any successful war effort.

This is one reason why I think revolt has been less of a feature in our political system. We essentially have a major revolt every four years and minor revolts every two years. Although these don't have the violent aftermath and destruction of infrastructure as a real civil war, they require mastery of many of the same skills - such as logistics and communication. This one reason why I believe a revolution would be futile as long as this system is accurately reflecting its representative nature - if you had the necessary numbers and skills in logistics and communication to win a war, you could much more easily win a political campaign and without the instability, risk or damage that accompanies a war.

One thing all gun owners should be working on is that logistics and communications aspect. Our founding fathers were leaders and respected men in our communities. We should be as well if we want to be in a position to protect RKBA with either guns or votes - and simply by virtue of taking on those leadership responsibilities, we will learn skills that will serve us well whether we fight with votes or guns.

[King Ghidora]

Peter Townshend, The Who, "Won't Get Fooled Again", 1971

From Won't Get Fooled Again on the Who's Next album produced by The Who, associate producer Glyn Johns. A complete quotation credit requires all the pertinent info.

Still one of the best ever.

[johnwilliamson062]

a revolution would be futile as long as this system is accurately reflecting its representative nature

The problem is the system no longer represents the tax payers. In our present system the kids tell the parents what their allowance will be. I am tired of 35+% of my money going to things that I have no influence over and serve no long term benefit to this country. Tax payers are footing the bill and bums are making the decisions.

Think about how much you really pay in taxes:
Federal, state and local income 25-45%
Sales of 4-10% of what is left over.
Gas tax from .25 to .75 per gallon
Property tax
estate tax
excise taxes on cars, firearms, cigarettes, alcohol, and others.
All the government fees you pay for licenses(driving, hunting, fishing, zoning teaching, firearms transfers and FFLs,etc)

All these other taxes besides income add up to well over 10% of your income. So next time you think about what your income tax is, add 10% to get a true figure.

Just wait until they implement a value added sales tax which drops the sales tax onto goods purchased for resale. How does wild feel about paying sales tax when those guns come in the door and still collecting it when they go out?

The more I think about it the more less I am opposed to a new Boston Tea Party.

[larvatus]

The problem is the system no longer represents the tax payers.

U.S. tax rates rank among the lowest in the world. Civil society costs money. Low taxes in Somalia go hand in hand with tolls exacted by warlords. All in all, I prefer paying the state to mitigate violence and corruption.

[azredhawk44]

All in all, I prefer paying the state to mitigate violence and corruption.

How does social security, medicare, department of housing and urban development, unemployment, and the host of other "suck from the teat" programs mitigate violence or corruption?

Because that stuff accounts for between 30 and 40 percent of your tax load right now.

I see that 700 Billion dollar bailout is mitigating a LOT of corruption.

The parts of government that mitigate violence and corruption are the first 25% of your current tax load.

[Wildalaska]

We'll be fighting in the streets
With our children at our feet
And the morals that they worship will be gone
And the men who spurred us on
Sit in judgement of all wrong
They decide and the shotgun sings the song

I'll tip my hat to the new constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around me
Pick up my guitar and play
Just like yesterday
Then I'll get on my knees and pray
We don't get fooled again

The change, it had to come
We knew it all along
We were liberated from the foe, that's all
And the world looks just the same
And history ain't changed
'Cause the banners, they all flown in the last war

I'll tip my hat to the new constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around me
Pick up my guitar and play
Just like yesterday
Then I'll get on my knees and pray
We don't get fooled again
No, no!

I'll move myself and my family aside
If we happen to be left half alive
I'll get all my papers and smile at the sky
For I know that the hypnotized never lie

Do ya?

YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!

There's nothing in the street
Looks any different to me
And the slogans are replaced, by-the-bye
And the parting on the left
Is now the parting on the right
And the beards have all grown longer overnight

I'll tip my hat to the new constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around me
Pick up my guitar and play
Just like yesterday
Then I'll get on my knees and pray
We don't get fooled again
Don't get fooled again
No, no!

YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!

Meet the new boss
Same as the old boss

The most intelligent rock and roll song ever written. Folks like Trotsky and Danton would testify to that, if they were still alive.

WildbecarefulofwhatyouwishforitmaycometrueAlaska ™

[johnwilliamson062]

U.S. tax rates rank among the lowest in the world.

not representing my interest, or the interests of other taxpayers, has nothing to do with the rates. If all this tax money was going into huge infrastructure projects that would set us up as the world leader for the next 50 years I would be ok with it. Instead it is just going down the drain. Anyone notice highways have more potholes? Our telecom infrastructure is now behind many third world countries as they never invested in copper lines and leapfrogged us. Our electrical grid is plagued with brown outs. Our ports are insufficient for current demand. Many of our airports will be undersized if people ever have the money to fly again. Our railroads are in terrible shape.

But its ok, as long as we buy American from firms who are terribly inefficient and producing inferior goods all our problems will be solved.

[larvatus]

How does social security, medicare, department of housing and urban development, unemployment, and the host of other "suck from the teat" programs mitigate violence or corruption?

As our Social Security Administration put it,

Germany's Chancellor, Otto von Bismarck ... was motivated to introduce social insurance in Germany both in order to promote the well-being of workers in order to keep the German economy operating at maximum efficiency, and to stave-off calls for more radical socialist alternatives. Despite his impeccable right-wing credentials, Bismarck would be called a socialist for introducing these programs, as would President Roosevelt 70 years later. In his own speech to the Reichstag during the 1881 debates, Bismarck would reply: "Call it socialism or whatever you like. It is the same to me."

So there you have it. If we must have socialism for the bankers, we damn better have socialism for the bums. The middle class can take it in the shorts.

[johnwilliamson062]

social security as originally proposed by Roosevelt and Bismark would not be a problem.

Our Social security is entirely invested in T-bills. All it is is a piggy bank for the government to get cheap loans from. Same goes for FDIC. Member banks pay money into a fund which buy non-liquid t-bills and there is nothing really there to back it. Both just Washington houses of card.

[removed as was off topic and aggressive.]

BTW in the last week I have had three people come to me with questions about firearms for home defense who were quite startled at feeling they needed one..

[larvatus]

Our Social security is entirely invested in T-bills. All it is a piggy bank for the government to get cheap loans from. Same goes for FDIC. Member banks pay money into a fund which buy non-liquid t-bills and there is nothing really there to back it. Both just Washington houses of card.

Do you really need anyone to explain this? Here is one principle at work:

because it’s there! The famous mountaineer George Leigh Mallory (1886-1924), when asked why he wanted to climb Mount Everest, replied, ‘Because it’s there!’ Mallory failed to reach the top, and vanished in the attempt. Edmund (later Sir Edmund) Hillary became, in 1953, the first man to succeed, and when asked why he had wanted to try, also replied, ‘Because it was there!’ It could be argued that it was Hillary who re-popularised the phrase and promoted it from famous saying to c.p. (It is illuminating to compare the various dictionaries of quotations: and salutary to conclude that to dogmatise is to risk a ‘final verdict’.) But it only really became a c.p. when it was humorously or wryly advanced as ‘a foolish reason for a foolish act’, mostly among those who were conscious of the origin.
—Eric Partridge, Paul Beale, A Dictionary of Catch Phrases, Routledge, 1986, p. 44

And here is another, even more pointed, albeit less authentic:

Willie SUTTON American bank robber (1901-80)
On being asked why he kept on robbing banks:
Because that’s where the money is.
Attributed remark. Philip French touched on this topic in The Observer (8 October 2000): There is a mysterious kind of movie title that is not explained in the film itself and demands some special knowledge. A Clockwork Orange, Straw Dogs and O Brother, Where Art Thou? are examples. The amiable Where the Money Is… belongs in this category. Nobody uses the phrase in the film and, surprisingly, it is not in any dictionary of quotations that I possess. But it is generally attributed to the legendary American criminal Willie Sutton, who spent most of his life in jail and the rest of it planning heists. Asked in old age why he persisted in robbing banks, Willie replied: ‘Because that’s where the money is’ and it is clear that Henry, the elderly thief played by Paul Newman, is modelled on Willie Sutton. As it happens, Sutton (who has been described as ‘The most publicized bank robber since Jesse James’) told CBS TV’s Sixty Minutes (8 August 1976) that, in fact, a reporter made it up and attributed it to him. His book I, Willie Sutton (1953) apparently does contain the observation: ‘It is a rather pleasant experience to be alone in a bank at night.’
Compare the similar-sounding proverbial sayings, ‘Marry for love, but love where there is money’ and ‘Never marry for money, but marry where money is.’ Tennyson’s dialect poem ‘Northern Farmer, New Style’ contains this dialect version:

But I knaw’d a Quaāker feller as often ‘as towd ma this:
‘Doānt thou marry for munny, but goā wheer munny is!’

According to Quotations for Our Time, ed. Laurence J. Peter (1977), John F. Kennedy, when asked why he wanted to be President, replied: ‘Because that’s where the power is!’
—Nigel Rees, Brewer’s Famous Quotations: 5000 Quotations and the Stories Behind Them, Sterling, 2006, p. 450

The determination of whether our government is acting in the capacity of famous mountaineers or infamous bank robbers is left as an exercise for the reader.

Now defend the others.

I have no intention of defending anything:

Cum igitur animum ad Politicam applicuerim, nihil quod novum, vel inauditum est, sed tantum ea, quae cum praxi optime conveniunt, certa, et indubitata ratione demonstrare, aut ex ipsa humanae naturae conditione deducere, intendi; et ut ea, quae ad hanc scientiam spectant, eadem animi libertate, qua res Mathematicas solemus, inquirerem, sedulo curavi, humanas actiones non ridere, non lugere, neque detestari, sed intelligere: atque adeo humanos affectus, ut sunt amor, odium, ira, invidia, gloria, misericordia, et reliquae animi commotiones, non ut humanae naturae vitia, sed ut proprietates contemplatus sum, quae ad ipsam ita pertinent, ut ad naturam aeris aestus, frigus, tempestas, tonitru, et alia hujusmodi, quae, tametsi incommoda sunt, necessaria tamen sunt, certasque habent causas, per quas eorum naturam intelligere conamur, et Mens eorum vera contemplatione aeque gaudet, ac earum rerum cognitione, quae sensibus gratae sunt.

Therefore, on applying my mind to politics, I have resolved to demonstrate by a certain and undoubted course of argument, or to deduce from the very condition of human nature, not what is new and unheard of, but only such things as agree best with practice. And that I might investigate the subject-matter of this science with the same freedom of spirit as we generally use in mathematics, I have laboured carefully, not to mock, lament, or execrate, but to understand human actions; and to this end I have looked upon passions, such as love, hatred, anger, envy, ambition, pity, and the other perturbations of the mind, not in the light of vices of human nature, but as properties, just as pertinent to it, as are heat, cold, storm, thunder, and the like to the nature of the atmosphere, which phenomena, though inconvenient, are yet necessary, and have fixed causes, by means of which we endeavour to understand their nature, and the mind has just as much pleasure in viewing them aright, as in knowing such things as flatter the senses.
—Benedict Spinoza, Tractatus Politicus, Caput I, §IV, translated by A.H. Gosset

[Tennessee Gentleman]

What was this thread about originally?

[johnwilliamson062]

Tennessee,
we are starting a revolution, right? I was waiting for you to ship the document to my FFL tucked down the barrel of a rifle for me to sign.

[Wildalaska]

Spinoza, in Latin...and The Who...all in one thread.

WildgodilovethisplaceAlaska TM

[azredhawk44]

Now, if you DID happen to sign Pax's Declaration... and you lived through the revolution(s) that followed, and had influence over the governmental structure to come about afterwards:

How would you feel about this?

We the Citizens of these United States come together to empower a government. Our stated goals are to provide for harmoneous and peaceful coexistence for member states of our Union, create standards of justice, enforce those standards with powers granted to the government, and provide for the common defense. To accomplish these goals, as well as to act as a defender of liberty for all generations to follow, we hereby present this article emobodying the government structure for these United States of America.

[Tennessee Gentleman]

John,

Well, if we did start a revolution and then fast forwarded 100 years later I suspect we would be where we are now. I am too complacent to participate in a revolution anyway.