Flutterby™! : Declaration of Independence 2005-07-04 15:49:47.9939+00

Declaration of Independence

2005-07-04 15:49:47.9939+00 by Dan Lyke 12 comments

Because I think it deserves re-reading at least once a year, and today is as good a day as any: The Declaration of Independence of the Thirteen Colonies.

We're going to hop on the tandem and go to the local fire department fundraiser breakfast, take a little longer ride, then hang out for the Woodacre Parade.

#Comment Re: made: 2005-07-04 22:41:38.329654+00 by: ziffle [edit history]

I for one do appreciate it that you reprint this each year - its always well worth rereading.

"But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."

This phrase has some meaning today. The results of the Kelo decision, and others before it and others sure to come ,may leave the only recourse as another revolution or civil war.

The mention of the savage indians should not be forgottten - today everyone is all wrapped up in glorifying the indians and how nice they were, etc., but in fact thay were vicious, as he mentions.

#Comment Re: "Dont let it go" made: 2005-07-04 23:51:02.273588+00 by: ziffle [edit history]

The blogger says: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

One of the last things Ayn Rand worked on before her death was planning a collection of essays that would be published as Philosophy: Who Needs It. The collection begins with her address to the graduating class at West Point in 1974, and ends with her 1971 essay "Don't Let It Go." This final essay attempted to predict Americas future based upon an assessment of its present course of action, conscious convictions, and sense of life. This essay concludes:

Can this country achieve a peaceful rebirth in the foreseeable future? By all precedents, it is not likely. But America is an unprecedented phenomenon. In the past, American perseverance became, on occasion, too long-bearing a patience. But when Americans turned, they turned. What may happen to the welfare state is what happened to the Prohibition Amendment.

Is there enough of the American sense of life left in people under the constant pressure of the cultural-political efforts to obliterate it? It is impossible to tell. But those of us who hold it, must fight for it. We have no alternative: we cannot surrender this country to a zero—to men whose battle cry is mindlessness.

We cannot fight against collectivism, unless we fight against its moral base: altruism. We cannot fight against altruism, unless we fight against its epistemological base: irrationalism. We cannot fight against anything, unless we fight for something—and what we must fight for is the supremacy of reason, and a view of man as a rational being.

These are philosophical issues. The philosophy we need is a conceptual equivalent of America's sense of life. To propagate it, would require the hardest intellectual battle. But isn't that a magnificent goal to fight for? [A. Rand, "Don't Let It Go," Philosophy: Who Needs It (New York: New American Library, 1982), p. 214-215.]

It hasn't gotten bad enough for 'average' people to sacrifice their cushy lifestyles to re-engineer the country. And those on the dole.. well they are getting FAR more than they deserve. It'll take critical mass for a true rebellion and things haven't gotten bad enough yet for that to happen.

One: All of a sudden enough right thinking people whom would normally shun politics get involved, touting an agenda that, at that time, finally makes sense to enough people.. and they become the dominant party and real changes take affect over 10-25 years.

Two: The government gets completely out of control, and violent rebellion comes from either the corporate sector (those companies who still operate in the USA and have an interest here..) and/or the general population. The question is, can and will the US military supress an armed rebellion of it's own people if the cause is just.

Three: Our own military siezes control. Having grown up a military brat, and having served myself, I probably think higher than most of our military commanders than most Flutterbarians and don't think this is that bad an option. Tigher borders, less 'free' trade, less welfare.. I may be delusional, but I see it better than option 2.

I've served too, and I can't say that I'd be more comfortable having some of my former co-soldiers in charge than I would be with many civilians I know.

Re alternative #3: didn't Heinlein already suggest this in >i>Starship Troopers?

Shawn, while admittedly, my experience with 'upper echelon' officers (colonel and above) outside the medical corp was minimal (I hung with a lot of officers that were doc's), I'd have to say that dispite the way they are often portrayed on bad TV movies.. I did get to know some serious military types, squadron commanders, artillery officers, etc..(no they were not angels). They left me with positive feelings about their motives, psychology, and judgement. I content that most of the socio-political snafu's that the military gets themselves into are direct or in-direct result of the political machine that controls the military.

Petronious, partially true, although maybe more in the book than the bad movie that was made. I'll have to re-read the book (it was so long ago..). At times, I can be a cold hard SOB, and am probably a hypocrite while being so. I have often thought that being a USA Citizen should be something earned.. It should be easy to earn it, ie: being born here. Doing something productive for our society. - But I wonder about our parasitical welfare caste should have as much 'vote' as those who put into our society.

And in my world, anyone who served, even as little as I did, gets a little extra respect and priviledge, at least from me, anyway.

I'd look less far than Starship Troopers

: We could use Chile as an example of what happens when the military decides it can do things better. And there are plenty of other examples, most of them worse.

However, I can see plenty of arguments towards requiring military sarvice, ala Switzerland or Israel, and I think that ends up at the better end of the continuum you propose.

I'd also like to offer up a terminology suggestion: When people talk about dismantling "the welfare state", the image that's immediately invoked is turning single mothers out onto the street. I think that "the entitlement state" is a phrase which is more inclusive to the many other types of "welfare" we need to eliminate. For instance: I'll sit and listen to (and probably even cheer) arguments that military spending should be the huge majority of federal spending, but right now a lot of that is spent not based on what makes the military more effective, but on whose home district it enriches. Similarly, large companies have lobbying arms, Microsoft

recently admitted to paying that hatemonger Ralph Reed quite a bit of money every year to influence legislation in their direction.

And maybe I'll find a way in which I can talk about some of my recent experiences with "the welfare state" end of things without leaving Google droppings that could come back and bite some of those involved, especially since some of those involved are children.

Oh yeah: I'd also add that my revelation about politics in this last election was in watching the stance of Howard Dean

. He brought home to me very strongly that parties don't set policy, parties try to adopt policy to attract voters. As much as I'd like to see a revolution in politics, if the attitudes of enough people change such that a viable new party could be formed, one of the existing parties will have changed its platform to adopt those voters first.

#Comment Re: made: 2005-07-05 16:58:08.063822+00 by: meuon [edit history]

You mean like how the fundementlists have become dominant in the Republican party.. and caused it to change. And, you are right 'entitlement state' is a better choice of words.. but some of those single mom's SHOULD be working somewhere.

A good friend of ours is working for a social organization in Dalton and was just commenting that for most of the kids they ended up dealing with in a foster home situation that they were getting close to $100 a day in funds, per kid. And the kids even got some "pocket money" out of the deal. Dang, that's more than I make some days.

After this previous month, I'm strongly of the opinion that, by allowing and even encouraging the circumstances which brought on the poverty in the first place, welfare programs make the situations worse. So, yeah, I group "welfare" under "entitlement", but by saying "entitlement" you head off the "what about corporate welfare" and "defense budget allocation by region" whines; it's a quick leap to say "yeah, they feel like they're entitled to something that isn't theirs too."

#Comment Re: made: 2005-07-06 13:32:43.702335+00 by: Shawn [edit history]

meuon; I'm not so concerned about officers (most of the ones I knew were good ~~guys~~ people) as I am with the rank-and-file. Unfortunately, most of the troops I saw and dealt with were not ones whose judgement I would trust in such a matter. (There, now I've alienated all my former range buddies.)

That said, I've also felt that a period of mandatory service would be a Good Thing for our citizenry. While I generally don't follow the military mindset, I found it to be a very educational experience.

2-6 years away from the parents, forced to work as a team against your will,, take care of yourself.. some education and exercise, travelling to far away places, meeting interesting people and sometimes killing them. Yep.. should be required for everyone. :) - It is a perspective changer.