|
|
|
Discussion Forums
Forum Index
> Off Topic
> “Common Sense” by Thomas Paine (1776)
“Common Sense” by Thomas Paine (1776)
@ 01:04 pm (GMT) |
Warwick Marflitthttps://knowitalltoknownothing.com/2018/03/01/common-sense-by-thomas-paine-1776/Government is a badge of lost innocence because it we could restrain our impulses, we wouldn’t need it Freedom & security is the aim & the best form is the one with the greatest benefit & least expensive Society starts without a need for government but as decisions are difficult to make or enforce we need representatives to decide on regulations We become too numerous & too spread out to participate ourselves The elected should never have a different interest from the electors – frequent interchange of elected will assure this Regarding the English Constitution When it was written, the world was overrun with tyranny Absolute governments are simple – the source of suffering & source of relief are the same The English Constitution became so complex that the country could suffer for years without even knowing what the source of it was |
Replies
|
@ 01:23 pm (GMT) |
Warwick MarflittRe: “Common Sense” by Thomas Paine (1776)“Dissertation on First Principles of Government” by Thomas Paine (1795)https://knowitalltoknownothing.com/2018/03/22/dissertation-on-first-principles-of-government-by-thomas-paine-1795/ With election & representation, we must contemplate Man is the origin & evidence of the right – his existence is the right & body is the deed/title Only true basis is equality of rights – one man, one vote Nothing based on land ownership or amount of money held This is Aristocracy, implying inequality of right & who has the right to establish the inequality? Would the rich exclude themselves? Would the poor? Rich has no right to exclude poor & poor have no right to exclude the rich –> robbery of rights Property/money as exclusionary is arbitrary – how much property? How much money? Any amount is arbitrary & ridiculous Any exclusion from right of voting is a stigma on the character of the one excluded Who has the right to say that about anyone? To remove the right is to make a man a slave only justified if the man is a criminal Danger is that if you exclude men, they’ll rebel against that exclusion – they at least have that right It was easy to rule authoritatively when men thought they had no rights or that rights only belonged to a certain class Those days are over, especially since they’ve realized that the true source of wealth in a country comes from farming & manufacturing. Once this was clear, it was impossible to keep them as “inferior” Property will always be unequal Industry, superiority of talents, good management, frugality, good luck, bad luck will always cause differences No need to use terms like “greed” & “oppression” in this vein Some men just hate working hard or looking lowly to earn money. They’ll refer to their method as “honest” while others are “criminal” Banks & commercial organizations have ownership based on percentage of ownership in company, not individually. This shouldn’t be the case for government The protection of a man’s person is more sacred than his property & his performance of work/service & maintaining his family – all the nature of property |
@ 04:33 pm (GMT) |
JOHN HAYSRe: “Common Sense” by Thomas Paine (1776)Warwick, I found this book to be most enlightenmenting: 
|
Please wait
ABOUT USWe are a small, family run business, based out of Taranaki, New Zealand, who specialize in cartridge research and testing, and rifle accurizing.
|
KNOWLEDGEBASE |
KNOWLEDGEBASE |