- Thread starter
- #61
I think Thoreau in the Classic Liberal camp. Hands down.
Individual Liberty V.S. Progressivism. Freedom to decide for yourself in matters of Conscience. Principle before the Arbitrary Rule of the State, the Mechanism. Which is to serve which.
Why the swing from Justice First to The State being Supreme over all else? I understand the State wanting to be in the Right, wanting Right on It's side, but it is inverse, The State, not being Supreme, at best, can be on the side of Right.
Why is the Construct viewed by some as of more value that that for which it was created to serve? Why is convenience and expedience of more value than what is Just? Why not just take the time to get it right? Measure twice, cut once.
Constitutions are about Values, Principles, Ideals, which are Broad sensed, true enough. We look to root out contradictions, giving value and position to what is relevant. We learn from error and amend. We Strengthen Individual Liberty in the service of Truth and Justice, not seek to strip it. The States, the People, the Commerce are not to be treated as Hostile enemies of the Federal System without Cause and Due Process. When you think Sacrifice, start with Yourself from within. It is not for one to demand Sacrifice from another, that is not sacrifice at all, but surrender. Someone taking from another without consent, is not sacrifice, it is theft. No construct is Greater than the Principle it was designed to serve. When that Principle is violated, the Trust is Violated. When the Construct has need, it presents It's case, and regardless of the outcome, it does It's best within the means it has to work with.
[4] After all, the practical reason why, when the power is once in the hands of the people, a majority are permitted, and for a long period continue, to rule, is not because they are most likely to be in the right, nor because this seems fairest to the minority, but because they are physically the strongest. But a government in which the majority rule in all cases cannot be based on justice, even as far as men understand it. Can there not be a government in which majorities do not virtually decide right and wrong, but conscience? — in which majorities decide only those questions to which the rule of expediency is applicable? Must the citizen ever for a moment, or in the least degree, resign his conscience to the legislator? Why has every man a conscience, then? I think that we should be men first, and subjects afterward. It is not desirable to cultivate a respect for the law, so much as for the right. Thoreau's Civil Disobedience - 1
Individual Liberty V.S. Progressivism. Freedom to decide for yourself in matters of Conscience. Principle before the Arbitrary Rule of the State, the Mechanism. Which is to serve which.
Why the swing from Justice First to The State being Supreme over all else? I understand the State wanting to be in the Right, wanting Right on It's side, but it is inverse, The State, not being Supreme, at best, can be on the side of Right.
Why is the Construct viewed by some as of more value that that for which it was created to serve? Why is convenience and expedience of more value than what is Just? Why not just take the time to get it right? Measure twice, cut once.
Constitutions are about Values, Principles, Ideals, which are Broad sensed, true enough. We look to root out contradictions, giving value and position to what is relevant. We learn from error and amend. We Strengthen Individual Liberty in the service of Truth and Justice, not seek to strip it. The States, the People, the Commerce are not to be treated as Hostile enemies of the Federal System without Cause and Due Process. When you think Sacrifice, start with Yourself from within. It is not for one to demand Sacrifice from another, that is not sacrifice at all, but surrender. Someone taking from another without consent, is not sacrifice, it is theft. No construct is Greater than the Principle it was designed to serve. When that Principle is violated, the Trust is Violated. When the Construct has need, it presents It's case, and regardless of the outcome, it does It's best within the means it has to work with.
Last edited: