« Systocrat Paper No. 1 |
Main
| Backcasting From The Hovercar Age »
Fellow Systocrats:
I received an email the other day entitled "Read and Heed Thomas Jefferson,"
which features a number of quotes from our third president intended to demonstrate that Obama's stimulus plan and proposed budget are ill-advised and otherwise straight up "un-American." Yeah. Notably, these "Friends of Jefferson" did not utter a word of protest during the last eight years, despite the fact that ol' Mr. Jefferson, who envisioned America as a republic of small farmers, would have vehemently raised most or all of the points below in objection to the ill-advised policies of the Bush administration, which in 18th century terms most closely resemble those of Alexander Hamilton and his High Federalists.
Where the hell is "Weezie" when you need her? She'd set things straight if she were here. But I digress . . .
Yes, any true fan of Jefferson's legacy would have circulated this email during the Bush years. Yet, the entire text of this email does not appear on the Internet until November 14, 2008, a few days after Obama became president-elect of the U.S.
What's particularly disturbing about this email is that it appears to be inciting the American people to armed rebellion! (Allow me to feign shock and disbelief for a moment . . . ) Gee, now I wonder . . . who stands to lose under Obama's proposed plans to rescue our Bush-whacked economy? Could it be the rich and powerful, who, after 8 years of tax breaks and corporate welfare under Dubya are now contemplating the end of a near unprecedented free-for-all whereby the rich looted the public trust at their pleasure? Hmmm . . . .
Of course, I didn't receive this email from a wealthy person. This email was sent by an individual who will benefit from Obama's proposed budget. Furthermore, my sense is that this email is being circulated exclusively to the non-wealthy, folks like you and me. Apparently, regular folks like us are concerned about Obama's socialist policies. And I hear these people. Gosh, it'd be a real drag to have the government create a job for me when I can't otherwise find one, or to help me stay in my home when I can't pay my mortgage cause I lost my job through no fault of my own, or to not have to choose between paying my mortgage and paying for health care, especially if I have a serious medical condition. Clearly, all of that sucks.
It's not surprising, then, that us regular folks simply aren't buying into all that "socialist" hype, even when a guy like Peter Orszag, director of the Office of Management and Budget, says that Obama's budget "makes the vast majority of Americans much better off."
Now, it's one thing to criticize Obama's massive budget and stimulus plan. I can certainly understand why Obama's plan to restart our economy could be the subject of legitimate, rational non-partisan debate, although personally, I have yet to hear anyone propose a viable alternative.
But armed rebellion? Against the Obama administration? Fought by people who stand to GAIN from his initiatives?
Enough said. Here are the relevant parts of the email, along with my mostly off-the-cuff responses:
Read and Heed Thomas Jefferson
John Kennedy once said to an assembled group of scholars in the White House, " I think this is the most extraordinary collection of talent, of human knowledge, that has ever been gathered at the White House - with the possible exception of when Thomas Jefferson dined alone.
The quotes below could prove his point.
The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.
This is a not-so-veiled stab at Obama's plan to increase taxes for the rich and otherwise divert a larger share of our tax dollars to pay for the "socialist programs" referenced above. To me, though, this quote makes more sense when applied to the last eight years, when Bush and his cronies took from the non-wealthy (those who would work) and gave to the rich (defense and reconstruction contractors, large corporations, etc., i.e. those looking to amass as much wealth as possible with minimum effort).
Plus, there's a difference between those who would not work and those who can't. I think everyone, Obama included, agrees that capable people that refuse to work should not receive a dime in aid.
It is incumbent on every generation to pay its own debts as it goes. A principle which if acted on would save one-half the wars of the world.
I find it simply incredible that after Dubya nearly doubled the outstanding public debt (from approximately 5.7 trillion dollars to approx. 10.7 trillion), largely through irresponsible government spending that did nothing to improve the condition of the vast majority of Americans, the right now claims that we should be more fiscally responsible! Again, where was this email when Bush was spending billions of taxpayer dollars a month on a frivolous war in Iraq? The only remedy for the current economic crisis is to spend in order to create jobs and stimulate lending. Tax cuts do NOT create jobs, and the market is NOT going to correct itself at this point unless we put people to work.
I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.
Again, are we talking about the last eight years, when the Bush administration wasted billions of our tax dollars on a war that was supposed to make us safer? Re: the anticipated "welfare state" argument, see my comments above.
My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government.
Of course, in 1800, nearly every government in the world was either a monarchy or an oligarchy. These days, there are many examples of successful Social Democracies with expansive, state-run "welfare programs" where the standard of living is higher than it is here in the U.S.
No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.
Great idea. Let's turn the entire U.S. into the Wild West, circa 1850-1900. Because as a society, we've clearly demonstrated that private citizens can act responsibly when entrusted with firearms.
Of course, now I'm gonna have to go buy a gun to protect myself against the people who say they need guns to protect themselves from people who want to take their guns away. People like me, I guess. (Sigh).
The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.
Oh, so THAT'S what they were getting at in the last paragraph . . . Let me understand this - after eight years of the rich and powerful in this country diverting our tax dollars into their pockets under every frivolous rationale they could think of, we're only NOW complaining of tyranny because Obama is going to impose a modest tax hike on the richest 5% and otherwise try to improve the standard of living for the average American citizen? Beware, my friends - this is the propaganda of the rich and powerful. These arguments are not being made on your behalf . . .
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
Here, Jefferson is expressing his cautious approval of Shay's Rebellion, an armed uprising of farmers in Massachusetts. These farmers, after unsuccessfully petitioning the MA Senate to reform corrupt lending practices that resulted in mass foreclosures and imprisonment, organized to forcibly prevent courts from entering these judgments.
Am I supposed to understand that a second American revolution, while apparently NOT warranted under Bush, a man that subverted the Constitution in every way he could think of, IS warranted under Obama, who has the unfortunate task of cleaning up the steaming Monticello-sized turd that Dubya left in the Oval Office for him?
Is anyone really buying this crap?
To purchase the Jefferson print featured above, please click here.
Comments
Hi All,
This is a very interesting posting to me. Hats off to the author. Being a Constitutionalists this is nothing new to me.
The leaders of this country have been stomping all over this Republic right from the get go.
I do not know who the "Friends of Jefferson" are but the Constitutionalists were very upset with Mr. Bush and his policies . So maybe we have some common ground to stand on.
First off "The rich and powerful" are the ones who wrote the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The Founding Fathers were "Rich White Men" but they knew in order for a country to throw off the chains of England all men must be set free. The individual rights over the oppression of the state .
You seem to forget that The United States of America is a Republic not a Democracy . Under a Republic the individual rules his/her life. Under a Democracy the majority rule.
The common good is in the eye of the holder .
Under Mr. Peter Orszag statement "makes the vast majority of Americans much better off" is the same thinking that kept slavery alive. It is OK to keep a slave because it is best for the majority of the people. Under a Republic the individuals right to FREEDOM is more important than what is good for the majority. "You are only taxing the top 10%"
My question to you is --what claim do you have to the fruits of someone else's labor? No matter how good your intentions how do you justify the taking of someones stuff?
You do not get more apples next year by taking 25-50% of the best apple growers apples and give it to people "who no fault of their own" do not have apples. Or in a classroom the top 10% of students that get A+ on their work and give points to the bottom 50%. Who "no fault of their own" did not do well. It is only being fair. It is for the "common good" . It is a recipe for disaster.
Of all the things to criticize Mr. Bush on. Going to Iraq is not one of them. Everyone including Saddam Hussein said he was going to kill Americans. Mr. Bush had approval from Congress and the UN (for the record we DO NOT need the permission from the UN to defend ourselves) When Mr Clinton went into Kosovo and Somalia were was the outrage. We had no business in either country. (we still have troops in Kosovo and no word from MR Obama) If you say it was for humanitarian reasons than what about the Kurds in Iraq being gassed to death men woman and children Under that logic we would be sending the US Military to almost every country in the world.
If you ask me, Mr. Bush was right because we have not had another attack on US soil. Not getting hit by terrorist does not mean that is proof that they did not want to kill us.
If you want to get upset with Mr. Bush ,and there is more than enough to,than it should be the disarming of the citizens of Louisiana after Katrina. Sending in US armed military to restore order was completely unconstitutional . The Federal Government had NO place in Katina. It was a state problem not federal.If the state of Louisiana lets a city build below sea level, that state should pay the price. The federal government does not have the right to take money and resources from one state and give it to another making bad building decisions. Katrina was 100% avoidable but because the Federal Government came running it WILL HAPPEN AGAIN. Rewarding bad decisions just makes more bad decisions.
"It is incumbent on every generation to pay it's own debts as it goes." I could not agree more. The doubling of the national debt came from a Democratic Congress so there is plenty of blame to go around. Mr Obama came from that very Congress and voted on the budget. So when he says he inherited this debt to a Constitutionalists it sounds hollow. The national debt has doubled again in less than 60 days and no end in sight.
I do not personally hold Mr Obama responsible for that however making the budget bigger . 3.6 Trillion , the most money spent by anyone anywhere ever is very dangerous. Mr Obama like Mr Bush has called for MORE corporate bail outs. There seems to be no end . I have said from the very beginning "NO BAIL LET THEM FAIL" Massive government spending did not save Egypt,Greece, Rome, Russia or Cuba. Why do you think it will work this time?
As far as the general public being armed. I could not agree more . You have the GOD given right to defend yourself and your family from harm. I will go one further, you have an obligation to your family and neighbors. If all woman were trained how to use a weapon, rape would become almost extinct.
"When seconds count the police are only minutes away"
But beyond that the first thing a government does to control the people is to disarm them . Soviet Union, Nazi Germany , China , Uganda, Cambodia , Rwanda, I know this time it will be different My new leaders would never do that to me or my neighbors. They want to protect me. Everywhere in America the more gun laws the more crime . DC has the most gun laws and the most murders. Pick any city with big anti gun laws and you see big crime. The predator always pray on the weak. Why is shootings up in "gun free zones" because they know no one can stop them.
In Europe, Switzerland is the heaviest armed people but they have one of the lowest crime rates. It is a law you must keep a gun in your house given to you by the government.
"These days , there are many examples of successful Social Democracies with expansive, state run "welfare programs" where the standard of living is higher than it is here in the US" Really were ??
To begin with we DO NOT live in a democracy we live in a Constitutional Republic. There are big fundamental differences. Second nowhere in Europe do I see a young poor black kid rising up to the top of the ladder to run a country. Mr Obama has said he wants to "fundamentally change" the United States of America. I think this is great if he is to move this great nation closer to the Constitution, but if he wants to move us closer to Europe than count me out . This is THE GREATEST NATION the world has ever seen. This country is not perfect we all know that. The Founding Fathers knew that " in Order to form a more perfect Union" . We all know this .
If you want more "BIG GOVERNMENT" and more social programs you will not get my help or the help of like minded Americans, but if you want more "INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM" I am all in .
Proud Citizen of THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Robert Wayne Horr
PS If anyone wants a copy the the Constitution I would be glad to send one to you you can find me by looking up Obama Mccain sign New Gloucester
Posted by: Robert Horr | March 4, 2009 01:26 PM
Rob:
Thanks for the thought-provoking comment. You've said quite a bit here. Rather than address all of it, I guess I'd simply ask you what the word "freedom" really means? Under our present circumstances, I respectfully suggest that "freedom" means preservation of the status quo - everybody is free to keep on doing what they've been doing. The problem with this is that people who already have access to the halls of power are "free" to continue to manipulate things to suit their own ends, which in American-style capitalist terms means that these people are free to maximize their bottom line by any means necessary - reduction and/or elimination of protections for workers, tax breaks for the wealthy and big business, exploitation of natural resources whether advisable or not, etc. and generally the perpetuation of conditions that allow those with power to retain their advantages over the rest of us.
You and I are "free" to do the best we can in the environment created to benefit those already in power. Doesn't mean a whole lot, because "freedom" is meaningless without opportunity. There are many people in this country who are born into circumstances where getting a quality education or finding well-paying, legal employment is exceedingly difficult if not impossible. The capitalist myth that anyone who works hard can become rich and successful is simply not true.
In other words, this "freedom" myth only benefits those that are already in power.
The Human Development Index measures standard of living in terms of opportunity. Here's a quote from their website:
"Human Development is a development paradigm that is about much more than the rise or fall of national incomes. It is about creating an environment in which people can develop their full potential and lead productive, creative lives in accord with their needs and interests. People are the real wealth of nations. Development is thus about expanding the choices people have to lead lives that they value. And it is thus about much more than economic growth, which is only a means —if a very important one —of enlarging people’s choices.
Fundamental to enlarging these choices is building human capabilities —the range of things that people can do or be in life. The most basic capabilities for human development are to lead long and healthy lives, to be knowledgeable, to have access to the resources needed for a decent standard of living and to be able to participate in the life of the community. Without these, many choices are simply not available, and many opportunities in life remain inaccessible." http://hdr.undp.org/en/humandev/
Re: your comments about the Bush years, gun control, who's responsible for current conditions, etc. I think I've said enough about those issues in these pages. I'll let the previous body of work on this website speak for itself.
"What right do you have to the fruits of somebody else's labor?" Rob, somebody always receives some of the "fruits" of our labor, be it our employer, the government or other members of the community. The people that don't work or pay taxes in your community - who do you suppose pays for their kids to go to public school or for their garbage pickup, etc? The people that do pay taxes, i.e. you and I. Also, do you think corporations have a right to minimize earnings and benefits for workers in order to maximize profits? Isn't that in effect usurping the fruits of your labor?
Also, let's remember that the Founders were all about "freedom," so long as you were white, rich and male. If you were poor, female, Indian or African, there was neither freedom nor opportunity.
Posted by: TD | March 4, 2009 08:37 PM
Hi All,
Thank you for the kind words . "Thinking is hard work,that is why so few do it." -- Henry Ford
First you ask for the definition of the word "FREEDOM" I have also give the definition of the word "FREE" because they are so closely related Webster's International Dictionary:
Freedom ---1) the absence of interference with the sovereignty of an individual by the use of coercion or aggression 2) quality or state of being free. exemption or liberation from slavery, imprisonment or restraint, or from the power and control of another,liberty, independence.
Free --- having liberty, not in bondage, not subject to an arbitrary external power or authority; not held in a state of bondage; independent.
So you are right no man/woman is ever 100% free ,however that does not mean we do not strive to be free of bondage or at least all that is not self imposed. I do not disagree that the people in power want to stay in power.That is human nature .That is why "We the people " must be on constant vigil to stop or at least slow them down. That is the foundation of my support of the Constitution. The Constitution is to give very strict limitation to the government .
"The government of the United States is a definite government, confined to the specified objects. It is not like the state governments, whose powers are more general. Charity is no part of the legislative duty of the government." --- James Madison
With that said I do strongly disagree with your statement that capitalism is a myth.
However it does not guarantee your success Working hard is only a small part of being "successful" guaranteed you need some luck and knowing "the right people" dose not hurt either. Also with all that you may still fail but that does not mean it is a myth . If so how did Mr. Obama get to were he is. He did not come from the "inside". I could make a long long list of people who have come from the outside and moved to the top of the mountain . That is the beauty of this country the Kennedy's and the Bush's will be moved to the side and new blood will move in. We do not have a Washington or a Jefferson in power though their families are still in America.
"In other words, this "freedom" myth only benefits those that are already in power."
I do not find this to be true. I believe that "freedom" is the very thing they fear the most. I do agree with you they do not want to give that up. However I agree with Adam Smith in The Wealth of Nation on his writings of the invisible hand.
"It is not from the benevolence of the butcher the brewer or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own self interest. We address ourselves, not to their humanity but to their self-love, and never talk to them of our own necessities but of their advantages." --- Adam Smith
I find this the biggest threat to the powers that be. The people in power never know were the next Henry Ford or Barack Obama is going to come from and that is why they stay awake at night trying to hold onto power. That is the very reason I want them to have a little power as possible . The biggest way for them to gain power and control is through taxes and regulation . I want them to have as little as possible of both.
Mr Obama raised 850 million dollars completely running over Clinton and McCain. People had the freedom to give to whichever candidate they wanted. 850 million dollars freely when to Mr. Obama.
The other main point I would like to make is that free is not the same as equal. I agree that there are many people who are born into very sad situations. That they do not have access to the same resources as others. There are not two tree seeds from the same tree that have the same equal chance. I will give you that. I also believe that as fellow humans we that have should help our fellow man. But I can find nowhere in my Constitution or my Bible where I have the right to take from my neighbours and give "the fruits of their labor" to someone else. I believe in letting the people freely donate the fruits of their labor to whoever they want or not want. I do not want the government to do it. They have NO RIGHT and NO PLACE.
"We, the people, are the rightful masters of both congress and the courts. Not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow men who pervert the Constitution." --- Abraham Lincoln
You are right in saying somebody always receives some of the fruits of our labor . It is the invisible hand at work. One can not build wealth without it being shared it is the natural order. A tree does not grow unless it also gives. That is the true beauty of the design.
Maybe after reading this we will agree to disagree. That is fine for that is what FREEDOM is all about. I am glad however that you let me post this and for that I say THANK YOU
Your humble thought -provoking citizen
Proud to be called an American
Robert Wayne Horr
Posted by: Robert Horr | March 6, 2009 08:48 PM
Rivka - is this comment addressed to me or to Mr. Horr?
Posted by: TD | April 1, 2009 10:01 PM