""God Bless America"


Recommended Posts

Shayne,

To be exact, noticing patterns is not necessarily collectivizing--not if the definition or indication of your individual referents (people) is clearly pro-individual rights.

Also, in my view, having pride in living in a good environment and belonging to a good group of individuals is not a false anything. On the contrary, it's pure coolness. It's great.

Granted, it's easy for bad guys to package-deal this and use it to manipulate others for their agendas, but it's just as easy for good guys to package-deal it and miss out on one of the good things in life (and even try to get others to miss out).

Clear thinking cures all this. So I believe it is far better to induce and encourage people about what to do (for instance, think for themselves) rather than try to paint bad pictures of stuff they like and get pleasure from, like calling it false across the board.

I see nothing wrong with feeling pride in being an American, knowing the quality of ideas and human beings that founded America. That is something to live up to.

Furthermore, it took me 32 years living in a foreign country to learn it.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One can find many biblical and other religious texts with libertarian implications, depending on how one interprets them. The most common, historically speaking, was some version (either negative or positive) of the Golden Rule. This was cited for centuries as a call for voluntary reciprocity. Even Thomas Paine and other non-Christians cited the Golden Rule in this context.

Ghs

This is still true. I take "love thy neighbour as thyself" to mean something like: "Know that each other person is more like you than they can ever be different from you, and has the same capacity for goodness and greatness as for evil and pettiness, as you do within yourself"

The Golden Rule was commonly taken to refer to individual autonomy. If you expect others to treat you as as a rational being who should be persuaded rather than coerced, then you should treat others the same way. This interpretation was especially common in arguments for religious freedom. The religious fanatic who persecutes others would not want others to force their religious beliefs on him.

For different versions of the Golden Rule, see the Wiki article.

Ghs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have mixed reactions to "American exceptionalism." America was an exceptional country, but in many respects this is no longer true. I am pessimistic about the future of America, and I am glad that I will not be alive to see what our country will be like a few decades from now.

George,

I don't share your pessimism, nor any overly-Romanticized view of the past (if this is what you hold, which I doubt). I believe our great men and women have always had a bunch of war-mongering control-freaking assholes around them--just like today.

I also think that human nature makes any short-term dream of finally arriving at the promised land totally impossible.

Here's the pattern I see. Things are somewhat all right, then they get bad, then worse, then even worse, then the great men and women stand up and put their foot down. Then thing get a lot better--until decay starts and the cycle runs through all over again.

So long as we have great men and women who are willing to adopt great ideas of liberty and individual rights, I think we are going to be fine. And gradually we will inherit the earth. It will not be by revolution, but instead by slowly crawling according to the pattern I gave. Look how long it took to get rid of slavery, give women the right to vote, etc.

The exceptional part of America, to me, is not that we are perfect. We are slow and often mean-spirited like the rest of mankind, but we eventually get it right because we want to--item by tortured item. That is what makes us exceptional.

Michael

I don't have a romanticized view of America's past. If anything, I am far more critical of our past than most O'ist types are. For example, like many Antifederalists in 18th century America, I view the U.S. Constitution as a fundamental departure -- even a betrayal in some respects -- from the principles that inspired the American Revolution.

My pessimism is largely owing to what earlier historians called "the spirit of the age." The meaning of this phrase is difficult to pin down with precision, but it basically refers to the general sentiments and ideas of most people in a country. (Today this is sometimes called "public opinion," a less suitable expression, in my opinion.)

It is fair to say that the spirit of an earlier America, despite its flaws, was the spirit of liberty. I don't think this is any longer true, nor has it been true for some time. And I would place much of the blame on public education. Early libertarian types, including America's Founders, correctly pointed out that the education of children is essential to the preservation of freedom, and the education that most children get now is pathetic. Until and unless this changes, I see no hope.

I could say much more about this, and I probably will as this discussion proceeds.

Ghs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michael,

A few more words about "the spirit of an age."

One of the greatest libertarian histories ever written is H.T. Buckle's Introduction to the History of Civilization in England . Originally published in two volumes in 1857 and 1861, this international best-seller is a comparative intellectual history -— richly detailed and meticulously documented— -- of four countries: England, Spain, France, and Scotland. Buckle traces the development of individual liberty in each country and attempts to isolate the factors that explain why freedom was more prevalent in some countries than in others. The result is masterpiece of libertarian literature, but also a work that is virtually unknown to modern readers. (I recommend the critical edition edited by the great freethought scholar J.M. Robertson, which I believe is available for free on Google Books.)

Buckle talks a lot about the "spirit" of different countries at different times. For example, he contrasts the "protective spirit" of the French people with the spirit of liberty exhibited by the English people in the 19th century. Here is one example among many:

[M]en can never be free, unless they are educated to freedom. And this is not the education which is to be found in schools, or gained from books; but it is that which consists in self-discipline, in self-reliance, and in self-government. These, in England, are matters of hereditary descent -- traditional habits, which we imbibe in our youth, and which regulate us in the conduct of life. The old associations of the French all point in another direction. What with us is competition, with them is monopoly. That which we effect by private companies, they effect by public boards. They cannot cut a canal, or lay down a railroad, without appealing to the government for aid. With them, the people look to the rulers; with us, the rulers look to the people. With them, the executive is the center from which society radiates. With us, society is the instigator, and the executive the organ. The difference in the result has corresponded with the difference in the process. We have been made fit for political power, by the long exercise of civil rights. They, neglecting the exercise, think they can at once begin [i.e., after the French Revolution] with the power. We have always shown a determination to uphold our liberties, and, when the times are fitting, to increase them....But the French, always treated as children, are, in political matters, children still.

Buckle's extensive discussion of the subject centers on the point that governments and their laws are of secondary importance compared to the "spirit" of a people. Similar points were made by other 19th- century liberal historians. For example, Lord Acton pointed out that the powers of the American Presidency were the same on paper during the late 19th century as they had been when the U.S. Constitution was ratified in 1788. Yet, in reality, these powers had grown tremendously over the course of a century. Acton thus warned against a type of optical illusion that political institutions and laws can present. What we find on paper often does not reflect the true nature of a political institution as it currently exists. What is important is how people generally "see" an institution, and this depends on public opinion.

I have written this post to serve as background for some points I want to make later on.

Ghs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michael,

A few more words about "the spirit of an age."

One of the greatest libertarian histories ever written is H.T. Buckle's Introduction to the History of Civilization in England .

Looks excellent, thanks for the recommendation. Just got a copy from AbeBooks for $14.

Shayne

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michael,

A few more words about "the spirit of an age."

One of the greatest libertarian histories ever written is H.T. Buckle's Introduction to the History of Civilization in England .

Looks excellent, thanks for the recommendation. Just got a copy from AbeBooks for $14.

Shayne

If you got the Robertson edition (published by Routledge) for that price, you got a great deal.

The Robertson edition is also available on Google Books here. .

A word of caution. The first four chapters deal with Buckle's theory of history. He defends a positivist methodology, and in this respect was influenced by Auguste Comte. Although there is interesting material in these chapters, they are by no means essential to understanding or appreciating the rest of the book, so they can easily be skipped over. I would argue that Buckle frequently ignores his own methodology when writing his history (though he occasionally refers to it later on), which in this case was very fortunate.

One other point. Even though the Robertson edition runs 900 pages in small font, Buckle intended this to be an introduction to a far more extensive multi-volume history. The standard line is that Buckle, always in frail health, worked himself to death. He died in Damascus at age forty-two.

Buckle was self-educated, btw. He taught himself many languages, and his range of knowledge was astonishing.

Ghs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

George.

Point taken about public education. But is that the only standard to look at?

Kids learn from their families, too. Even TV and other media. Apropos to this, look at the growth of the strong freedom-leaning programs on Fox (Stoessel, Napolitano, etc.), for a mainstream example, and most specifically Glenn Beck's discourse on his Fox News show.

Despite Beck's focus on religion, there is his constant preaching of the sanctity of the individual, non-violence, individual rights, thinking for yourself, reading books, looking at original historical resources instead of later interpretations, how great our founding fathers were, etc. The fact that he recently built an audience out of nowhere that stays somewhere between 1.5 to 3 million people for a five o'clock show is something I believe needs to be put on the scale in arriving at your "spirit of an age."

I went to the Restoring Honor rally in Washington DC last year and I stood in the midst of half-a-million freedom-loving people from all over the USA. As has been mentioned several times, we left the place cleaner than what we found it. Not one arrest. And so on.

I didn't see any numbers on professions for that rally, but I believe the bulk of those people were entrepreneurs and self-employed professional practitioners (like lawyers, doctors, etc.), and/or family members of the same.

These are the people who are going to keep the country from collapsing during the present monetary crisis, which is going to get a lot worse. They are the ones behind the Tea Party movement, which is pissing off a lot of big-government and entitlement types. They are also the ones who are educating their own children and even the children of their neighbors, especially by example.

Maybe they are not the epitome of libertarian angels in libertarian heaven, but they are certainly moving and thinking in the right direction. And I believe there are a lot more where they came from. These are people of good character who have been too busy just living until recently to be involved with public affairs. But now they are seeing a problem and are coming out to fix it..

So I see a very mixed "spirit of the age." Admittedly, I see one that is polarized. But the very nature of that polarity is what gives me hope.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you got the Robertson edition (published by Routledge) for that price, you got a great deal.

Yep, that was the one.

A word of caution. The first four chapters deal with Buckle's theory of history. He defends a positivist methodology, and this respect was influenced by Auguste Comte. Although there is interesting material in these chapters, they are by no means essential to understanding or appreciating the rest of the book, so they can easily be skipped over.

Thanks for the warning, I'll probably skim those.

Shayne

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you got the Robertson edition (published by Routledge) for that price, you got a great deal.

Yep, that was the one.

A word of caution. The first four chapters deal with Buckle's theory of history. He defends a positivist methodology, and this respect was influenced by Auguste Comte. Although there is interesting material in these chapters, they are by no means essential to understanding or appreciating the rest of the book, so they can easily be skipped over.

Thanks for the warning, I'll probably skim those.

Shayne

Buckle's book contains many passages that will warm the heart of every libertarian. He rebuts a number of what he calls historical "prejudices," such as the claim that art, literature, and science in 17th century France flourished under the subsidies provided by Louis XIV. Buckle considers an astonishing list of names (many of which I had never heard of before I first read this book many years ago), and he shows in detail that the recipients were either mediocrities or capable thinkers and artists whose best work was done before they received any state subsidies. This is a remarkable section; I have never seen anything remotely like in any other serious historical work.

Here is a passage in which Buckle responds to another historical prejudice:

The other opinion to which I have referred is, that the civilization of Europe is chiefly owing to the ability which has been displayed by the different governments, and the sagacity with which the evils of society have been palliated by legislative remedies. To any one who has studied history in its original sources, this notion must appear so extravagant, as to make it difficult to refute it with becoming gravity. Indeed, of all the social theories which have ever been broached, there is none so utterly untenable and so unsound in all its parts, as this. In the first place, we have the obvious consideration, that the rulers of a country have, under ordinary circumstances, always been the inhabitants of that country; nurtured by its literature, bred to its traditions, and imbibing its prejudices. Such men are, at best, only creatures of the age, never its creators. Their measures are the result of social progress, not the cause of it. This may be proved, not only by speculative arguments,but also by a practical consideration, which any reader of history can verify for himself. No great political improvement, no great reform, has ever been originated in any country by its rulers. The first suggesters of such steps have invariably been bold and able thinkers, who discern the abuse, denounce it, and point out how it is to be remedied. But long after this is done, even the most enlightened governments continue to uphold the abuse, and reject the remedy. At length, if the circumstances are favorable, the pressure from without becomes so strong, that the government is obliged to give way; and the reform being accomplished, the people are expected to admire the wisdom of their rulers, by whom all this has been done. That this is the course of political improvement, must be well known to whoever has studied the law-books of different countries in connexion with the previous progress of their knowledge. Full and decisive evidence of this will be brought forth in the present work....

Indeed, the extent to which the governing classes have interfered [with freedom and progress], and the mischiefs which that interference has produced, are so remarkable, as to make thoughtful men wonder how civilization could advance, in the face of such repeated obstacles.

Ghs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Buckle was self-educated, btw. He taught himself many languages, and his range of knowledge was astonishing.

According to J.M. Robertson (in his Introduction to Buckle's book), Buckle "mastered nineteen languages."

I'm still working on English. <_<

Ghs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the latter part of his Introduction to the History of Civilization in England, Buckle, in bad health and realizing that he would never live to complete his ambitious project as originally conceived, wrote this remarkable passage:

Perchance, the human mind is hardly ready for so vast an enterprise. At all events, he who undertakes it will meet with little sympathy, and will find few to help him. And let him toil as he may, the sun and noontide of his life shall pass by, the evening of his days shall overtake him, and he himself have to quit the scene, leaving that unfinished which he had vainly hoped to complete....It is, indeed, too true, that such a work requires, not only several minds, but also the successive experience of several generations. Once, I own, I thought otherwise. Once, when I first caught sight of the whole field of knowledge, and seemed, however dimly, to discern its various parts and the relation they bore to each other, I was so entranced with its surpassing beauty, that the judgment was beguiled, and I deemed myself able, not only to cover the surface, but also to master the details. Little did I know how the horizon enlarges as well as recedes, and how vainly we grasp at the fleeting forms, which melt away and elude us in the distance. Of all that I had hoped to do, I now find but too surely how small a part I shall accomplish. In those early aspirations, there was much that was fanciful; perhaps there was much that was foolish. Perhaps, too, they contained a moral defect, and savoured of an arrogance which belongs to a strength that refuses to recognize its own weakness. Still, even now that they are defeated and brought to nought, I cannot repent having indulged in them, but, on the contrary, I would willingly recall them if I could. For, such hopes belong to that joyous and sanguine period of life, when alone we are really happy; when the emotions are more active than the judgment; when experience has not yet hardened our nature; when the affections are not yet blighted and nipped to the core; and when the bitterness of disappointment not having yet been felt, difficulties are unheeded, obstacles are unseen, ambition is a pleasure instead of a pang, and the blood, coursing swiftly through the veins, the pulse beats high, while the heart throbs at the prospect of the future. Those are glorious days; but they go from us, and nothing can compensate their absence. To me, they now seem more like the visions of a disordered fancy, than the sober reality of things that were, and are not. It is painful to make this confession; but I owe it to the reader, because I would not have him to suppose that either in this, or in the future volumes of my History, I shall be able to redeem my pledge, and to perform all that I had promised.

Ghs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"There is the land of lost content

I see it shining plain

The happy highways where I went

And cannot come again"

-AE Housman

Beautiful and sobering, all at once, Carol.

That is a great poem.

After this and the indeed remarkable passage of H.T.Buckle, I have something very prosaic:

Men at fifty

Learn to close softly

The doors of rooms

They won't be going back to.

Not a great one, but it stuck with me. (And one can make it fit any decade that suits one. :rolleyes: )

I don't remember the author.

Tony

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"There is the land of lost content

I see it shining plain

The happy highways where I went

And cannot come again"

-AE Housman

Beautiful and sobering, all at once, Carol.

That is a great poem.

After this and the indeed remarkable passage of H.T.Buckle, I have something very prosaic:

Men at fifty

Learn to close softly

The doors of rooms

They won't be going back to.

Not a great one, but it stuck with me. (And one can make it fit any decade that suits one. :rolleyes: )

I don't remember the author.

Tony

Ah, Tony. Haven't you heard that fifty is the new forty ?(decade-adjustable). And then there's there's April Inventory:

"Though trees turn bare and girls turn wives

We shall afford our costly seasons

There is a gentleness survives

That shall outspeak and has its reasons

There is a loveliness exists.

Preserves us, not for specialists."

-WD Snodgrass

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now