Magnetic Synthesizer Posted June 15, 2017 Posted June 15, 2017 ... was to allow the masses political freedom. I kid you not: this essay is of great interest. > The death or the Roman Republic may be ascribed with equal truth either to the fault of the masses or to the failure of the great. The system of civil and political liberty could be made to work so long as it was not extended beyond men whose folkways accorded with it. But, it ceased to be workable when once it had come to include strata of men for whom liberty was as nothing beside political authority, who expected nothing from the one and hoped everything of the other. This posted quote below, so far as I've read, can be summarized as such: Liberty started at the top between men capable of maintaining what they had and sought to maintain peace among themselves for common interests. Sooner or later, the plebs (strata of men for whom liberty was as nothing beside political authority) (''freedom doesn't give me anything, but I can exchange it for a play in the political lottery'' -molymeme interpretation of leftist gime gime behavior) were included in the political machinery; we're given voting power, and due to their irresponsibility and the cowardly dovishness/carelessness of the top, the spirit of the law was amended to protect them from their own freedom to ruin themselves, and so regulations to limit choice were introduced, in the spirit of the law had become ''notion that it is the business of legislative authority to prescribe or forbid anything whatever'' > Weaker characters, of men who had not previously enjoyed complete autonomy as regards law, could not be made subject to the cruel consequences of mistakes, which would be more frequent. It became necessary to temper and humanize the law. Public authority, in the form of the praetor, was brought in to protect individuals. Regulations multiplied under it. > In this way, there was introduced into Roman society the essentially erroneous notion that it is the business of legislative authority to prescribe or forbid anything whatever > Anyone who put forward a proposition of a nature seemingly advantageous for the immediate future was blindly applauded, even though his proposition subverted the entire permanent edifice of order. > It was the tribunate [a political body first created to protect the plebs from arbitrary tyranny] which habituated the people to the idea of a saviour redressing at a stroke the social balance. reads like ''muh equality'' ---- > We ought not, therefore, to feel surprise at the wide measure of support accorded to kings in their attempts to substitute their own authority for liberties which benefited only the few and were an oppression to the many. Amazing analysis: (one is the desire to exercise power over others; the other is disinclination to have power exercised over themselves.) J. S. Mill, in a famous passage, threw into contrast the different political tempers of the peoples of France and England: Before finishing this essay. I will add a few observations: There is a vast swath of humanity naturally incapacitating the realization of freedom. There are some ''[slave] master minded'' psychopaths who quote consider as moral absolute the obedience of everyone to them *aggressive* ''You will do as we say'' *aggressive* -some global tyranny agent (won't bother to dig it up again, it's in a mark passio natural law video) ideas in circulation: -Spread freedom by word (conversion tactic) -Defend freedom by borders (segregation tactic) -Spread freedom by opening borders (brain drain being best argument I can find, but it seems the parasite infusion is overriding in weight) (liberating potential tactic) -Spread freedom by genetic engineering -Spread freedom by segregating it on a global basis wherein there is class of rulers and class of subjects (segregation tactic) -Spread freedom by annihilating the class of subjects (elimination tactic) -Spread freedom by annihilating the class of rulers (elimination tactic) Now of course there are those who wish to subjugate; and it seems that at a high level of competence and differential ''predatory virtue manifests'' ex: I hate noobs, I hope they all die'' (proceeds to dominate to the top of the scoreboard) There's probably a natural construct of triggers that go something like this : wow, I am so much better than my fellow man, I should genetically replace them to augment my species! Away with the old! Onwards with the NEW! In conclusion: ''So long as the people, consisting of freemen participating in the work of government, comprises none without some individual interests to defend, so that all feel an attachment to subjective rights, liberty seems to them precious and Power dangerous. But so soon as this "people with voting power" comprises a majority of persons who have, or think they have, nothing to defend, but are offended by great material inequalities, then it starts to set no value on anything but the power which its sovereignty gives it of overthrowing a defective social structure: it delivers itself over to the messianic promises of Power.'' Here's some music:
Recommended Posts