A Little Common Sense....

Status
Not open for further replies.

Seeker

Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2002
Messages
137
Location
Lacomb, Oregon
.....literally.


SOME writers have so confounded society with government, as to leave little or no distinction between them; whereas they are not only different, but have different origins. Society is produced by our wants, and government by our wickedness; the former promotes our happiness positively by uniting our affections, the latter negatively by restraining our vices. The one encourages intercourse, the other creates distinctions. The first is a patron, the last a punisher.


Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state is but a necessary evil in its worst state an intolerable one; for when we suffer, or are exposed to the same miseries by a government, which we might expect in a country without government, our calamities is heightened by reflecting that we furnish the means by which we suffer! Government, like dress, is the badge of lost innocence; the palaces of kings are built on the ruins of the bowers of paradise. For were the impulses of conscience clear, uniform, and irresistibly obeyed, man would need no other lawgiver; but that not being the case, he finds it necessary to surrender up a part of his property to furnish means for the protection of the rest; and this he is induced to do by the same prudence which in every other case advises him out of two evils to choose the least. Wherefore, security being the true design and end of government, it unanswerably follows that whatever form thereof appears most likely to ensure it to us, with the least expense and greatest benefit, is preferable to all others.


In order to gain a clear and just idea of the design and end of government, let us suppose a small number of persons settled in some sequestered part of the earth, unconnected with the rest, they will then represent the first peopling of any country, or of the world. In this state of natural liberty, society will be their first thought. A thousand motives will excite them thereto, the strength of one man is so unequal to his wants, and his mind so unfitted for perpetual solitude, that he is soon obliged to seek assistance and relief of another, who in his turn requires the same. Four or five united would be able to raise a tolerable dwelling in the midst of a wilderness, but one man might labor out the common period of life without accomplishing any thing; when he had felled his timber he could not remove it, nor erect it after it was removed; hunger in the mean time would urge him from his work, and every different want call him a different way. Disease, nay even misfortune would be death, for though neither might be mortal, yet either would disable him from living, and reduce him to a state in which he might rather be said to perish than to die.


Thus necessity, like a gravitating power, would soon form our newly arrived emigrants into society, the reciprocal blessings of which, would supersede, and render the obligations of law and government unnecessary while they remained perfectly just to each other; but as nothing but heaven is impregnable to vice, it will unavoidably happen, that in proportion as they surmount the first difficulties of emigration, which bound them together in a common cause, they will begin to relax in their duty and attachment to each other; and this remissness, will point out the necessity, of establishing some form of government to supply the defect of moral virtue.


Some convenient tree will afford them a State-House, under the branches of which, the whole colony may assemble to deliberate on public matters. It is more than probable that their first laws will have the title only of Regulations, and be enforced by no other penalty than public disesteem. In this first parliament every man, by natural right will have a seat.


But as the colony increases, the public concerns will increase likewise, and the distance at which the members may be separated, will render it too inconvenient for all of them to meet on every occasion as at first, when their number was small, their habitations near, and the public concerns few and trifling. This will point out the convenience of their consenting to leave the legislative part to be managed by a select number chosen from the whole body, who are supposed to have the same concerns at stake which those have who appointed them, and who will act in the same manner as the whole body would act were they present. If the colony continue increasing, it will become necessary to augment the number of the representatives, and that the interest of every part of the colony may be attended to, it will be found best to divide the whole into convenient parts, each part sending its proper number; and that the elected might never form to themselves an interest separate from the electors, prudence will point out the propriety of having elections often; because as the elected might by that means return and mix again with the general body of the electors in a few months, their fidelity to the public will be secured by the prudent reflection of not making a rod for themselves. And as this frequent interchange will establish a common interest with every part of the community, they will mutually and naturally support each other, and on this (not on the unmeaning name of king) depends the strength of government, and the happiness of the governed.


Here then is the origin and rise of government; namely, a mode rendered necessary by the inability of moral virtue to govern the world; here too is the design and end of government, viz., freedom and security. And however our eyes may be dazzled with snow, or our ears deceived by sound; however prejudice may warp our wills, or interest darken our understanding, the simple voice of nature and of reason will say, it is right.


I draw my idea of the form of government from a principle in nature, which no art can overturn, viz., that the more simple any thing is, the less liable it is to be disordered, and the easier repaired when disordered; and with this maxim in view, I offer a few remarks on the so much boasted constitution of England. That it was noble for the dark and slavish times in which it was erected is granted. When the world was overrun with tyranny the least therefrom was a glorious rescue. But that it is imperfect, subject to convulsions, and incapable of producing what it seems to promise, is easily demonstrated.


Absolute governments (though the disgrace of human nature) have this advantage with them, that they are simple; if the people suffer, they know the head from which their suffering springs, know likewise the remedy, and are not bewildered by a variety of causes and cures. But the constitution of England is so exceedingly complex, that the nation may suffer for years together without being able to discover in which part the fault lies, some will say in one and some in another, and every political physician will advise a different medicine.

...more at "Common Sense" by by Thomas Paine, Philadelphia, Feb. 14, 1776: URL http://www.hdmsc.org/html/new/Thomas Paine's Commom Sense - TEXT VERSION.htm


(Edited by Preacherman to reset URL)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The merit of this quotation illustrates perfectly why I believe no L/libertarian has read this treatise or (understood it if they did) else they would not spout their (cough) great insights to us beings of more imperfect intellect. :eek:
 
Is it just me...

or do the ills he mentions, eg

and that the elected might never form to themselves an interest separate from the electors,


and

But the constitution of England is so exceedingly complex, that the nation may suffer for years together without being able to discover in which part the fault lies, some will say in one and some in another, and every political physician will advise a different medicine.

Sound like today?
 
An interesting article, on many levels. I have it on my PalmPilot.

Comparing Thomas Paine's conception of government with the modern central state, nicely illustrates the impossibility of a lasting limited government. Paine himself can be forgiven; he did not know at the time what we today can perceve with our own eyes. We ourselves have no such excuse.

- Chris
 
How so, Chris? Paine has pretty well identified the gomt as a hydra where with every head you lop off, two more spring up in its place. Is that not a good characterization of our modern centralized gumit?
 
That's exactly my point, BigG. Government expands. It cannot be controlled by laws, or regulations, or Constitutions, or even the blood of patriots. Form a government, and it WILL eventually become a tyranny. This is as certain as gravity.

- Chris
 
I wonder how it would read if translated in to todays terms and to reflect current issues?

By Bill Buckley?

Where is our modern T. Paine?

Great reading! Paine sounds kinda libertarian, or perhaps libertarianim comes from Common Sense.

Chris, what do you think would be a solution to "Form a government, and it WILL eventually become a tyranny. "?

yer an anarcist aren't you? :D
 
...that the more simple any thing is, the less liable it is to be disordered, and the easier repaired when disordered...

This, to me, is the heart of the libertarian view of government.

BigG-

Explain, please, how I am wrong.
 
BigG,

Interesting that you think I haven't read Paine or am incapable of understanding his writing.

Perhaps you'd care to explain it to me in small words?
 
BigG,

I think I'm getting it. Are you saying that you need people to pass laws to control your behavior?
 
government... is... a necessary evil...

Yep. When there is more than one person involved, EVERYBODY (including the mountaintop dwellers) need some level of governance. :neener:
 
government... is... a necessary evil...

To the degree that that governance only protects the rights of citizens from being interfered with, I have no argument with this.

Here's the rest of Paine's thought:

in its worst state an intolerable one

We're far closer to "worst" than "best" in this country, and the GOP bears almost as much responsibilty for that as the Dems.
 
We're far closer to "worst" than "best" in this country,
Hokay. :uhoh: Have you ever been out of country? Just asking. Are you old enough to remember Jimma Carter? Gerald Ford? LBJ? Kennedy? Think the pedulum is a long way from the worst back under those fellers. But you may be right. :uhoh:
 
Said we were closer to worst than best, not that we are there (yet).

My travel out of the U.S. is limited to Canada and Mexico, and I would rather have our government than either of theirs (by a long shot).

Old enough to remember Ford and Carter. Not Johnson and Kennedy.

From a standpoint of the gov't interfering with peoples rights to conduct both their business and personal lives as they see fit, and the gov't growing to a point at which the people serve it, rather than the other way around, I maintain that we're continuing to head in the wrong direction.

Broad freedom can be dangerous, no doubt. But nowhere near as dangerous as tyranny.
 
Broad freedom, at it's broadest, is indeed as evil as Tyranny at its broadest.

Nature tends toward equilibrium, a concept I learned in 9th grade science class. Just look at how the political, economic and social pendalums swing in this country.

Extremes at both ends, be it governmental power or no governmental power or be it no taxes or 90 pct tax rates, are dangerous.

The first American government was the Articles of Conferation - The Feds were effectively impotent. Worked so well that a convention was held to try again at a form of governement, which yielded the current Constitution that seems to have been working out ok for just over 200 years now.

I dislike taxation and govt, but looking back on my childhood; my parents had rules I have to live by and chores I had to perform.

Govt and Taxes - can't live with them and can't live without them.
 
Chris,

I know. I, too, find it a little creepy that some folks don't kill people or steal their stuff because it's "against the law", and would apparently start doing so if those laws were repealed. Me? I don't do that kind of stuff because, well, it's just flat wrong, law or no law. Then again, some of the same people that tell me I need these laws to protect me are the same ones who, in other threads, tell folks to carry a gun because the law can't protect them. This makes my head hurt. ;)
 
August: I have to agree with hops, either end of the pendulum swing ain't pretty. The broad freedom end is survival of the fittest. No matter how tough you are, there is always somebody tougher, faster, etc. The nanny state end we can see in the socialized Euro states. That part of the spectrum ends at Soviet Union style communism, survival of the state at the expense of the individual. Also ain't pretty.
 
... the law
Since we are all theorizing here:
law is only as effective as its enforcement. The vast majority of USA laws are "feel good laws" enacted to make people think the legislators care. These laws are not enforced and should be wiped off the books. There are a few things that need to be under law however, malum in se crimes and true weights and measures are a couple, unless you libs want blood feud all over the place?

Oh, I forgot. Y'all're more adult than the rest of us. :uhoh: :eek: :p
 
...survival of the state at the expense of the individual.

Which is where we're incrementally ending up here. Not as blatant, or abusive as Stalinism, for sure. I would just rather err on the side of too little government than the inevitable alternative.

A government run by strict interpretation of the Constitution, staying out of what goes on behind closed doors among consenting adults, would be fine by me. Maybe that makes me less libertarian than some, but it sure isn't the mainstream these days.
 
BigG,

Oh, I forgot. Y'all're more adult than the rest of us.

Au contraire; I'd assume you're as adult as anyone else and quite capable of telling right from wrong without a statute book to help. ;) :neener:

We're the ones who want to treat you like an adult. :cool:
 
err on the side of too little government
That's the ideal.

I am probably more of a true librarian than most of the chest beaters (of both sexes :neener: ) who claim to be.
 
BigG,
The broad freedom end is survival of the fittest. No matter how tough you are, there is always somebody tougher, faster, etc.
Let me get this right: We need gov't so that we won't be subject to rule by people with few scruples and no morals who are willing to use force to make the rest of us do things their way.

Is that what you said?

pax

If you think of yourselves as helpless and ineffectual, it is certain that you will create a despotic government to be your master. The wise despot, therefore, maintains among his subjects a popular sense that they are helpless and ineffectual. -- Frank Herbert
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top