For the first time, a government was created with the explicit purpose of defending the rights of Man. Previous governments were created by the Divine Right of Kings, or because of the Will of Heaven; or they were accidents of geography and language.
For the first time, a government was logically created, beginning with axioms: “We hold these truths to be self-evident…”
Our fault has been (1) mixing with foreign nations. They are wrong for us because of the reasons listed above. Their philosophy is one of repression and death. (2) our morality of altruism conflicts with the rights of Man. The wealth of one man can be forced from him as long as its for the ‘public good’, or some other altruistic abomination.
While its likely that we will fall, being surrounded, infiltrated, and infected by evil from abroad and in our hearts, this nation is/was the noblest and most moral country in the history of the world. In fact, it is/was THE only moral one.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
In fact, it is/was THE only moral one.
The Headhunter
How is it moral to force authority onto people? If it is not voluntary it cannot be moral. Government by definition can never be moral.[/quote]
It is perfectly moral to stop or dissuade the initiation of violence. Violence is permitted and moral when used for defense. In a sense, we the people hire the government as our agent to protect us from the initiation of force, whether domestic or external.
It is when the government legalises the initiation of force that a government becomes the enemy of its people. The federal income tax is an excellent example of the legalised initiation of violence against (usually) unarmed citizens. In 1913, the government stopped being our agent and became our ruler.
…well, maybe at one point this was true, but today it isn’t, is it? If anything, the US government is barely able to maintain the illusion of being morally just…
[quote]ephrem wrote:
…well, maybe at one point this was true, but today it isn’t, is it? If anything, the US government is barely able to maintain the illusion of being morally just…[/quote]
America became altruistic. It kept coming to the rescue of Britain and France. But altruism is counter to the principles of our government. In its origins, the sanctity of person and property was the supreme principle. But then we became embroiled with others, out of altruism, which is a truly vile philosophy.
When you begin by helping others, you then begin to think it moral to FORCE your citizens to help others. You create and raise taxes. You create welfare, forcing some citizens to work for others (in essence, create slaves). The excuse was that it ‘was for the good of others’.
No one’s good can be sacrificed to another without the use of force. We then begin resembling other nations, and become immoral. We initiate violence.
If anyone wants to blame America for the fiasco in Iraq, they should look in the mirror. It was the philosophy of altruism which made this government and what it does possible.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
In fact, it is/was THE only moral one.
The Headhunter
How is it moral to force authority onto people? If it is not voluntary it cannot be moral. Government by definition can never be moral.
It is perfectly moral to stop or dissuade the initiation of violence. Violence is permitted and moral when used for defense. In a sense, we the people hire the government as our agent to protect us from the initiation of force, whether domestic or external.
It is when the government legalises the initiation of force that a government becomes the enemy of its people. The federal income tax is an excellent example of the legalised initiation of violence against (usually) unarmed citizens. In 1913, the government stopped being our agent and became our ruler.
[/quote]
Defense is moral but it is not considered violent aggression. Aggression is the initiation of violence and is never moral.
If it does not fit within the framework of the non-aggression axiom it is immoral.
Governmental authority can only be enforced with violence or coercion, both of which violate the non-aggression axiom. Government is immoral.
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
Yes I think our government has rights we do not, but I am not sure they should have as many rights as they do. Yes , Yes and No
[/quote]
Where do these rights come from that government has which we individuals do not?
Isn’t government enforced by individuals? Isn’t it the individuals that have rights and not the government?
I don’t think there can be such thing because government is instituted by men and therefore must be beholden to the same ethic.
I am just greatful they let me keep 60% of my labor.
Would it be moral to kick the shit out of someone that is stealing from you? Can we get a list of addresses for every sitting senator, represtative, Court Justice, and misc. bearucrats? I have a lot of morality building up these days.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
ephrem wrote:
…well, maybe at one point this was true, but today it isn’t, is it? If anything, the US government is barely able to maintain the illusion of being morally just…
America became altruistic. It kept coming to the rescue of Britain and France. But altruism is counter to the principles of our government. In its origins, the sanctity of person and property was the supreme principle. But then we became embroiled with others, out of altruism, which is a truly vile philosophy.
When you begin by helping others, you then begin to think it moral to FORCE your citizens to help others. You create and raise taxes. You create welfare, forcing some citizens to work for others (in essence, create slaves). The excuse was that it ‘was for the good of others’.
No one’s good can be sacrificed to another without the use of force. We then begin resembling other nations, and become immoral. We initiate violence.
If anyone wants to blame America for the fiasco in Iraq, they should look in the mirror. It was the philosophy of altruism which made this government and what it does possible.
