Showing posts with label James Madison. Show all posts
Showing posts with label James Madison. Show all posts

Tuesday, February 23, 2016

Sheldon Richman — Madison on Government and Force

Thus Madison would have understood that libertarian minarchism without taxation is incoherent.
While it is unclear what Washington may have thought or said, he did lead the army to put down the Whiskey Rebellion to put down an insurrection over refusal to accept a tax.

Free Association

Tuesday, May 12, 2015

Heather Digby Parton — The GOP’s Scientology strategy: How Charles Murray’s perverse anti-government agenda has won over the American right

The man most famous for the deeply racist "The Bell Curve" has found a solution to Big Government: Sue it to death. 
It’s important to note here that the right’s loathing of the federal government is actually quite narrowly focused on certain areas of interest. They are fully behind the neoconservatives’ imperial project — flag waving and martial strutting are fundamental to American conservatism. (Small government is a very imprecise term; they have no problem with a big military and police apparatus. In fact, those bureaucracies have a blank check.) But within that narrow anti-government focus of low taxes is their extreme hostility to government regulations....
Murray has a new book coming out that is poised to take the conservative and libertarian world by storm. It’s called “By the People: Rebuilding Liberty Without Permission,” and in it Murray proclaims, “the government cannot enforce its mountain of laws and regulations without voluntary compliance.” His book proposes to create “a private-sector counterweight that pulls back the curtain and exposes the Wizard’s weakness.” The private sector counterweight, in this case, will be a billionaire-funded institution that will bankroll thousands of lawsuits against the government, which Murray fatuously names “The Madison Institute.”
If conservatives follow the Scientology strategy to the letter, they will file lawsuits against individual federal employees as well, making their lives miserable and putting them into personal financial jeopardy....
Of course, if a Republican becomes president, the whole idea becomes moot. The billionaires would withdraw to their counting rooms to add up their profits while the GOP executive makes their job unnecessary. The fact that they are contemplating this assault through the legal system is an admission that they don’t really believe they’ll have the political power to do this any time soon.

Tuesday, August 19, 2014

John Nichols — Defend Journalism That Speaks Truth to Power: From Ferguson to Washington

“A popular government, without popular information, or the means of acquiring it, is but a prologue to a farce or a tragedy; or perhaps both,” declared James Madison, the author and champion of the Bill of Rights. “Knowledge will forever govern ignorance; and a people who mean to be their own governors must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives.”
This is still the essential truth of an American experiment that can only be advanced toward the equal and inclusive justice that did not exist in Madison’s time by a broadly informed and broadly engaged citizenry. When journalists are harassed, intimidated, threatened and detained, the basic premise of democracy — that the great mass of people, armed with information and perspective, and empowered to act upon it, will set right that which is made wrong by oligarchs — is assaulted.
Where assaults on the gatherers and purveyors of popular information occur, those assaults must be challenged immediately. Social media and then mainstream media did just that after Washington Post writer Wesley Lowery and Huffington Post writer Ryan Reilly were arrested, detained and then released without charges or an explanation by police in Ferguson, Missouri, as they were reporting on the tensions that developed after 18-year-old Michael Brown was killed in a police shooting. The detention of reporters is merely one illustration of the seriousness of the broader battering of civil liberties and civil rights in Ferguson, a battering so severe that Amnesty International has made the unprecedented move of deploying human rights observers to the city.
Moyers & Company
Defend Journalism That Speaks Truth to Power: From Ferguson to Washington
John Nichols

See also Katherine Fung, James Risen: Obama Is 'Greatest Enemy To Press Freedom In A Generation' at Huffington Post.
New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd spoke to Risen for her Sunday column"Where’s the Justice at Justice?"


"How can he [Obama] use the Espionage Act to throw reporters and whistle-blowers in jail even as he defends the intelligence operatives who 'tortured some folks,' and coddles his C.I.A. chief, John Brennan, who spied on the Senate and then lied to the senators he spied on about it?" Dowd wrote.

Risen had one word to describe Obama's actions: "hypocritical."

"A lot of people still think this is some kind of game or signal or spin," he told Dowd. "They don’t want to believe that Obama wants to crack down on the press and whistle-blowers. But he does. He’s the greatest enemy to press freedom in a generation."


"How can he [Obama] use the Espionage Act to throw reporters and whistle-blowers in jail even as he defends the intelligence operatives who 'tortured some folks,' and coddles his C.I.A. chief, John Brennan, who spied on the Senate and then lied to the senators he spied on about it?" Dowd wrote.
Risen had one word to describe Obama's actions: "hypocritical."
"A lot of people still think this is some kind of game or signal or spin," he told Dowd. "They don’t want to believe that Obama wants to crack down on the press and whistle-blowers. But he does. He’s the greatest enemy to press freedom in a generation."

Wednesday, November 20, 2013

Some May Find This Amusing. Many Other Citizens Are Left Baffled, Confused and Disoriented.

(Commentary posted by Roger Erickson)

Maybe sowing confusion is the real purpose?*

According to Chuck Lane, a longtime Editorial Writer for the Washington Post:
Banks aren’t the bad guys.
Chuck's entire essay establishes, at best, a vague position for a Washington Post editorial - so what is it's purpose?

Is he referring to some banks, or to no banks whatsoever? Or is he laying the cornerstone for the message that not all bank executives, or no bank executives whatsoever ... should ever be held accountable for their part in propagating significant local events as well as setting industry trends? How many readers - new or old - can tell exactly what Chuck means? Other's have different views on some of the points Chuck offers up, and even on the varying motives of diverse journalists.

Chuck Lane's current editorial - again, for the Washington Post, a prominent newspaper that prides itself on educating citizens - may, unfortunately, serve as a convenient reference for many future editorials seeking to slowly disorient and sway the views of an impatient public always in need of quick answers and consistent talking points.

What if some quick answers can be completely wrong, and even disastrously mal-adaptive? Can that be useful? One famous strategist, Napoleon Bonaparte, supposedly had a statement on just that topic. Undoubtedly, Napoleon wasn't the first to think this way, or the last.
"Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake."
Does that strategy embody a helpful or harmful outlook for citizens of a supposed democracy? It all depends on the intended outcome, and where that intention falls in the spectrum between dog-eat-dog vs "a more perfect union"!

If Chuck Lane feels that some citizens are his enemies, it would be nice to know which citizens those are. All of us, or just some of us? And, if that's the case, exactly what mistake does he want to help us make? The mistake of NOT being an informed electorate? For propagandists, vaguely worded precedent statements serve the same function as subliminal advertising. Their only purpose is to prime the emotional disposition of audiences.

Chuck Lane's record and position also leaves many citizens truly baffled about the politics of the Washington Post's current and former owners. Do the WashPo's owners too, feel that some citizens of the USA are their enemies? This is very confusing ground, of course, but not the sort of situation we should be forced to wonder about when discussing the motives of a nationally prominent news organization.

When answers are needed, it helps to start with a useful question, and then pursue answers with adaptive methods. As George Washington supposedly wrote to James Madison: "Wisdom and good examples are necessary at this time to rescue the political machine from the impending storm." Unfortunately, Chuck Lane's current editorial on bank policy doesn't stand up as a very good example. If anything, it gums up our political machine and worsens the next impending storm.

Is there more to know about why Chuck is there at the Washington Post? At whose will? Whom does he serve? Are his messages just consistent cover for hidden goals?

* Lyndon LaRouche's writing was also spectacularly confusing and disorienting, but strangely effective - at least for the goal of advancing his, hard to fathom, personally desired outcome.


Sunday, May 26, 2013

James Madison on democracy


[1:422; Madison, 26 June]
[Mr. Madison.] In all civilized Countries the people fall into different classes havg. a real or supposed difference of interests. There will be creditors & debtors, farmers, merchts. & manufacturers. There will be particularly the distinction of rich & poor. It was true as had been observd. (by Mr Pinkney) we had not among us those hereditary distinctions, of rank which were a great source of the contests in the ancient Govts. as well as the modern States of Europe, nor those extremes of wealth or poverty which characterize the latter. We cannot however be regarded even at this time, as one homogeneous mass, in which every thing that affects a part will affect in the same manner the whole. In framing a system which we wish to last for ages, we shd. not lose sight of the changes which ages will produce. An increase of population will of necessity increase the proportion of those who will labour under all the hardships of life, & secretly sigh for a more equal distribution of its blessings. These may in time outnumber those who are placed above the feelings of indigence. According to the equal laws of suffrage, the power will slide into the hands of the former. No agrarian attempts have yet been made in this Country, but symptoms of a leveling spirit, as we have understood, have sufficiently appeared in a certain quarters to give notice of the future danger. How is this danger to be guarded agst. on republican principles? How is the danger in all cases of interested coalitions to oppress the minority to be guarded agst.?

The Founders Constitution

Friday, July 20, 2012

Thomas Jefferson & James Madison on Equality

I am conscious that an equal division of property is impracticable. But the consequences of this enormous inequality producing so much misery to the bulk of mankind, legislators cannot invent too many devices for subdividing property, only taking care to let their subdivisions go hand in hand with the natural affections of the human mind. The descent of property of every kind therefore to all the children, or to all the brothers and sisters, or other relations in equal degree is a politic measure, and a practicable one. Another means of silently lessening the inequality of property is to exempt all from taxation below a certain point, and to tax the higher portions of property in geometrical progression as they rise. Whenever there is in any country, uncultivated lands and unemployed poor, it is clear that the laws of property have been so far extended as to violate natural right. The earth is given as a common stock for man to labour and live on. If, for the encouragement of industry we allow it to be appropriated, we must take care that other employment be furnished to those excluded from the appropriation.
Thomas Jefferson to James Madison
28 Oct. 1785 Papers 8:68-82
in The Founders' Constitution

19 June 1786  Papers 9:76--77
Volume 1, Chapter 15, Document 32

University of Chicago Press
The Papers of Thomas Jefferson. Edited by Julian P. Boyd et al. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1950
(h/t OccupyMarines)

Madison replied:
A certain degree of misery seems inseparable from a high degree of populousness. If the lands in Europe which are now dedicated to the amusement of the idle rich, were parcelled out among the idle poor, I readily conceive the happy revolution which would be experienced by a certain proportion of the latter. But still would there not remain a great proportion unrelieved? No problem in political Oeconomy has appeared to me more puzzling than that which relates to the most proper distribution of the inhabitants of a Country fully peopled. Let the lands be shared among them ever so wisely, & let them be supplied with labourers ever so plentifully; as there must be a great surplus of subsistence, there will also remain a great surplus of inhabitants, a greater by far than will be employed in cloathing both themselves & those who feed them, and in administering to both, every other necessary & even comfort of life. What is to be done with this surplus? Hitherto we have seen them distributed into Manufacturers of superfluities, idle proprietors of productive funds, domestics, soldiers, merchants, mariners, and a few other less numerous classes. All these classes notwithstanding have been found insufficient to absorb the redundant members of a populous society; and yet a reduction of most of those classes enters into the very reform which appears so necessary & desireable. From a more equal partition of property, must result a greater simplicity of manners, consequently a less consumption of manufactured superfluities, and a less proportion of idle proprietors & domestics. From a juster Government must result less need of soldiers either for defence agst. dangers from without or disturbances from within.
James Madison to Thomas Jefferson
The Founders' Constitution
Volume 1, Chapter 15, Document 33

University of Chicago Press
The Papers of James Madison. Edited by William T. Hutchinson et al. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 1962--77 (vols. 1--10); Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 1977--(vols. 11--)