PDA

View Full Version : Thomas Paine on Government



Green Arrow
09-22-2013, 09:10 PM
http://youtu.be/q9M2nTmU3jA

Thoughts?

jillian
09-22-2013, 09:29 PM
other than the fact that he was right? what's else is there to say?

Green Arrow
09-22-2013, 09:40 PM
other than the fact that he was right? what's else is there to say?

I was hoping to hear the conservatives and libertarians weigh in, as they tend to find the suggestions of Mr. Paine to be of the vilest socialism.

AmazonTania
09-22-2013, 09:47 PM
Okay. I'll bite. What is the purpose of this?

Green Arrow
09-22-2013, 09:50 PM
Okay. I'll bite. What is the purpose of this?

Of what, the video? To set the record straight, as it were, on what Thomas Paine's view of good government was.

If you meant the purpose of the thread, it's to foster a discussion on what good government is.

AmazonTania
09-22-2013, 09:53 PM
Of what, the video? To set the record straight, as it were, on what Thomas Paine's view of good government was.

You're setting the record straight on what Thomas Paine's view of good government based on a hearsay fallacy?


If you meant the purpose of the thread, it's to foster a discussion on what good government is.

Which is?

jillian
09-22-2013, 09:54 PM
Okay. I'll bite. What is the purpose of this?

yes, why would anyone discuss the purpose of government on a political messageboard.

yep...

jillian
09-22-2013, 09:55 PM
Which is?

what is the purpose of your questions? you clearly aren't interested in the issue. and you clearly don't like what he posted.

AmazonTania
09-22-2013, 09:55 PM
yes, why would anyone discuss the purpose of government on a political messageboard.

yep...

Who is discussing anything? We're watching an actor monologue Thomas Paine... Poorly.

AmazonTania
09-22-2013, 09:59 PM
what is the purpose of your questions? you clearly aren't interested in the issue. and you clearly don't like what he posted.

You're confusing issues with banter and opinions.

Green Arrow
09-22-2013, 10:03 PM
You're setting the record straight on what Thomas Paine's view of good government based on a hearsay fallacy?

When did directly quoting someone's works to explain how they felt about certain issues become "hearsay"?


Which is?

In the video.

Green Arrow
09-22-2013, 10:03 PM
Who is discussing anything? We're watching an actor monologue Thomas Paine... Poorly.

What do you mean, poorly? He's a terrific actor.

jillian
09-22-2013, 10:05 PM
You're setting the record straight on what Thomas Paine's view of good government based on a hearsay fallacy?

that whole quote thing beyond you, huh?

i guess glen beck knows better than thomas paine's own words.

AmazonTania
09-22-2013, 10:10 PM
When did directly quoting someone's works to explain how they felt about certain issues become "hearsay"?

Quoting someone else's work and monologging it vaguely are two different things. The actor is not Thomas Paine, nor has the actor witness any events regarding Thomas Paine himself has witnessed in question.

That's a Hearsay Fallacy. If you want to set the record about what Thomas Paine felt, just provide a quote by Thomas Paine.

AmazonTania
09-22-2013, 10:12 PM
that whole quote thing beyond you, huh?

i guess glen beck knows better than thomas paine's own words.

Monologging is not quoting. It's loosely portraying a public figure.

AmazonTania
09-22-2013, 10:12 PM
What do you mean, poorly? He's a terrific actor.

No... No he isn't.

oceanloverOH
09-22-2013, 11:13 PM
I finally found the time to watch this superbly-done clip. First of all, Ian Ruskin is a wonderful actor....he really brought that historical period to life for me. The longer I listened to him talk, the more sense he was making to me.....me, a staunch conservative! I think the issue is not what he espoused....it was all absolutely spot-on. IMO, the issue is the skewed way those original concepts are interpreted and employed in modern society. Is it a right for the disabled and others who truly cannot support themselves, to receive support from the government? YES, IT IS. But this concept has been so mangled over the years as to now include perfectly able-bodied people, who have created their own bad situations (i.e., the woman who has a half-dozen babies from different fathers, to keep the welfare checks rolling in). Again, a well-done piece and definite food for thought. Thank you for posting it, Green Arrow.

Any other conservatives want to weigh in on this one?

GrassrootsConservative
09-22-2013, 11:41 PM
http://youtu.be/q9M2nTmU3jA

Thoughts?

Yes, I watched the whole thing and found it to be a pretty good speech although I think him posing as Thomas Paine is a little much. He's a good speaker, but he's no Thomas Paine. Also neither Republicans nor Democrats embrace the values he talks about. Republicans do so much better, but not nearly as much as they ought to.

I agree with the phrase about government being a "necessary evil" although I am still not sure whether Paine came up with that. I think back then in America the attitude was pretty much embracing of government, just not the British tyranny. We were quick to claim our independence and legal documents as a new country, I don't think people who thought of government as a "necessary evil" would have been so hasty in their establishing a government.

/Edit: Also his bit about how one person can't accomplish anything alone is NOT something they would have thought back then. A big theme for the early American people was "independence." Maybe Thomas Paine did but that idea isn't very American at all IMHO.

I do far better working alone than I do with a group of people. Far. Better.

Green Arrow
09-23-2013, 12:15 AM
Yes, I watched the whole thing and found it to be a pretty good speech although I think him posing as Thomas Paine is a little much. He's a good speaker, but he's no Thomas Paine. Also neither Republicans nor Democrats embrace the values he talks about. Republicans do so much better, but not nearly as much as they ought to.

I agree with the phrase about government being a "necessary evil" although I am still not sure whether Paine came up with that. I think back then in America the attitude was pretty much embracing of government, just not the British tyranny. We were quick to claim our independence and legal documents as a new country, I don't think people who thought of government as a "necessary evil" would have been so hasty in their establishing a government.

/Edit: Also his bit about how one person can't accomplish anything alone is NOT something they would have thought back then. A big theme for the early American people was "independence." Maybe Thomas Paine did but that idea isn't very American at all IMHO.

I do far better working alone than I do with a group of people. Far. Better.

Everything he said came directly from the works of Thomas Paine, save for the little digs about modern Americans. He also was not aiming for a partisan message, and neither was the Thomas Paine Society in putting this together. Quite the opposite, as Paine himself was non-partisan and the TPS prides themselves on being as true to Thomas Paine as possible.

GrassrootsConservative
09-23-2013, 12:28 AM
Everything he said came directly from the works of Thomas Paine, save for the little digs about modern Americans. He also was not aiming for a partisan message, and neither was the Thomas Paine Society in putting this together. Quite the opposite, as Paine himself was non-partisan and the TPS prides themselves on being as true to Thomas Paine as possible.

If there was no partisan aim here then why did you say you were hoping for conservatives and libertarians to weigh in on this?

/Edit: And why is the title of the video and the short section about Glenn Beck partisan jabs at the tea party, if they're non-partisan?

Green Arrow
09-23-2013, 12:33 AM
If there was no partisan aim here then why did you say you were hoping for conservatives and libertarians to weigh in on this?

Because I expected leftists to pretty much agree, save for the statists.


/Edit: And why is the title of the video and the short section about Glenn Beck partisan jabs at the tea party, if they're non-partisan?

Because it's Beck and the Tea Party that took Paine's works and bastardized them into something they weren't.

Regardless, I wasn't looking for this to be a critique of the video, I was hoping to discuss the issues within.

GrassrootsConservative
09-23-2013, 12:38 AM
Because I expected leftists to pretty much agree, save for the statists.



Because it's Beck and the Tea Party that took Paine's works and bastardized them into something they weren't.

Regardless, I wasn't looking for this to be a critique of the video, I was hoping to discuss the issues within.

Well I agree with everything in the video except for the partisan nonsense.

jillian
09-23-2013, 04:54 AM
If there was no partisan aim here then why did you say you were hoping for conservatives and libertarians to weigh in on this?

/Edit: And why is the title of the video and the short section about Glenn Beck partisan jabs at the tea party, if they're non-partisan?

everyone is partisan if you have opinions.

and he asked for conservatives because the words of thomas paine are vastly different from the claims of today's extreme right.

jillian
09-23-2013, 04:54 AM
Well I agree with everything in the video except for the partisan nonsense.

which part is partisan nonsense? when he pointed out that glenn beck shouldn't be claiming his mantle?

he shouldn't. that's fact.

patrickt
09-23-2013, 07:06 AM
At the end of the somewhat entertaining film it says:

"Thomas Paine's Words and Ideas Adapted by Ian Ruskin and Alaine Lowell"

So much for the show being accurate quotes of Thomas Paine and some sort of reality show. Some quotes might be accurate and out of context. Some might be accurate and presented honestly. Others are adapted to suit the presenter and the audience.

But, back in the day, only socialists had electric lights.

For years, some have had trouble distinguishing moves from reality. It's sad.

jillian
09-23-2013, 07:12 AM
At the end of the somewhat entertaining film it says:

"Thomas Paine's Words and Ideas Adapted by Ian Ruskin and Alaine Lowell"

So much for the show being accurate quotes of Thomas Paine and some sort of reality show. Some quotes might be accurate and out of context. Some might be accurate and presently honestly. Others are adapted to suit the presenter and the audience.

But, back in the day, only socialists had electric lights.

For years, some have had trouble distinguishing moves from reality. It's sad.

they were accurate quotes. what was adapted was the stuff about modern politics (like the glen beck thing... i'm pretty sure thomas paine wasn't prescient enough to know about beck).

keep talking about reality when it isn't the right's thing.

patrickt
09-23-2013, 07:30 AM
they were accurate quotes. what was adapted was the stuff about modern politics (like the glen beck thing... i'm pretty sure thomas paine wasn't prescient enough to know about beck).

keep talking about reality when it isn't the right's thing.

And we're to rely on your reputation for honesty, decency, and intelligence and take your word that what was spoken was "accurate quotes"? Surely, even you realize, how ludicrous that would be.

Alyosha
09-23-2013, 07:40 AM
Back then your state was your country. Many of our founders did believe in communitarian principles within their individual states because they were Christians or deists. They were not collectivists, however. When Thomas Paine was espousing this the tax was on goods, tariffs, etc. They had no income tax, had no methods of collection, had no ability to organize it even. If I had a voluntary consumption tax I'd be more apt to want my dollars to go to more social programs than when I'm robbed of my money to have it redistributed.

All of them believed in charity and the rule of Natural Law. I see nothing about this that is incongruent with libertarian principles.

jillian
09-23-2013, 07:42 AM
Back then your state was your country. Many of our founders did believe in communitarian principles within their individual states because they were Christians or deists. They were not collectivists, however. When Thomas Paine was espousing this the tax was on goods, tariffs, etc. They had no income tax, had no methods of collection, had no ability to organize it even. If I had a voluntary consumption tax I'd be more apt to want my dollars to go to more social programs than when I'm robbed of my money to have it redistributed.

All of them believed in charity and the rule of Natural Law. I see nothing about this that is incongruent with libertarian principles.

back when?

the constitution specifically did away with what you're talking about in favor of strong centralized government.

consumption taxes are disproportionately charged against the middle class and poor

which is why the right loves them

Alyosha
09-23-2013, 07:52 AM
back when?

I won't bother to answer that. You're just being silly now. We didn't have the income tax until Wilson.




the constitution specifically did away with what you're talking about in favor of strong centralized government.


No, it did not. The Constitution did not create a "strong" centralized government, just a centralized government. The Civil War created a strong centralized government.



consumption taxes are disproportionately charged against the middle class and poor


Why do you say that? You'll pay more tax on a Bentley than a Hyundai. Most food essentials would not even be taxed--they weren't then. It was goods they could put a tax to like tea, cloth, etc.



which is why the right loves them

Not at all. Rich people can avoid taxes now and do. The middle class, specifically the upper middle and lower upper pay the tax of this nation. Not the Mitt Romneys, the Warren Buffets, the Mark Cubans. It's people like me paying it.

I've been extremely poor when I was growing up and I'm now well off. I've seen both sides of the spectrum and I see the flaws in our progressive taxation system. It punishes success for those in the middle, rewards mediocrity for those on the lower end, and rewards corruption at the top.

I'd like a system with feedback loops to care for the very poor and help them, not just throw money at them and I'd like that system not to punish the middle class, and I'd like the system to be voluntary. People who don't believe in war shouldn't have to have their dollars jerked out of their pockets for it, and people who don't believe in the drug war should not either, etc.

I'd rather see my money go to the poor, but I believe it should be voluntary or not at all.

Green Arrow
09-23-2013, 09:07 AM
And we're to rely on your reputation for honesty, decency, and intelligence and take your word that what was spoken was "accurate quotes"? Surely, even you realize, how ludicrous that would be.

No, you could just read Paine's works. I've read everything he's ever published. It was all accurate.

KC
09-23-2013, 10:27 AM
Of what, the video? To set the record straight, as it were, on what Thomas Paine's view of good government was.

If you meant the purpose of the thread, it's to foster a discussion on what good government is.

Now that is a good topic.

I think we all have a common idea of what a good government is. We want a government that's able to bring wrong doers to justice, to protect our common interests and protect our rights and civil liberties, at the very least to safeguard those things that are enshrined in the Declaration of Independence; life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Where I think most of our disagreements will arise is how the government is best able to do this.

The problem of good government isn't trying to discover what combination of specific policies will bring about a good and just society because most of us have a basic framework of what that looks like. The problem of good government is to find a way to constrain opportunistic politicians who will abuse their power for their benefit and the benefit of their benefactors. The old problem of tyranny of the majority is really not the issue in our republic. We have tyranny of the minority, the wealthy elite that has hijacked the power of the government by purchasing the two major political parties. I believe that "good government" is the result of successful constraints on both tyranny of the minority and of the majority, so for the advocates of good government... good luck.

Chris
09-23-2013, 10:57 AM
yes, why would anyone discuss the purpose of government on a political messageboard.

yep...

Where's your discussion, jillian, you've contributed no substance so far.


In the video, "Paine" begins by justifying rebellion against tyranny--what we find in the Declaration as


...That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.....


When you say "other than the fact that he was right? what's else is there to say?" are you saying you now suddenly agree with the right of the people to abolish our government should it become tyrannical?

Discuss.


From there he goes on to discuss the role of government. Specifically he says "Society in every state is a blessing. Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil, and in its worst state, an intolerable one." Again going back to the declared right of the people to abolish it.

Discuss.

Chris
09-23-2013, 11:07 AM
When did directly quoting someone's works to explain how they felt about certain issues become "hearsay"?



In the video.



The first half of the video, where he looks at his times and does cite his work, seems accurate enough; the second half, where he seems to take a stand in today's issues, seems speculative.

The speculation might be supported in considering how eventually he was rejected here by American revolutionaries (all but perhaps Washington) and embraced by French revolutionaries. I think the speculative half is understandable in terms of what Hayek pointed out as two traditions of liberalism, the Scottish/English tradition of classical liberalism, the purpose of government limited to protecting rights as equality before natural law, versus the French tradition, the purpose of government unlimited in providing entitlements as right and equality through posited law. Paine, especially later in life, fell into the French tradition. So perhaps the speculation is accurate.

Chris
09-23-2013, 11:11 AM
Now that is a good topic.

I think we all have a common idea of what a good government is. We want a government that's able to bring wrong doers to justice, to protect our common interests and protect our rights and civil liberties, at the very least to safeguard those things that are enshrined in the Declaration of Independence; life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Where I think most of our disagreements will arise is how the government is best able to do this.

The problem of good government isn't trying to discover what combination of specific policies will bring about a good and just society because most of us have a basic framework of what that looks like. The problem of good government is to find a way to constrain opportunistic politicians who will abuse their power for their benefit and the benefit of their benefactors. The old problem of tyranny of the majority is really not the issue in our republic. We have tyranny of the minority, the wealthy elite that has hijacked the power of the government by purchasing the two major political parties. I believe that "good government" is the result of successful constraints on both tyranny of the minority and of the majority, so for the advocates of good government... good luck.



Well said, and, yes, good luck, for those opportunistic politicians will always tell us they are promoting the common good, and many will believe them, especially when they see how easy it is to vote themselves largess from the public coffers.