The only moral purpose of government is to protect individual rights against the tyranny of society

L L wrote:

Flip it.

Government is to protect society from crazy individuals.

And of course your own self preservation/protection isn't your own responsibility. Like with everything and libtardation that is someone else's responsibility.

taxpayer of frogs wrote:

I quite literally own you, as I pay your salary. You are a pawn that more important decide where to go, when we say so, and you are to do what we tell you. This role is perfect for you because it doesn't require you to do any thinking.

Now, I am not paying you to post on your laptop that I paid for. Back to the mess hall.

Perhaps you should familiarize yourself with the definitions of the words, 'literally' and 'own'.

The moral form of government is not Democracy, which holds a majority vote as a moral validation of an idea, but a Republic in which constitutional restraints strictly limit the power of elected officials to prevent them from infringing on the sovereignty of the individual. Our move toward collectivism and unrestrained Democracy is the reason for our decline.

Enlightened person wrote:

The moral form of government is not Democracy, which holds a majority vote as a moral validation of an idea, but a Republic in which constitutional restraints strictly limit the power of elected officials to prevent them from infringing on the sovereignty of the individual. Our move toward collectivism and unrestrained Democracy is the reason for our decline.

And so we see another uneducated individual who mindlessly repeats something that he thinks he understands or perhaps heard at some point.

1) Democracy holds no such notion. Some commonly held tenets of democracy include:

- A government chosen (and periodically replaced) through elections

- The active participation of the citizens in politics

- Protection of the human rights of all citizens

- The right of people to dissent

- The rule of law, including the law applying equally to all

There is nothing whatsoever about "a majority vote as a moral validation of an idea"

But thanks for repeating nonsense.

2) There is no "move toward collectivism and unrestrained Democracy" going on in this country.

But thanks for the laughs.

3) The country is most certainly NOT in decline

But thanks for the "sky is falling" paranoia.

4) If there is a problem in this country it is at least partially explainable as the result of ignorant talking heads mindlessly repeating ignorant talking points (like yourself, for example).

It is. But every time we try it a large majority of folks decide they prefer stability and community to chaos and isolation so, of their own volition and out of pure self interest, they say up a government and agree to subjugate themselves to a handful of rules they may not love in exchange for the assurance that everyone else abides by the majority of the rules they do like. I live in America because I like physical security, economic opportunity and your national parks. I despise the NBA and your bizarre love of guns but that's the pill I swallow. For now.

Then the majority create a police force to deal with the minority who were never on board with the whole government enterprise anyway. Sucks to be them but their situation is no different than if there were no government at all - they're still just getting screwed by a group that's stronger than them.

Humans are social creatures. Government is human nature.

iceCream wrote:

:)

Care to explain why? And whose individual rights? You think they never conflict? Which rights are the most important? Can you honestly not think of a situation in which an individual's rights might need to come second to the best interest of society? What constitutes tyranny?

:)

Every individual has an analienable right to his own life, and as a consequence, the inalienable rights to his freedom of action and the product of his own effort. There is no such thing as "society."

The less enlightened person go it right.

1) Democracy without constitutional limitations means that the 51% can force the 49% to do whatever they want. It's called "the tyranny of the majority". That's what we have today. Unrestricted government rule by the 51%. So you're wrong on that one.

2) Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Welfare x 100, ObamaCare, student loans, etc. You're wrong again.

3) Lowest work force participation rate since 1977. A jobless recovery. The Fed running out of room to do more pumping to prop up a dead economy. A foreign policy in shambles. Race wars brewing everywhere. Wrong again.

4) You certainly got that one right... assuming you were talking about MSM reporters, college professors, and the "more enlightened" set like yourself.

One out of four. 25%. You get an "F".

Enlightened person wrote:

The moral form of government is not Democracy, which holds a majority vote as a moral validation of an idea, but a Republic in which constitutional restraints strictly limit the power of elected officials to prevent them from infringing on the sovereignty of the individual. Our move toward collectivism and unrestrained Democracy is the reason for our decline.

Spot on. Unbridled democracy also has the problem of spending. Without a constitutional limit on what can be done (and spent) politicians give out goodies in the here and now to get re-elected, and the liabilities of these giveaways come to fruition farther down the road when said politicians are out of office. Not to worry though; there is always a new crop of politicians to give out free stuff.

Can people really look at the debt-to-GDP ratio of Japan, Europe, the U.S., etc., and straight-faced say there isn't a problem? The delusion and propaganda these people live under is astounding.

While a republic is more moral than a direct democracy, it is still immoral in that it relies on force (taxes) to maintain itself. I'm sure I'll get some bullshit responses about the implicit "social contract" or some other Rousseauian nonsense.

Ah, the king of the ignoramuses has spoken.

Well done, sir. Well done indeed!

Abdoujaparov wrote:

I despise the NBA and your bizarre love of guns but that's the pill I swallow. For now.

Basketball and guns is a crazy combo.

"The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal bread." -- Anatole France

Enlightened person wrote:

The moral form of government is not Democracy, which holds a majority vote as a moral validation of an idea, but a Republic in which constitutional restraints strictly limit the power of elected officials to prevent them from infringing on the sovereignty of the individual. Our move toward collectivism and unrestrained Democracy is the reason for our decline.

____________

Even if it was true that a move toward collectivism and "unrestrained Democracy" would lead to "decline," neither of these trends describes the tendency of American government since the 1970s, which has been characterized by devolution (decentralization of decision-making to states and local governments, especially decisions pertaining to social welfare programs) and retrenchment (scaling back of social welfare programs).

More Enlightened Person wrote:

3) The country is most certainly NOT in decline

But thanks for the "sky is falling" paranoia.

On Oct 1, Russia bombed USA-backed rebel forces, killing women and children. On the SAME DAY, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov appears with John Kerry on stage. Instead of condemning Russian actions in the strongest manner possible, Kerry says only that the US is "concerned about the nature of targets... and the need for clarity on those targets." This had to be embarrassing for Kerry. He wasn't even allowed to condemn the murder of innocents.This was embarrassing to watch live. It's a new low for America's continued decline as a world power.

fisky wrote:

More Enlightened Person wrote:

3) The country is most certainly NOT in decline

But thanks for the "sky is falling" paranoia.

On Oct 1, Russia bombed USA-backed rebel forces, killing women and children. On the SAME DAY, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov appears with John Kerry on stage. Instead of condemning Russian actions in the strongest manner possible, Kerry says only that the US is "concerned about the nature of targets... and the need for clarity on those targets." This had to be embarrassing for Kerry. He wasn't even allowed to condemn the murder of innocents.This was embarrassing to watch live. It's a new low for America's continued decline as a world power.

The US is by far the preeminent military power in the world. It is not even remotely close.

But thank you for playing.

The status quo of this country represents the failure of Democracy. We've voted ourselves to death.

GD wrote:

Enlightened person wrote:

The moral form of government is not Democracy, which holds a majority vote as a moral validation of an idea, but a Republic in which constitutional restraints strictly limit the power of elected officials to prevent them from infringing on the sovereignty of the individual. Our move toward collectivism and unrestrained Democracy is the reason for our decline.

____________

Even if it was true that a move toward collectivism and "unrestrained Democracy" would lead to "decline," neither of these trends describes the tendency of American government since the 1970s, which has been characterized by devolution (decentralization of decision-making to states and local governments, especially decisions pertaining to social welfare programs) and retrenchment (scaling back of social welfare programs).

Apparently, I missed the memo Re: decrease in gov't spending on social welfare...and this was four years ago.