Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: Tublecane

Because there wasn’t one.

Here’s a quote worth remembering while the boot of the oppressor grows heavier:

“He who will not rule himself will be ruled by another.”

It is those who will not rule themselves that get my ire up, because I suffer under the oppressive restrictions they bring down on us all.

Like a teacher who says, “Nobody gets to go to recess until the entire class is quiet and finishes their work,”... or like a judge who says, “One more outburst like that and I’ll clear this entire courtroom,”... well, you get the point.

When a community polices itself instead of adopting that corrupt “live and let live” libertarian hogwash, government restraint is unnecessary. Such were the earlier days of America, and worthy of the term “self-government”.


38 posted on 12/14/2012 1:47:36 PM PST by LearsFool ("Thou shouldst not have been old, till thou hadst been wise.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies ]


To: LearsFool

Did government step in because the community stopped policing itself, or did the community stop policing itself because the government stepped in? I think historically the latter has more evidence behind it, though it may be impossible to prove. In any case even if the government is only responding to parental or community failure I atoll blame the government. If not on efficiency grounds then on moral grounds. Arguing otherwise means you think such interference is justified, even if they step in only after private failure. Which might be grounds not to consider you a conservative (there must be some hard boundaries).

Besides, who said the community has failed? Is there really a buckyball problem? Did buckyball tragedies and the people’s inability to respond to them beg for public health intrusion, or were busibodies out seeking for something to ban? I see absolutely no evidence this was something just begging to be regulated.

I can see blaming the people for falling short of the eternal vigilence standard. I can see putting the onus on voters as opposed to dirty politicians and dirty bureaucrats. But treating it as a legitimate substitute for missing private responsibility is anathematic. Perhaps he who will not rule himself will be ruled by others. But that does NOT make others’ rule legitimate.


43 posted on 12/14/2012 3:08:17 PM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson