Posted on 06/09/2006 4:14:37 AM PDT by Zedeed
It is a common mistake/oversight to use the word "All" in a posting and somehow expect that everyone you refer to will get the word. Even if you put "All" in the "To:" box of a reply it will not get the job done.The point about conserving the revolution and America as exemplar was particularly illuminating.If you hope to get replies to a reply, you must see that the FR handle of each poster is explicit in the "To:" box of your reply. I have taken the trouble to do that for you, above.
I refer you to The Theme Is Freedom: Religion, Politics, and the American Tradition by M. Stanton Evans.Further recommended reading: American Beliefs by John McElroy.
And anything written by Thomas Sowell (and he has written a lot) will be illuminating. See especially his recent book, Black Rednecks and White Liberals (note that Professor Sowell is black).
OK, you've got my attention! Can you elaborate either via FReepmail or another post? Count me as one of the Americans who know nothing of this - but I'd like to learn more.
Just a note. As an historian, what I see now is the flowering of the British empire as Engliish fast becomes the lingua franca. Someone should help the British feel enormously gratified, instead of referring to themselves a just a poor litle country.
http://coat.ncf.ca/our_magazine/links/53/butler02-by_schmidt.html
http://www.webcom.com/ctka/pr399-fdr.html
America would have become a fascist state had Butler not stood his ground and told those that wanted to enlist him to overthrow the government that he would raise his own army of Marines and soldiers to stop them.
Thanks for the information - I'll check it out.
Write your own paper.....and get off my cloud!
In a sense they are a "poor little country," considering that they are dwarfed by the US and even matched economically by Hong Kong.But as you say, the English-speaking US and all its other former colonies are standing on the shoulders of their British legacy. In that sense see the preamble to our Constitution and its usage, "secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity." If you limit the word "posterity" to one of its meanings, you think only of decendants.
But viewing "posterity" to mean "those who come after" rather than merely decendants, the legacy of the Founding Fathers would be secure even if, Heaven forefend, the US were to somehow fail as a polity. For the fact that the US has already endured for 200 years is proof of the concept of the stable democratic republic. Which was the minimum criterion for success of the "Great Experiment."
I have bookmarked this thread; it's the sort of thing I'm interested in. Note that you can view a poster's bookmarks, if any, by clicking on their screen name following one of their postings and then selecting "Links" from the heading of their home page. That can be fun and informative.
As my namesake the ancient Greek historian Polybius observed over 2100 years ago, every war has a "cause" (true, but not avowed) and one or several "pretexts" (avowed, but not true).
The cause of the 1882 invasion of Egypt was a threat to the continuing British access to the Suez Canal by an Egyptian civil war. The pretext was "to restore order and to bring Egyptian finances and administration back into shape".
The incursion into Sudan was necessary as Sudan's geographic position directly threatens Egypt and the Suez Canal.
While the U.S. has often acted, and also failed to act, on the basis of its own self-interest, it has also often fought for idealistic purposes in causes that yielded little or no strategic advantage to the U.S.
The Europe Union has recognized such idealism by the fact that, 60 years into the Pax Americana, it has virtually disarmed itself and has entrusted its defense to the Americans while reserving the right to sneer at America's preoccupation with such vulgar matters as the ability to successfully wage war.
By contrast, the British Empire and Imperial Germany so distrusted each other in regards to relative naval prowess that they bled each other almost to death on French soil when the traditional enemy of both had always been France.
While much can be made of Belgian neutrality as a British casus beli in 1914, such concern for neutral rights were not evident in 1801 when Nelson destroyed the Danish fleet at Copenhagen in order to eliminate the Armed Neutrality.
In the end, the Europeans trust America's idealism for their very survival much more than they ever trusted themselves.
European mercantilism which promoted a favorable balance of trade always sought to bleed the trade partner to benefit the motherland. So, the colonies, being disadvantaged, felt they had to be free. Americans have promoted freeedom and free trade in a way that benefits everyone. I suspect that the mercantilists still think that everyone else will end up with all of the American money and we will be broke, but it doesn't seem to be working out that way, at all.
The joke on the mercantilists is the fact that the most prosperous country has a "negative balance of payments" - a "trade deficit" because less prosperous nations desire to invest in the more prosperous ones.All in the world a "trade deficit" is is positive net foreign investment in the country. That is its only possible cause.
IBTZ!
I hope you're taking notes, as this is turning out to be a magnificent thread. Thank you for starting it.
My first paycheck.
2. On a related note, which element of conservatism is most important for you? Belief in family values, religious faith, patriotism, belief in the market, or something else entirely? I appreciate that these are all bound together to a certain extent, but if you had to isolate one element…
Small Government. Reagan said it best: Government is the Problem, not the Solution.
3. How do you account for the “rise of the right” since the 1970s? Has it always been there, was it a response to particular stimuli?
Realization that Conservative Values ARE Values. Liberal "Values" don't exist. Want proof? Look at the lack of response of Feminists to Lewinsky or anyone else the First Rapist attacked. People need to be grounded.
4. Do you feel conservatism is dominant in American political culture today?
Yes, but silently so.
5. If you could repeal any constitutional amendment tomorrow, which would you choose and why?
I wouldn't repeal any, but I would reinstate the 10th (the most important of them all.
6. If you could pass any constitutional amendment tomorrow, what would it be and why?
Take Mexico's Article 33 word for word (in English) and make it an Amendment.
7. “Splendid isolation” and “policeman of the world” are both descriptions which have been applied to American foreign policy in the twentieth century- which is the better goal for the twenty-first century?
Neither applies -- both are naive. But we need to make it clear that our foreign policy is there to serve US interests. The sissy-boy Liberals "we need to be liked" line don't understand.
8. What role, if any, should government play in the economy?
Stay out as much as possible. Just make sure the playing field is level.
9. Do you admire any philosophers/economists/statesmen of the past? If so, who and why?
Harry Truman and Ronald Reagan.
10. The United States at the end of the twentieth century has been compared to Britain at the end of the nineteenth. Is this a reasonable comparison in your opinion, and if so, how can the US maintain its international position through the twenty-first century as Britain failed to do in the twentieth?
Hah! We have a virtual hegemony that Britain could never even imagine. The important thing is we don't need city-states. Our hegemony is the result of having basic values that can be admired (despite the world's fickle opinion of the USA at any given moment). The USA is the greatest force for good that the world has ever seen. We take a lot of crap from the ungrateful and still our first reaction is to help. More money was probably raised here for the Tsunami victims than anywhere else in the world. Our basic values of generosity, freedom, self-reliance are indeed something that everyone should admire.
There is nothing to stop us, except ourselves. If we continue to allow illegal immigration and embrace multiculturalism we will die as a society.
IB4TZ?????
1. How did you first become attracted to broadly “conservative” ideas?
I was born free in the USA, a citizen as opposed to a subject. How could I not be attracted to this idea?
2. On a related note, which element of conservatism is most important for you? Belief in family values, religious faith, patriotism, belief in the market, or something else entirely? I appreciate that these are all bound together to a certain extent, but if you had to isolate one element…
Freedom.
3. How do you account for the “rise of the right” since the 1970s? Has it always been there, was it a response to particular stimuli?
Socialism wasn't working.
4. Do you feel conservatism is dominant in American political culture today?
Of course. Socialism has failed every time it has been tried.
5. If you could repeal any constitutional amendment tomorrow, which would you choose and why?
Amendment 16 - The income tax. Do I really need to say why?
6. If you could pass any constitutional amendment tomorrow, what would it be and why?
Amendment 28 - Limited Debate Act: Debate in the US Senate and House can be ended with a majority vote of the members.
7. “Splendid isolation” and “policeman of the world” are both descriptions which have been applied to American foreign policy in the twentieth century- which is the better goal for the twenty-first century?
Neither applies. Enlightened self interest is appropriate.
8. What role, if any, should government play in the economy?
The government should encourage free enterprise.
9. Do you admire any philosophers/economists/statesmen of the past? If so, who and why?
Thomas Jefferson - Small government, free enterprise
10. The United States at the end of the twentieth century has been compared to Britain at the end of the nineteenth. Is this a reasonable comparison in your opinion, and if so, how can the US maintain its international position through the twenty-first century as Britain failed to do in the twentieth?
Not reasonable. It's a stupid comparison, made by stupid people.
Yes, plus they have less money, but they spend what they have here, so they still have less.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.