Skip to comments.When the Pursuit of Liberty Is Liberty's Greatest Enemy
Posted on 06/19/2011 12:10:12 PM PDT by Nachum
It has been said by persons such as Abraham Lincoln that the cause of tyranny can oftentimes be mistaken for and promoted as the cause of liberty. To prevent such a destructive misconception from metastasizing, Americans must concern themselves most seriously with understanding what liberty is -- and also what it is not.
John Stuart Mill, in what is perhaps his most famous and influential work, On Liberty, helped build the foundation for a modern understanding of freedom, one which an overwhelming number of Americans support. In doing so, he argued that for a society to be properly liberated, its citizens must be guaranteed freedom of thought and speech, liberty of tastes and pursuits, and freedom of association. Yet, expressly recognizing in the first chapter of On Liberty that these liberties were too radical without certain restrictions, Mill sought the boundaries within which they should exist. And by setting those particular boundaries, like so many of his followers on both the left and right do today, he unwittingly destroyed the foundation for the liberty he sought in the first place.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Now there's a kicker!
Any relation to a "living breathing" Constitution?
This is incredibly muddled thinking for American Thinker. When Mill said “Despotism is a legitimate mode of government in dealing with barbarians, provided the end be their improvement, and the means justified by actually effecting that end.”
He was no referring to letting Aztecs alone to run their human sacrificial affairs. He was saying Aztecs should be ruled by force, by someone who has their betterment as the end goal. Like it or not, the Spanish were utterly justified in enslaving them.
And far from not defining babarism, Mill’s very statements define it. If you assert a “right”that causes actual harm to another, you are barbaric.
I’m talking actual verifiable undeniable proof that something is harming another. Not the mentality that by exhaling or eating a steak, im affecting the fate of someone else. This guy is very muddled compared to what i normally see in American Thinker.
Worst of all, it looks like he says “Mill was wrong” and doesn’t say why, or offer any example to prove his point, or offer any alternate way to view Liberty.
certainly lincoln would know that tobe so!
certainly lincoln would know that to be so!
Then they lawyer up with an activist legal whiz and make it so! WTF
Agreed this needs clarity. It is late and my mind is not as clear as in the AM. I am going to try again tomorrow morning. This is too important to gloss or ignore.
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.