It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Thomas Paine & John Locke Liberal Heroes.

page: 2
6
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 31 2018 @ 07:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: jjkenobi
The USA was born out of people willing to give their life to escape laws and taxes.


And where did we end up now that both parties continually pass more laws and do nothing about curtailing spending?


Call the single most destructive act on personal rights and inflated spending on illegal wars the Patriot Act.

If it didn't suck, it would be hilarious.




posted on Oct, 31 2018 @ 07:53 AM
link   
a reply to: GBP/JPY

I do what I can.


That doesn't make the Republicans any better in this regard though. If they had their way we would have been saddled with a 3rd Bush.

And as Augustus mentioned, this isn't new.



posted on Oct, 31 2018 @ 07:53 AM
link   
a reply to: CriticalStinker


But muh par-tee!



posted on Oct, 31 2018 @ 08:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: CriticalStinker


But muh par-tee!


The single most cancerous thing to true liberty and economic prosperity IMO.

The "my side doesn't suck as bad as the other" is quintessentially what keeps the bar so effing low.



posted on Oct, 31 2018 @ 08:22 AM
link   
a reply to: alldaylong

I think both Locke and Paine would be quite insulted to be associated with either party in their present form.

To the extent that both denounced and defied the status quo of the time, they would be considered "liberal." But they would also be considered "republican" to the extent they both advocated for individual rights -- NOT majority rule.

And both would be horrified at the crony capitalism on steroids that have empowered those fictional legal entities called "corporations" to the detriment of the individual.

Neither side would pass muster in the eyes of these two great minds.



posted on Oct, 31 2018 @ 08:24 AM
link   
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin



There are very few places in the world (if any) that have actually got liberalism right.

None
Because it would be unsustainable.



posted on Oct, 31 2018 @ 08:37 AM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04




And you think John Locke would be in the Democrat party of today?


Well maybe some people on here need to modify their language and tone.

Locke ( and Paine ) where true Liberals. Those on here who complain about " Liberals " need to re classify them as either Protest Groups, Anarchists or Insurgents. Or even maybe the " Politically Correct " mob or " Do-Gooder's "

For feck sake, stop calling them " Liberals "


edit on 31-10-2018 by alldaylong because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 31 2018 @ 08:49 AM
link   
a reply to: alldaylong

I agree. It's actually more Progressives that cause the liberals the bad rap.



posted on Oct, 31 2018 @ 09:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: alldaylong

I agree. It's actually more Progressives that cause the liberals the bad rap.


If we are to continue with a two party system, even though I think it has proven to be inadequate,
it's in everyone's best interest that both parties are healthy and selecting premium candidates.

I don't see that happening in a monopoly type market of candidates though, especially when both sides are heavily funded by the same belligerents in perverting the system as a whole.

Everyone is busy arguing about things that are mostly irrelevant to the biggest problems we face.

Key topics of the last year.
-Kavanaugh
-Extremist groups that represent less than 1%
-Bathrooms people decide to use
-Petty things that people say

Key topics we have to address for survival
-Exponentially growing federal debt (and many states)
-Deteriorating infrastructure tallying 6~ trillion right now
-Failing wars that are tallying right around our infrastructure overhaul outstanding bill
-Ballooning health care costs



posted on Oct, 31 2018 @ 11:41 AM
link   
a reply to: CriticalStinker

That would require an informed populace. Today's voting laws make it near impossible as the Kim Kardashian fans who have little to no idea what is going on are the most common voters.



posted on Oct, 31 2018 @ 11:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: CriticalStinker

That would require an informed populace. Today's voting laws make it near impossible as the Kim Kardashian fans who have little to no idea what is going on are the most common voters.


I can't argue with you there.

I've said many times, if 50%~ of elidigble voters are voting for president....

How many of that 50% are actually informed.

Sad times we live in.



posted on Oct, 31 2018 @ 12:01 PM
link   
a reply to: CriticalStinker

I sometimes wonder if the FF idea of only a select few having voting rights would not be better. Maybe it's the grass will always look greener on the other side scenario.

Even if we made people get educated who provides that? Their bias will impact the election.



posted on Oct, 31 2018 @ 12:17 PM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Unfortunately I think we will have to hit dire times to remind the non-participants you get out what you put in.

On the plus side, those who have been paying attention will at least be able to mitigate the effects to themselves of such a situation prior to its transpiring.

Edit: although, is it possible to at least reduce lobbyists/corporate boatloads of cash for campaigns.... Get rid of parties and just have all candidates proclaim their platform issue by issue. If they are not beholden to anyone, it might reduce the number who pander and renege.

Such a system would eliminate inherent bias to "this side" or that "side".
edit on 31-10-2018 by CriticalStinker because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 31 2018 @ 12:24 PM
link   
a reply to: CriticalStinker

Do platforms matter? They get elected, break every promise, and no one cares and they vote them again.



posted on Oct, 31 2018 @ 01:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: alldaylong
How times have changed.

The very birth of The U.S. gained from independence from Britain, had in it's foundation in the works of two British Liberal Heroes John Locke and Thomas Paine.

Their anti monarchist writing , monarchists being of a right wing persuasion more generally, gained increased popularity with those colonists who wanted to break away from The Mother Country.

So yes, America was born on Liberal thinking. the very thinking that now insights much hatred with many members of ATS.

Think about it.


Nice try, but that is a straw man argument. It's a false premise. On all fronts. It doesn't even need to be debunked because it's so obviously backwards and wrong to anyone with an education.

Nice try, though. 😀



posted on Oct, 31 2018 @ 01:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: CriticalStinker

Do platforms matter? They get elected, break every promise, and no one cares and they vote them again.


Sure, all of them belong to a party, and their campaign was funded in many cases by the same people as their opponent.

How's that system ever going to work?



posted on Oct, 31 2018 @ 02:46 PM
link   
And if we were to read any of Paine's writings, we would easily find out he was for promoting this enlightened Western culture, and not to destroy it with hypocrisy and taking advantage of the masses with our media overlords.

The new monarchy is social media and talk show hosts. The loss of faith has been a game changer, and the masses have been drug into the abyss.

We need a smart, protective liberalism now. The current one can be easily manipulated because as what this country envisioned, we think people should all have the right to pursue certain things. But that "right" is easily hijacked through manipulation and always has been... So now if you fight to protect what you love about Western culture, you are deemed a "white nationalist". Somehow loving liberty is now negative, because liberty necessarily needs to be protected if is threatened.

All I can say is thank goodness for the internet, and forums like this where we can debate things out as these legends did before us. Albeit we are not face to face, but nonetheless we give it our all to try to understand what is going on and to build our future.



posted on Oct, 31 2018 @ 04:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: gernblan

originally posted by: alldaylong
How times have changed.

The very birth of The U.S. gained from independence from Britain, had in it's foundation in the works of two British Liberal Heroes John Locke and Thomas Paine.

Their anti monarchist writing , monarchists being of a right wing persuasion more generally, gained increased popularity with those colonists who wanted to break away from The Mother Country.

So yes, America was born on Liberal thinking. the very thinking that now insights much hatred with many members of ATS.

Think about it.


Nice try, but that is a straw man argument. It's a false premise. On all fronts. It doesn't even need to be debunked because it's so obviously backwards and wrong to anyone with an education.

Nice try, though. 😀



Sometimes,having to look at the truth and face it head on can be very painful.

I feel your pain.



posted on Oct, 31 2018 @ 04:44 PM
link   
dlc.dcccd.edu...




Limited Government Cover of Adam Smith's book Wealth of Nations

This emphasis on limited government is notable in three particulars. First, classical liberalism is hostile to government interference in the marketplace. It was a reaction against the repressive medieval guild system of trades and the heavy-handed state policy of mercantilism, typified under France's economic minister, Colbert. Adam Smith, a Scottish political economist, invoked the metaphor of an invisible hand to describe how individual selfishness in an unregulated economy actually promotes the public good. More bluntly, big government is bad for business and prosperity. Second, the classical liberal tradition emphasizes separation of church and state (though not always the wall of separation endorsed by some modern constitutional scholars). The emerging business elites who embraced classical liberalism were often Protestants and victims of persecution or discrimination by Catholic, Anglican or other state churches. State control of religious practice was bad for business and, more fundamentally, a matter best left to individual conscience. They saw proof for these points in the apocalyptic bloodshed of Europe's Thirty Years War, a war waged in the name of religion.

edit on 33313331b03 by SammyB0476 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 1 2018 @ 12:28 AM
link   
John Locke advocated for:

- Private Property
- All people are created equal
- All people are entitled to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness
- Government exists as a contract to the people, at the behest of the people, and by the people.
- Government can ASK for assistance in providing security so populace can enjoy property / liberty.
- The right of the people to protect themselves with the same measure the Government can use to subdue them.
- The freedom of speech, any and all.
- Governments should not use the press as a propaganda arm.
- Defined borders with determination of admittance agreed upon by law established at the consent of the people
- Advocated that the 10 commandments were a just and reasonable basis of law.

Liberals tend to advocate for:

- Socially owned / state property
- People should have equality of OUTCOME
- Deny personhood to the unborn denying them opportunity of life
- "Ask not what your country can do for you..." - JFK
- Manditory taxes and enforcement
- Limitation on tools for self-defense / defense against government (2a)
- Limited speech on that which might be considered hateful
- Ignoring the MSM's extreme bias toward liberal talking points
- Looser / Open borders with minimal standards
- The removal of 10 commandments at courthouses

Liberal: Definition as of 1704 for the term liberal: Liberalism, from the Latin liber, meaning free, referred originally to the philosophy of freedom. “Liberal” was once an honorable word used to describe those who put liberty first.
edit on 11 1 18 by KaDeCo because: Grammarly


And no, the left-wing does not have exclusivity to defying Locke's initial ideas. The right-wing does it too, however. This thread is how the left-wing is embracing and promoting the ideas of Locke, etc. - not the right. That would be a separate issue/thread.
edit on 11 1 18 by KaDeCo because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join