Countervailing Powers
I borrowed the phrase "Countervailing Powers" from the Economist John Kenneth Galbraith used in his book: "American Capitalism". I more or less "repurposed it". Didn't think he would mind, but I may have infringed on some kind of copyright. It is a thread I first posted on One Political Plaza about 2 years ago:
Both private property and religion act (or should act) as bulwarks against the power of government. (Stalin abolished both, as you know). Capitalism abandoned its role, as did religion, as a countervailing power to the "power of the sword" and the "power of the purse" when it became crony capitalism.
Mankind, throughout most of history (well, in the last 2 millenia, at least) has evolved some methods to curtail, limit and prevent a concentration of power, and its abuse. (The Investiture Controversy in the time of Charlemagne, and the Magna Carta are examples of some of the first attempts at limiting power.)
When the holders of property and the holders of knowledge, either scientific or religious, align with the sword and the purse, then power becomes concentrated and freedom vanishes.
Can you understand how Socialism and Communism, products of 19th century philosophy, are particularly, and insidiously, dangerous in implementing a concentration of power? And in more than one way.
We are at that period in Mankind's history when it has become imperative that we learn how to govern ourselves. Unfortunately, and perhaps fatally so, BHO's latest perverted irrationality is that a concentration of power is inevitable. That is regressive, not progressive.
My young Vietnamese foreign exchange student told me she was taught that the problem with a democracy is that one man or group of men could obtain power. I replied that couldn't happen in America where we have the doctrine of separation of powers. But that now seems to be disappearing.
I'll end with this cautionary word:
More evil has been done in the name of the "Greater Good" in the last 200 years of human history than in the 2 millenia preceding it."
Food for thought.
Both private property and religion act (or should act) as bulwarks against the power of government. (Stalin abolished both, as you know). Capitalism abandoned its role, as did religion, as a countervailing power to the "power of the sword" and the "power of the purse" when it became crony capitalism.
Mankind, throughout most of history (well, in the last 2 millenia, at least) has evolved some methods to curtail, limit and prevent a concentration of power, and its abuse. (The Investiture Controversy in the time of Charlemagne, and the Magna Carta are examples of some of the first attempts at limiting power.)
When the holders of property and the holders of knowledge, either scientific or religious, align with the sword and the purse, then power becomes concentrated and freedom vanishes.
Can you understand how Socialism and Communism, products of 19th century philosophy, are particularly, and insidiously, dangerous in implementing a concentration of power? And in more than one way.
We are at that period in Mankind's history when it has become imperative that we learn how to govern ourselves. Unfortunately, and perhaps fatally so, BHO's latest perverted irrationality is that a concentration of power is inevitable. That is regressive, not progressive.
My young Vietnamese foreign exchange student told me she was taught that the problem with a democracy is that one man or group of men could obtain power. I replied that couldn't happen in America where we have the doctrine of separation of powers. But that now seems to be disappearing.
I'll end with this cautionary word:
More evil has been done in the name of the "Greater Good" in the last 200 years of human history than in the 2 millenia preceding it."
Food for thought.
Interesting. I quite agree on the matter of damage done in the name of the "greater good". It is similar to the old saw "for the children". One objecting, is immediately put on the defensive...
By the way, since you are a producer and the author of this blog, you should have an edit button at the top that allows you to add your addendum to the original script, instead of the comment section, if you desire.
Respectfully,
O.A.
I totally agree with you about the phrase: "for the children". A woman on OPP made the comment, when we were discussing "The Most Dangerous Game" that someone could get hurt! You cannot argue with someone like that. You may be able to refute the statement---using knowledge of human nature, but the writer will never change.
The reason Liberal-Progressive policies always result in crony capitalism, is that the preponderance of, even oppressive, regulations and rules, our Legislature, and now our overreaching executive, enact, causes otherwise competitive individuals and entities to become whinging, cringing sycophants lobbying for their own special interests subsidies and special regulations.