Posted on 03/16/2017 8:20:29 PM PDT by ProgressingAmerica
(He) stated his position when he said that the history of government, the history of liberty, was the history of the limitation of governmental power. This is true as an academic statement of history in the past. It is not true as a statement affecting the present. It is true of the history of medieval Europe. It is not true of the history of twentieth-century America.
In the days when all governmental power existed exclusively in the king or in the baronage and when the people had no shred of that power in their own hands, then it undoubtedly was true that the history of liberty was the history of the limitation of the governmental power of the outsiders who possessed that power. But today, the people have, actually or potentially, the entire governmental power. It is theirs to use and to exercise, if they choose to use and to exercise it. It offers the only adequate instrument with which they can work for the betterment, for the uplifting of the masses of our people.
Unbelievable. Had any democrat spoken these words, they would be raked over the coals. Obama could've said this! Yes, this is absolutely audio of whining that government is not big enough and needs to be bigger and more expansive.
Here's the audio. It's only a 3:48 (4 minute) clip.
This is the exact problem we have with progressivism, and have had now for just over a century. They live government. They breathe government. They sleep government, and they eat government. Government runs through their veins. Every aspect of their life is government-focused, every aspect of their thoughts are filtered through the prism of government. Everything they see would be improved if only government controlled it, and everything they touch needs government in the mix.
Government, government, government! And what's quoted above, that's not the worst of it. Here, here is what he says next: class warfare claptrap!:
The liberty of which (he) speaks today means merely the liberty of some great trust magnate to do that which he is not entitled to do. It means merely the liberty of some factory owner to work haggard women over-hours for under-pay and himself to pocket the profits. It means the liberty of the factory owner to close his operatives into some crazy deathtrap on a top floor, where if fire starts, the slaughter is immense. It means the liberty of the big factory owner—who is conscienceless, and unscrupulous—to work his men and women under conditions which [inaudible] their lives like an [inaudible]. It means the liberty of even less conscientious factory owners to make their money out of the toil, the labor, of little children. Men of this stamp are the men whose liberty would be preserved by (him). Men of this stamp are the men whose liberty would be preserved by the limitation of governmental power.We propose, on the contrary, to extend governmental power in order to secure the liberty of the wage workers, of the men and women who toil in industry, to save the liberty of the oppressed from the oppressor. (He) stands for the liberty of the oppressor to oppress. We stand for the limitation of his liberty not to oppress those who are weaker than himself.
Progressives have been using this very template for over 100 years. I heard Chuck Schumer use it last week. Any time you want to put government back into it's constitutional box, the progressives trot out this false narrative. Never fails. You're just a stooge for the rich, according to Theodore Roosevelt. You're in their pockets, you're beholden to the lobbyists, you're paid off. You're GREEDY. Thanks for clearing that up TR! Thanks pal!
Every word in that audio is perverse, it's word pollution - diarrhea of the mouth. Progressivism is incredibly sickening.
1912 election: Wilson (GLOBALIST), Roosevelt (PROGRESSIVE) Debs (SOCIALIST) and propagandists v. Taft
Early 20th century totalitarianism.
Thanks for posting. 104 years of damage later...
2016 election: HOORAY Wisconsin.
Ironically, the guy he is attacking, Woodrow Wilson, was every bit as toxic to liberty as TR.
TR and none of the progressives have either understood or admitted that the foundations admonishments about the constraints on the power of government was in the framework of the government they were forming, not the governments of kings they were severing themselves from.
There warnings were about government, period, however it is formed.
“Democracy” and “representative government” do not change the equation with the danger to Liberty government can wrongly imposed if government, by designed, is not constrained.
No, Liberty is not preserved by “the people” doing anything they want by majority vote. By majority vote always means not “the people” but some people, “the majority” imposing their will - government - over others. All the more reason, in a democratic government that government be constrained, by design.
O’Sullivan’s First Law By John O’SullivanAn eternal truth. EDITOR’S NOTE: This appeared in the October 27, 1989, issue of National Review.
Robert Michels — as any reader of James Burnham's finest book, The Machiavellians, knows was the author of the Iron Law of Oligarchy. This states that
in any organization the permanent officials will gradually obtain such influence that its day-to-day program will increasingly reflect their interests rather than its own stated philosophy.To take a homely example, congressmen from egalitarian parties somehow end up voting for higher pay and generous expenses for congressmen. We can also catch an ironic echo of Michels's law in Stalin's title of General Secretary, as well as in the fact that powerful mandarins in the British government creep about under such deceptive pseudonyms as "Permanent Under-Secretary.”All of which is by way of introducing a new law of my own.
I cite as supporting evidence the ACLU, the Ford Foundation, and the Episcopal Church. The reason is, of course, that people who staff such bodies tend to be the sort who don't like private profit, business, making money, the current organization of society, and, by extension, the Western world. At which point Michels's Iron Law of Oligarchy takes over — and the rest follows.
- O'Sullivan's First Law:
- All organizations that are not actually right-wing will over time become left-wing.
TR’s talk about toil and labor has an anachronistic sound to it at a time when we are starting to seriously wonder if robots are about to make human labor - physical or intellectual - obsolete.
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.
