Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

America, the new serfdom.
August 24, 2008 | gpk9

Posted on 08/23/2008 11:20:41 PM PDT by gpk9

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-35 next last

1 posted on 08/23/2008 11:20:41 PM PDT by gpk9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: bamahead; traviskicks

ping


2 posted on 08/23/2008 11:28:37 PM PDT by rabscuttle385 (Conservatives can be mavericks too.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gpk9
I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that you figured all this out just now.

Thanks for sharing....

L

3 posted on 08/23/2008 11:29:53 PM PDT by Lurker (Islam is an insane death cult. Any other aspects are PR to get them within throat-cutting range.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gpk9

That’s an extremely well-written piece.

I would hope the Admin Moderator would make it a sticky thread.


4 posted on 08/23/2008 11:30:47 PM PDT by wastedyears (Show me your precious darlings, and I will crush them all)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rabscuttle385
Check out the book Democracy: the God that Failed by Hans Herman Hoppe.
5 posted on 08/23/2008 11:34:53 PM PDT by SeeSharp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Lurker
I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that you figured all this out just now.

Thanks for sharing....

well said!

6 posted on 08/23/2008 11:43:02 PM PDT by robomatik ((wine plug: renascentvineyards.com cabernet sauvignon, riesling, and merlot))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: wastedyears; gpk9

> That’s an extremely well-written piece.

It’s a pretty good piece — save only for the persisitent misuse of “it’s”.

(I hate being a grammar critic, BUT when a piece is well-written it deserves to be perfect.)

The possessive form of “it” is “its” not “it’s” (contraction for “it is”.) Possessive pronouns do not have apostrophes.


7 posted on 08/23/2008 11:49:47 PM PDT by DieHard the Hunter (Is mise an ceann-cinnidh. Cha ghéill mi do dhuine. Fàg am bealach.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: gpk9

I wish more people would realize this.


8 posted on 08/23/2008 11:52:56 PM PDT by djsherin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gpk9
I love the dialog on justice between Thrasymachus and Socrates in Plato's Republic>. Thrasymachus makes three central claims about justice.

1. Justice is nothing but the advantage of the stronger
2. Justice is obedience to laws
3. Justice is nothing but the advantage of another

I also love Orwell's take.

(2+2=5)

9 posted on 08/23/2008 11:58:41 PM PDT by endthematrix (Congress, Get Off Your Gas, And Drill!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gpk9
Pdf
10 posted on 08/24/2008 12:11:10 AM PDT by endthematrix (Congress, Get Off Your Gas, And Drill!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DieHard the Hunter

“Persistent” use of “it’s”? I counted two. You’re right, it should be “its”.

If you wrote something this well I’d be focusing on what you’re saying. I wouldn’t even worry about your little technical grammar errors, nor do I suspect anyone else would.


11 posted on 08/24/2008 12:17:19 AM PDT by gpk9 ("Fairness" is the new Constitution and Bill of (no) Rights for America... I mean Amerika.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: gpk9

> “Persistent” use of “it’s”? I counted two. You’re right, it should be “its”.

It’s persisitent in that it’s never used correctly in the entire piece. This indicates to me that the correct apostrophe use is likely misunderstood by the writer.

I felt a polite correction was not out of place, in that context.

> If you wrote something this well I’d be focusing on what you’re saying.

If I wrote something for the FRee Republic as a Vanity I would do my best to get my grammar right, or suffer the consequences when someone hauled me up on it.

Annoying grammatical mistakes detract unnecessarily from the piece and subtract Credibility from the author needlessly.

The “grammar-doesn’t-matter-the-content-does” school of thought is an unpleasant modern trend. I find it unpleasant.

> I wouldn’t even worry about your little technical grammar errors, nor do I suspect anyone else would.

Perhaps you don’t speak for everyone else? I’ve noted that the FRee Republic tends to maintain a fairly high standard of English and even higher expectations of pieces that are posted here. It’s one of the things that makes the FRee Republic a pleasant place to be.


12 posted on 08/24/2008 12:38:04 AM PDT by DieHard the Hunter (Is mise an ceann-cinnidh. Cha ghéill mi do dhuine. Fàg am bealach.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: DieHard the Hunter
I believe you're wrong on all three assertions:

1) This piece was not written as a vanity. I you feel it was, you're missing the entire point of it.

2) I really doubt misuse of "its" in two spots detracts from the piece to the average person reading it. I suspect the average person wouldn't even notice it.

3) FreeRepublic doesn't maintain ANY standard of grammar. I've seen pieces here written by major journalists with more grammar errors than mine.

"The “grammar-doesn’t-matter-the-content-does” school of thought is an unpleasant modern trend. I find it unpleasant."

I don't care what you find unpleasant, nor do I suspect anyone else does.

If you want to discuss the substance of the piece I'll be happy to engage you, but take your petty little arguments somewhere else.
13 posted on 08/24/2008 12:51:35 AM PDT by gpk9 ("Fairness" is the new Constitution and Bill of (no) Rights for America... I mean Amerika.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: gpk9
> 1) This piece was not written as a vanity. I you feel it was, you're missing the entire point of it.

It looks like a Vanity, and it reads like a Vanity, and according to the Posting Guidelines it would be a Vanity. It's a pretty good Vanity, so far as Vanities go. You feel it is something other than a Vanity: I'd be interested to know what you feel it is, and why.

> 2) I really doubt misuse of "its" in two spots detracts from the piece to the average person reading it. I suspect the average person wouldn't even notice it.

I'm an average person and I noticed it. And yes, it does detract from your piece: it's a glaring mistake that stands out like dog's bollix, and is the first tell-tale clue that the piece has been nowhere near an Editor or subjected to any critical thought by anyone other than its author.

(Thus, it has more in common with a Vanity than a credible Op/Ed piece.)

> 3) FreeRepublic doesn't maintain ANY standard of grammar. I've seen pieces here written by major journalists with more grammar errors than mine.

Bollix. Even if that were true, it's no excuse for poor grammar. Luckily, it isn't true. From the posting guidelines:

>> Do lead by example - Nothing improves a forum more than posters who reason sharply, write well, and have some perspective about it all. Be one of them.

and: >> Do keep "vanity" posts to a minimum - Free Republic is primarily a place to discuss news, articles, and editorials. Vanity posts, creations of the poster him or herself, should meet a high standard of quality before one is even considered worthy of posting. Often a relevant current thread or general announcement, catch-all thread is a much better choice for a brief question or comment.

(emphasis mine -- DHTH)

> If you want to discuss the substance of the piece I'll be happy to engage you, but take your petty little arguments somewhere else.

Hey mate -- I'm not arguing anything, petty or otherwise. If you can't handle a legitimate (and polite) correction on your grade-school-level grammatical error, then you're way too fragile to handle a critique on the substance of your grade-school-level Vanity article.

14 posted on 08/24/2008 1:22:25 AM PDT by DieHard the Hunter (Is mise an ceann-cinnidh. Cha ghéill mi do dhuine. Fàg am bealach.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: DieHard the Hunter
Discussions of grammar and punctuation are relevant to all Vanity posts.
I disagree with the content of the article. It is excessively pessimistic. Insisting that all governments are fundamentally tyrannical dismisses the belief of the Founders of our own Constitution that a government can be established that ensures the rights of its citizens. For nearly 150 years this understanding guided our government.
The influence of Marxist thought during the past 80 years has increasingly decimated our Constitution. As a people we must understand the very issue that the writer has clearly distinguished. The role of government under our Constitution is to ensure the rights of the citizens and not to protect them from themselves and each other.
We are engaged in just such a clarification of purpose in this current election. Obama by his clear assertions will advance the power and authority of government over the lives of citizens. McCain will begin to alleviate aspects of the burden that government has placed on citizens.
We will, as a result of this election, map a strategy to return to Constitutional law or we will abandon all HOPE and enter the abyss of absolute authority over every detail of our lives.
15 posted on 08/24/2008 4:06:44 AM PDT by Louis Foxwell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: gpk9

The not so funny thing is up until the 17th century our English cousins were required to maintain arms. The generally accepted belief was a well armed Englishman was the model of a free man.

That got changed around with a bit of applied papist pressure which ultimately ended in Civil war.

The extremely truncated version of the history of that time has the Monarchists and parliamentarians alike noticing they were outgunned by Commoners. It didn’t take long for their sense of self-preservation to kick in and they started first collecting the weapons around London and it’s suburbs.

After Cromwell took charge, the program was expanded with orders to...

search for and seize all arms, in the custody and possession of any popish recusant, or other person that hath been in arms against the Parliament, or that have adhered to the enemies thereof, or any other person whom the Commissioners shall judge dangerous to the peace of this Commonwealth.

One of the first, if not the first, recorded instances of increased crime committed against disarmed citizens was documented by James II’s military commandant of Ireland.

About a month after receiving James’ orders to disarm the English colonists in Ireland, they became such a target for the Irish criminal element, the Comandant sent written notice to James of the increased bandit activity.

Eventual adoption of their Bill of Rights included the defined right of the individual to bear arms, form a citizens militia and place limits on a standing army . A lesson our forefathers learned well.

http://www.committeesofsafety.com/Committees_of_Safety/Home.html isn’t a history page but does offer a plan that could help eliminate the worry of living under the control of an all too powerful government that no longer functions as designed.


16 posted on 08/24/2008 5:19:29 AM PDT by MurrietaMadman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gpk9; rabscuttle385; Abathar; Abcdefg; Abram; Abundy; akatel; albertp; AlexandriaDuke; ...


Libertarian ping! To be added or removed freepmail me or post a message here.
17 posted on 08/24/2008 7:42:26 AM PDT by bamahead (Few men desire liberty; most men wish only for a just master. -- Sallust)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eric Blair 2084; Gabz

This is a must read!


18 posted on 08/24/2008 7:52:15 AM PDT by bamahead (Few men desire liberty; most men wish only for a just master. -- Sallust)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: gpk9

Good post! Thanks.


19 posted on 08/24/2008 8:05:21 AM PDT by 383rr (Those who choose security over liberty deserve neither- GUN CONTROL=SLAVERY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: endthematrix

Notice the overwhelming size of the Proles vs. the Inner and Outer Parties.


20 posted on 08/24/2008 9:34:33 AM PDT by wastedyears (Show me your precious darlings, and I will crush them all)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-35 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson