Posted on 09/17/2017 9:09:25 AM PDT by ProgressingAmerica
As I have written in the past, Progressivism would not exist at all if not for Henry George. John Dewey was influenced by George, many of the British Fabians, Margaret Sanger; one of the most proud proclaimations of progressive achievement in the early 20th century is Initiative, Referendum, and Recall - that entire movement was based on Georgist ideals (and dishonest ones at that.) The early unions, many of them were not socialist, they were Georgist. The Knights of Labor, Samuel Gompers, and others.
But understanding the link between big government and Henry George is not well understood. The fact that George repeatedly agitated for the nationalization of land typically falls on deaf ears. One of the most prominent members of the so-called "Social Gospel", Walter Rauschenbusch, is another who was deeply moved by the politics of Henry George. Rauschenbusch once gave a speech in which he proclaimed:
Mr. George has taught this proposition in his book. He is often called a socialist, but it is very incorrect to call him so; he is not a socialist, but the strongest opponent of socialism in the United States. He is a strong advocate of laissez faire in the highest sense of that term. Therefore he insists that artificial monopolies, such as the tariff, should be swept away, and that freedom should be given to the natural forces of society, and that natural monopolies should be owned and managed by the community to which they naturally belong. These are his propositions in regard to monopoly. Am I right?
By "his book" Rauschenbusch means "Progress and Poverty", George's most well known work.
Now, just earlier this week I pointed out that Progressives do not (and I believe they cannot; they are impaired from doing so) distinguish between "Government" and "Society". For a progressive, society is government and government is society. This speech from Rauschenbusch is no different. Reading the speech, he repeatedly uses "community", "society" and "the State"(and other synonyms) completely interchangeably.
For Rauschenbusch, natural monopolies need to be owned by the big organization of society i.e. government. He doesn't mean shareholders, read his speech. That's not his tone and its not his content. Besides, ownership by only the shareholders does not encompass an entire community. The only way "society" or "the community" can be the owners and managers is if the state at some level begins nationalizing property.
Which is what George was known for supporting anyways, at least in regards to land. It's clear what Rauschenbusch is talking about and clear who he is citing as his inspiration.
Ping.....
And of course Henry George was a proponent of the single tax.
A tax on unimproved land. His argument was that raw land was fixed in supply and a tax on land owners would be paid by them and not the purchaser. (incorrect on both counts)
As I recall he ran for mayor of New York City in 1886 and came in second. Teddy Roosevelt came in third.
He’s not a socialist because he advocates what socialist advocate ... just locally rather than at the central government level?
Riiiiight.
Rauschenbusch is shoveling some serious BS there. And not a good sort of BS either....
Progressivism is simply bad. Even early on it was opposed to everything this country was actually founded to be and it has only gotten worse.
If only George had applied his talents to upholding the true private ownership of all property (real to intellectual) and all means of production and distribution rather than any form of corporate or communal ownership by mere entities (ESPECIALLY the government) then he might have done the world some good.
All people do not have the same level of experience, education (not just school) and intellect.
Most people are in The Great Mean and spend their lives struggling to maximize their benefits using what skills they have.
But, what of The Outliers?
Specifically, those who have higher levels of experience, education and intellect.
What should they do?
How should they behave towards those who have lesser amounts of experience, education and intellect?
Should they seek to help them or to take advantage of them?
Aye, that's the rub.
Freely elected politicians have no problem answering that question as they seek office; nor do they have a problem with the question after they are seduced by lobbyists.
Is one correct in assuming that this statement also applies if one substitutes the word "village" for the words, "Government" and "Society"? If so, then Hillary has made her position on the offspring of citizens (offspring whom the "elites" of the system allow to be birthed) quite clear, hasn't she?
We might note that in her "world," some births are to be celebrated (such as those who are her grandchildren) and some are to be prevented at will.
Progress and poverty is the only gift democrats know how to give.
|
That would be their decision, not yours.
The business of a government is to lead and manage citizens.
A city government leads and manages the citizens of a city.
A national government leads and manages the citizens of a nation.
The first question to be asked of anyone seeking to be in a government is,
“Why do you want to lead and manage these citizens?”
And you cannot rely on the person to tell you the truth.
The biggest repositories of wealth are not banks but public treasuries.
Criminals seek their greatest Return On Investment (ROI).
They know their best ROI is stealing from the public treasuries.
Criminals will tell you that they want to help the government when they are in fact in government to steal.
And that is why the Democrat Party must be abolished.
It is a huge criminal organization dedicated to looting the public treasuries.
You chose to not answer the question, but to comment on it.
That is a very superficial approach.
I just find it interesting that people like you don’t even want it discussed. That’s the only thing that makes me believe there might be something to it. You act like BLM/Antifa at an Ann Coulter speech.
“Don’t even want it discussed”
What would this “it” be?
They know their best ROI is stealing from the public treasuries.
Modern day Willie Suttons become politicians -- "That's where the money is."
Thanks for posting this list of the “Ten Planks....”
GOAL > One world government under communism as developed by Marx.
OBJECTIVES > The “Ten Planks...”
ACTIVITIES > The items in the (...)
OTHER ACTIVITIES > Those developed at the FRANKFURT SCHOOL in Germany, 1925 to 1935, when closed down for fear of Hitler and moved to the United States.
It’s called freedom.
Evidently you believe that people should answer to you.
You have failed, E.
You are not one of the Outliers.
You proved me right.
Yes, you did.
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.