Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

A $553,000 piano controversy in Maryland? [Broke state buys 32 Steinways]
Washington Post ^ | 11/17/2011 | Michael S. Rosenwald

Posted on 11/17/2011 8:51:59 PM PST by freespirited

Edited on 11/18/2011 9:51:41 PM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-63 last
To: hal ogen; freespirited; sickoflibs; ProtectOurFreedom; Marine_Uncle; Ten Beers Gone; tcrlaf; ...

Quite the thread.

From “The Law”...

The Law and Education

You say: “There are persons who lack education,” and you turn to the law. But the law is not, in itself, a torch of learning which shines its light abroad. The law extends over a society where some persons have knowledge and others do not; where some citizens need to learn, and others can teach. In this matter of education, the law has only two alternatives: It can permit this transaction of teaching-and-learning to operate freely and without the use of force, or it can force human wills in this matter by taking from some of them enough to pay the teachers who are appointed by government to instruct others, without charge. But in this second case, the law commits legal plunder by violating liberty and property.

The Political Approach

When a politician views society from the seclusion of his office, he is struck by the spectacle of the inequality that he sees. He deplores the deprivations which are the lot of so many of our brothers, deprivations which appear to be even sadder when contrasted with luxury and wealth.

Perhaps the politician should ask himself whether this state of affairs has not been caused by old conquests and lootings, and by more recent legal plunder. Perhaps he should consider this proposition: Since all persons seek well-being and perfection, would not a condition of justice be sufficient to cause the greatest efforts toward progress, and the greatest possible equality that is compatible with individual responsibility? Would not this be in accord with the concept of individual responsibility which God has willed in order that mankind may have the choice between vice and virtue, and the resulting punishment and reward?

But the politician never gives this a thought. His mind turns to organizations, combinations, and arrangements — legal or apparently legal. He attempts to remedy the evil by increasing and perpetuating the very thing that caused the evil in the first place: legal plunder.

Law Is a Negative Concept

But when the law, by means of its necessary agent, force, imposes upon men a regulation of labor, a method or a subject of education, a religious faith or creed — then the law is no longer negative; it acts positively upon people. It substitutes the will of the legislator for their own wills; the initiative of the legislator for their own initiatives. When this happens, the people no longer need to discuss, to compare, to plan ahead; the law does all this for them. Intelligence becomes a useless prop for the people; they cease to be men; they lose their personality, their liberty, their property.

Try to imagine a regulation of labor imposed by force that is not a violation of liberty; a transfer of wealth imposed by force that is not a violation of property. If you cannot reconcile these contradictions, then you must conclude that the law cannot organize labor and industry without organizing injustice.

Law Is Force

Since the law organizes justice, the socialists ask why the law should not also organize labor, education, and religion.

Why should not law be used for these purposes? Because it could not organize labor, education, and religion without destroying justice. We must remember that law is force, and that, consequently, the proper functions of the law cannot lawfully extend beyond the proper functions of force.

When law and force keep a person within the bounds of justice, they impose nothing but a mere negation. They oblige him only to abstain from harming others. They violate neither his personality, his liberty, nor his property. They safeguard all of these. They are defensive; they defend equally the rights of all.

The Seductive Lure of Socialism

Here I encounter the most popular fallacy of our times. It is not considered sufficient that the law should be just; it must be philanthropic. Nor is it sufficient that the law should guarantee to every citizen the free and inoffensive use of his faculties for physical, intellectual, and moral self-improvement. Instead, it is demanded that the law should directly extend welfare, education, and morality throughout the nation.

This is the seductive lure of socialism. And I repeat again: These two uses of the law are in direct contradiction to each other. We must choose between them. A citizen cannot at the same time be free and not free.

The Fate of Non-Conformists

If you suggest a doubt as to the morality of these institutions, it is boldly said that “You are a dangerous innovator, a utopian, a theorist, a subversive; you would shatter the foundation upon which society rests.” If you lecture upon morality or upon political science, there will be found official organizations petitioning the government in this vein of thought: “That science no longer be taught exclusively from the point of view of free trade (of liberty, of property, and of justice) as has been the case until now, but also, in the future, science is to be especially taught from the viewpoint of the facts and laws that regulate French industry (facts and laws which are contrary to liberty, to property, and to justice). That, in government-endowed teaching positions, the professor rigorously refrain from endangering in the slightest degree the respect due to the laws now in force.”

Legal Plunder Has Many Names

Now, legal plunder can be committed in an infinite number of ways. Thus we have an infinite number of plans for organizing it: tariffs, protection, benefits, subsidies, encouragements, progressive taxation, PUBLIC SCHOOLS, guaranteed jobs, guaranteed profits, minimum wages, a right to relief, a right to the tools of labor, free credit, and so on, and so on. All these plans as a whole — with their common aim of legal plunder — constitute socialism.

Now, since under this definition socialism is a body of doctrine, what attack can be made against it other than a war of doctrine? If you find this socialistic doctrine to be false, absurd, and evil, then refute it. And the more false, the more absurd, and the more evil it is, the easier it will be to refute. Above all, if you wish to be strong, begin by rooting out every particle of socialism that may have crept into your legislation. This will be no light task.

CAPS (mine)

Frederic Bastiat 1801-1850


61 posted on 11/18/2011 1:58:56 PM PST by PGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: freespirited; Abundy; Albion Wilde; AlwaysFree; AnnaSASsyFR; bayliving; BFM; ...

When I was a kid, I played piano as a hobby. I did not perform, and I certainly didn’t play on a Steinway. Pianos I played generally sounded fine to me, but maybe the brothers at Bowie State have better audio acuity than I do.

Maryland “Freak State” PING!


62 posted on 11/19/2011 9:06:17 PM PST by Tolerance Sucks Rocks (Occupy DC General Assembly: We are Marxist tools. WE ARE MARXIST TOOLS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
I love what the Maryland Reporter article linked from the WaPo piece had to say:

…It was only after an extended back on forth between Franchot and Holmes over the quality of the Steinways that Holmes explained that the pianos being purchased would actually be of differing quality.

Only 4 of the 32 would be made by Steinway & Sons. Five would be the Steinway-designed Boston model that would go to faculty and 23 would be the least expensive Essex model. Both the Boston and Essex models are manufactured by Asian piano-makers to Steinway specifications and sold by Steinway.

The batch sale also gained the university an average 25% discount from the Steinway Piano Gallery of Rockville. The single-source purchase was exempt from university procurement policies.

When State Treasurer Nancy Kopp found out that most of the pianos would not be full Steinway & Sons instruments, she wondered if it would be false advertising to say that Bowie was “all Steinway.”

I don't have a problem with Steinways...particularly if the university actually manages to pay for them. Getting Steinways for a fine arts program is like getting an electron microscope for a science program. But if Bowie State's fine arts program can't pay for them, either out of revenues generated from contracts or revenues generated from tuition, then the logical question is not whether or not they get the Steinways; the logical question is whether or not they should have the fine arts program.

After all, there is a perfectly fine university in Prince George's county with a fairly highly regarded fine arts program: it's called the University of Maryland College Park. If the program at Bowie can't pay its own freight, perhaps they should negotiate a transfer.

63 posted on 11/20/2011 2:25:15 AM PST by markomalley (Nothing emboldens the wicked so greatly as the lack of courage on the part of the good-Pope Leo XIII)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-63 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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