America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 20 years ago by tailgater. 15 replies replies.
Scary Warning From Scottish Professor in 1787
RDC Offline
#1 Posted:
Joined: 01-21-2000
Posts: 5,874
Scary Warning From Scottish Professor in 1787 !
Democracy Progressing Through the Sequence?

A warning from Scots Historian Professor Alexander Tyler, circa 1787

Re: The Fall of the Athenian Republic.


"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse (generous gifts) from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, (which is) always followed by a dictatorship." "The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been two hundred years. These nations have progressed through this sequence. From bondage to spiritual faith; from spiritual faith to great courage; from courage to liberty; from liberty to abundance, from abundance to complacency; from complacency to apathy, from apathy to dependence, from dependence back into bondage."

Professor Joseph Olson of Hamline University of Law, St.Paul, MN passed on that gem and provides the following 2000 election facts for consideration:

Population of counties won by Gore 127 million, won by Bush 143 million.

Sq.miles of country won by Gore 580,000, won by Bush 2,427,000.

States won by Gore 19, by Bush 29.

Murder per 100,000 residents in counties won by Gore 13.2 by Bush 2.1 (not a typo).

Professor Olson adds, "And may I add that the map of the territory Bush won was (mostly) the land owned by the people of this great country. Not the citizens living in cities owned by the government and living off the government....

Below is a reply from my friend, George, who lives in California. He has lived in CA for many years. We have never met but have becomes good "online" friends. Maybe he has something here:

Jane: I believe we are between apathy and dependence. We, America, needs a strong leader with the statesmanship we have lacked for many years of our great country's life.

Also I came across the following and have given my thoughts as to it's meaning.

Subject: From the Islamic Bible The following verse is from the Quran, (the Islamic Bible) Quran ( 9:11) -- For it is written that a son of Arabia would awaken a fearsome Eagle. The wrath of the Eagle would be felt throughout the lands of Allah and lo, while some of the people trembled in despair still more rejoiced; for the wrath of the Eagle cleansed the lands of Allah; and there was peace.
(Note the verse number!)

I believe it is the "Screeching Eagles" the 101st Air borne Division.

George

Robby Offline
#2 Posted:
Joined: 10-30-2002
Posts: 5,067
yeaup...
donutboy2000 Offline
#3 Posted:
Joined: 11-20-2001
Posts: 25,000
The Koran story is bogus. See http://www.snopes.com/politics/war/quran.asp
jdrabinski Offline
#4 Posted:
Joined: 08-16-2002
Posts: 794
With all due respect, your professor is indulging in some wishful thinking. While there may be a lot of rhetorical points scored with phrases like 'the land owned by the people of this great country,' that is a very misleading--even outright fallacious--statement. People in cities are all dependent on the government? Who and what is this guy talking about?

Check out a couple of things:

More white people than any other racial classification are on welfare. We all know the city=dependency is a racially coded statement.

Look into how much cities like New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago pay INTO the system compared to how much they take out. Then compare that to states like Idaho (my home state!), Montana, Wyoming, Nebraska, Kansas, and other farm states. The latter group takes out a lot more than they put in. The former does the reverse, taking out less than put in.

The point is this: the hypocricy of these 'great landowning people' (as if the family farm is some sort of capitalist paradise, instead of under siege by multinational corporations) is unmatched. They vote for the anti-welfare, small government, no tax party (repubs) and then reap the benefits as the government continues to stay big, keep tax rates, and dole out welfare to subsize farms, offer free public land grazing, and so on.

Meanwhile, this is all done on the backs of the hated 'liberal states.'

John
Robby Offline
#5 Posted:
Joined: 10-30-2002
Posts: 5,067
Oh here we go again... John, you need to soft pedal that race bating a bit. You're starting to sound like Al Sharpton.
tarheel4lyf Offline
#6 Posted:
Joined: 09-23-2002
Posts: 2,543
this is entirely to weird!!! I was browsing through strangecosmos.com and clicked on the link to this bit at exactly the same time you posted it on here. Way weird!!
jdrabinski Offline
#7 Posted:
Joined: 08-16-2002
Posts: 794
Robby, it is not race baiting. What do you think is meant by 'city people who are dependent on government'?

What images are supposed to come to mind?

I am a white american, raised in the same culture as you and every other white person, so I know the code words and the assumed images. My point is that a hell of a lot of poor white people in rural america are on welfare, dependent on the government. So is pretty much every rancher and farmer.

That said, this was only one aspect of my remarks.

John
cwilhelmi Offline
#8 Posted:
Joined: 07-24-2001
Posts: 2,739
It's republican propaganda to remind them of simpler times and focus on how bad democrats are, just another scare tactic to drive votes for 04. So of course it omits integral facts and circumstances so as not to paint the complete picture. Notice that they saw fit to leave out the fact that Gore won the popular vote, and the unmentioned fact that the difference between Gore and Bush was statistically insignificant given the size of the voting base.

I agree with John's assertion regarding the unspoken racial connection to city dwellers living off of the government.
Robby Offline
#9 Posted:
Joined: 10-30-2002
Posts: 5,067
Are you implying that city dwellers are mostly contributors to and non-city denizens are mostly beneficiaries of, “the government largess?”

John, I hear them pissing and moaning on TV about "gentrification" and what a THREAT that is to "people of color"... So which is it? Get out? Or come in?

People focus entirely too much on the racial divide. I've said it before, and I'll say it again. I watch the news every night. Our local stations run at least one, and sometimes more "racially motivated" stories EACH DAY! It's a drone, a constant undertone; it's like "white noise" (pardon the pun). Many people are focused on this to the exclusion of all else! The obsess over it! With that kind of mantra, there is no way peace will ever be achieved, only unrest, discontent, anger, and hatred... When they were commemorating the place where Dr. Martin Luther King made his famous "I have a dream" speech, the race baiters were out there, screaming at the crowd of several hundred... "You've become complacent! You have to get out there and stir things up!!"

I saw it in the news clip. “get out there and stir things up!” i.e., March! Protest! Why not, “educate yourselves?” “work hard, work your way up!” “save!” “stay in school!” I heard NONE of that! Just “get out there and stir things up!!”

It’s old, it’s tired, it’s failed, and by beating the drum, you’re right there with them…

Main Entry: gen·tri·fi·ca·tion
Pronunciation: "jen-tr&-f&-'kA-sh&n
Function: noun
Date: 1964
: the process of renewal and rebuilding accompanying the influx of middle-class or affluent people into deteriorating areas that often displaces earlier usually poorer residents

Robby Offline
#10 Posted:
Joined: 10-30-2002
Posts: 5,067
Chris, who got more votes? Clinton? or Bush?
cwilhelmi Offline
#11 Posted:
Joined: 07-24-2001
Posts: 2,739
Do you have to ask the question? It's known... And obviously you're trying to bait me into saying that because the same can be said for the outcome of Gore vs Bush. But there are a lot of the other "facts" which they choose not to omit in the little propaganda piece...
mkraus47 Offline
#12 Posted:
Joined: 02-04-2003
Posts: 196
Robby, Why does it matter? That is not how the system works. Whe have the E.C. always have (almost) always will (probibly), the only reason librals (Dems) whine is this time it did not work out for them. We need to get over this moot point. The Electoral College exists, and it works, for good or ill. This time it was for good. MK
cwilhelmi Offline
#13 Posted:
Joined: 07-24-2001
Posts: 2,739
Good for whom? The minority group that voted for Bush? Would you say that it worked out poorly if the tables were turned? It's all relative, just like Georgia... Sorry Robby, had to throw in some humor...
Robby Offline
#14 Posted:
Joined: 10-30-2002
Posts: 5,067
The EC is the way to go and was a wise decision put in place a long time ago by people who put it in place for just such an eventuality...
Cigarick Offline
#15 Posted:
Joined: 07-28-2002
Posts: 3,078
Of course there are more white people on welfare than any other race--there are more white people in the country. The important statistic is what percentage of a given population is on welfare.
tailgater Offline
#16 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
Are we comparing welfare recipients in the inner city with "welfare" via farm subsidies????

One is a complacent non-worker with a sense of unearned entitlement that has become a parasite to our capitalistic economy.

The others are hard working families who provide the biggest necessity of all.

Yeah, I see where our philosopher friend gets confused.
But it's not uncommon for liberals to blurr the line.

Subsidies are provided to working farms so seasonal inconsistencies don't force them to close shop. Welfare is intended for those who can not work until such time that they can become self sufficient.

Which program has failed miserably?
Regardless of color.

Users browsing this topic
Guest