Lincoln pretty much killed the idea of small autonomous republics along with about 1M people. That was really the end of the Republic and the start of the Empire.
There are to this day too many people who still want to be governed by a royalty. They still believe there are royal people. It might be nice if it were true, but I doubt it. I don't think we would allow them to remain royal.
It’s such an odd phenomena that I don’t understand.
If I were British, I would question why we would we give our money to people who claim to be royal, so “we” can ogle their lifestyle? Wait, we do that with our current royals called Congress.
But, worse, now we have created a nanny-state-dependent class of royal watchers. This can’t end well.
Mark Steyn has written that one advantage of having a monarch as Britain does is that without one, mere elected officials are likely to decide they are important.
In my view, anarchism functions via governance vs. government. Governance based on the Natural Law...Do you make this distinction and have you written on the topic?
On whose side would the military be? Without power centralized in D.C. where would the state of war be? Without a constant state of war, a central control (pentagon) would be pointless. Would they be willing to step down? Or would they make war on us to retain their status? The army of bureaucrats in D.C. would surely sic the pentagon on us rather than step down.
The idea of how to get there, well, yes, you do have a point that they won't step down. My hope is that we could negotiate with 2/3 governors/state legislatures (33+). But, I would defer strategic matters to military experts who know better than I. The military would still fall under the national government – all matters foreign.
Among the many brilliant insights here are some new to me. I have not read it explicitly stated that a real republic must be small. But it makes sense! The real, free republics were probably all small.
"…Venice where without any recognized leader to direct them, they agreed to live together under such laws as they thought to suited best suited to maintain them. And by reason of the prolonged tranquility which their position secured… they were able, from the very small beginnings, to attain to that greatness they now enjoy."
Excellent read, puts the concepts swirling around in my own head into an ordered plan for how to convey these things to others. No one gets it; Americans are so used to their cushy lives now that we as a whole are clueless about the evils surrounding us, and the younger generations don’t feel like their lives will ever really change (just ask the surviving families of Holocaust victims). Instead we mock the generations who lived through WWII and the Great Depression as clueless boomers stuck in the past instead of using their messages to secure our future. Some days I do feel we need a serious wake up call in this nation, but I’ve yet to read anyone come up with a solid idea on how to avoid the bloodshed that is likely coming.
Thank you! And thanks for reading and for your comment. I agree; I wish we could negotiate an "amicable" divorce and be united for foreign affairs only to avoid the coming blood shed.
I wouldn't even have the foreign affairs connection not wishing to get dragged into the Forever Wars. Continental defense perhaps. The ideal end state would be like the relationship with Canada. Wholly separate but peaceful trading partners. We would have to be careful to avoid economic domination given the enormous head start of the People's Republic but with us out of their way , they would spend themselves into oblivion.
It is worth noting that the Constitution gives the Congress the authority raise an army but maintain a navy. This implies the militia theory for the army and recognizes the professional needs of the navy. In modern terms, we would look like Switzerland which is 200 years from its last war.
Interesting idea and what a concept - no war. Not saying it can't be done, but Switzerland does have a huge advantage that we don't have - they are small and homogenous.
Not so homogeneous. Three official languages ( technically 4). Majority German but a sizeable French minority and a smaller Italian one
Army is militia but well trained. Rifles at home with crew served weapons and extra ammo at local armory. AF is professional and ,of course, no navy. Blast shelters for about 90%
My late brother-in-law, in his novel “The End of Fame”, wrote “The three worst enemies of liberty are a standing army, a sitting legislature, and a lying executive.”
It’s not often I come across other Libertarian women with whom I agree - in fact I am the only one in my entire circle of women, all of whom are voting Kamala, so I appreciate your perspectives.
Thank you and ditto - I too have friends voting for Kamala - which to me is voting for child abuse (gender affirming care for minors and human trafficking through uncontrolled borders.) They refuse to see it that way and I'm the outlier.
I never said they did. I said the younger generations mock them as such, which is true, because they are clueless that it was WWII that actually produced the boomer generation.
Got it. They do do that and in the other direction too. I have lost track of how many times I have heard the whippersnappers rant about the like of Biden, Pelosi and McConnell being examples of the evil Boomers. Plus we get blamed for everything that happened in the 60s just because we were alive then, overlooking that we were in charge of absolutely nothing.
Lincoln pretty much killed the idea of small autonomous republics along with about 1M people. That was really the end of the Republic and the start of the Empire.
Very true - Lincoln was a nationalist and not a federalist.
There are to this day too many people who still want to be governed by a royalty. They still believe there are royal people. It might be nice if it were true, but I doubt it. I don't think we would allow them to remain royal.
It’s such an odd phenomena that I don’t understand.
If I were British, I would question why we would we give our money to people who claim to be royal, so “we” can ogle their lifestyle? Wait, we do that with our current royals called Congress.
But, worse, now we have created a nanny-state-dependent class of royal watchers. This can’t end well.
Mark Steyn has written that one advantage of having a monarch as Britain does is that without one, mere elected officials are likely to decide they are important.
Very good read, Liz.
In my view, anarchism functions via governance vs. government. Governance based on the Natural Law...Do you make this distinction and have you written on the topic?
Thanks! No, I have not written about that distinction but that’s a very good point.
When the government fears knowledgeable people, there is tyranny.
Yes, there is tyranny and then “they” send “them” to prison. As Joe Strummer asked,
"When they kick at your front door
How you gonna come?
With your hands on your head
Or on the trigger of your gun?"
On whose side would the military be? Without power centralized in D.C. where would the state of war be? Without a constant state of war, a central control (pentagon) would be pointless. Would they be willing to step down? Or would they make war on us to retain their status? The army of bureaucrats in D.C. would surely sic the pentagon on us rather than step down.
The idea of how to get there, well, yes, you do have a point that they won't step down. My hope is that we could negotiate with 2/3 governors/state legislatures (33+). But, I would defer strategic matters to military experts who know better than I. The military would still fall under the national government – all matters foreign.
Among the many brilliant insights here are some new to me. I have not read it explicitly stated that a real republic must be small. But it makes sense! The real, free republics were probably all small.
"…Venice where without any recognized leader to direct them, they agreed to live together under such laws as they thought to suited best suited to maintain them. And by reason of the prolonged tranquility which their position secured… they were able, from the very small beginnings, to attain to that greatness they now enjoy."
Machiavelli, Discourses on Livy (1532)
Thanks. Yep, it does make sense. The happiest countries seem to be small, homogenous republics - I wrote an article about it.
https://lizlasorte.substack.com/p/do-you-want-to-live-in-the-happiest?r=76q58
Are you sure you’d like to quote Lennon’s “Imagine”? I.e., he imagines a Utopia where there’s no borders, no religion and other assorted idiocies.
Yeah, it’s quite inappropriate, but I always liked that song, so I just changed the lyrics. Oh, the duality of human nature.
Excellent read, puts the concepts swirling around in my own head into an ordered plan for how to convey these things to others. No one gets it; Americans are so used to their cushy lives now that we as a whole are clueless about the evils surrounding us, and the younger generations don’t feel like their lives will ever really change (just ask the surviving families of Holocaust victims). Instead we mock the generations who lived through WWII and the Great Depression as clueless boomers stuck in the past instead of using their messages to secure our future. Some days I do feel we need a serious wake up call in this nation, but I’ve yet to read anyone come up with a solid idea on how to avoid the bloodshed that is likely coming.
Thank you! And thanks for reading and for your comment. I agree; I wish we could negotiate an "amicable" divorce and be united for foreign affairs only to avoid the coming blood shed.
I wouldn't even have the foreign affairs connection not wishing to get dragged into the Forever Wars. Continental defense perhaps. The ideal end state would be like the relationship with Canada. Wholly separate but peaceful trading partners. We would have to be careful to avoid economic domination given the enormous head start of the People's Republic but with us out of their way , they would spend themselves into oblivion.
I get that sentiment and under the AOC, the army was not a national standing army, but made of state militias - and we were at war!
Robert Yates discussed the history of standing armies causing forever wars: https://lizlasorte.substack.com/p/name-that-anti-federalist?r=76q58
It is worth noting that the Constitution gives the Congress the authority raise an army but maintain a navy. This implies the militia theory for the army and recognizes the professional needs of the navy. In modern terms, we would look like Switzerland which is 200 years from its last war.
Interesting idea and what a concept - no war. Not saying it can't be done, but Switzerland does have a huge advantage that we don't have - they are small and homogenous.
Not so homogeneous. Three official languages ( technically 4). Majority German but a sizeable French minority and a smaller Italian one
Army is militia but well trained. Rifles at home with crew served weapons and extra ammo at local armory. AF is professional and ,of course, no navy. Blast shelters for about 90%
My late brother-in-law, in his novel “The End of Fame”, wrote “The three worst enemies of liberty are a standing army, a sitting legislature, and a lying executive.”
Media is a problem too. Reading history of CW1. Media on both sides was much more bloodthirsty than the troops
Very true and Robert Yates predicted it all. I would also add that creating a dependent class is an enemy of liberty too.
It’s not often I come across other Libertarian women with whom I agree - in fact I am the only one in my entire circle of women, all of whom are voting Kamala, so I appreciate your perspectives.
Thank you and ditto - I too have friends voting for Kamala - which to me is voting for child abuse (gender affirming care for minors and human trafficking through uncontrolled borders.) They refuse to see it that way and I'm the outlier.
Just for the record, zero Boomers lived through the Great Depression and WW2.
I never said they did. I said the younger generations mock them as such, which is true, because they are clueless that it was WWII that actually produced the boomer generation.
Got it. They do do that and in the other direction too. I have lost track of how many times I have heard the whippersnappers rant about the like of Biden, Pelosi and McConnell being examples of the evil Boomers. Plus we get blamed for everything that happened in the 60s just because we were alive then, overlooking that we were in charge of absolutely nothing.
+50x Olympians!