We will be defending our country, because our weapon is truth, and our truth is that this is our land, our country, our children, and we will defend all of this.
President Volodymyr Zelensky, quoted in ”Kyiv on heightened alert as Russian forces close in on all sides,” by Ivana Kottasová, Simone McCarthy, Tara John and Tim Lister, CNN (updated February 27, 2022).
On February 28, 1646, Roger Scott, of Lynn, Massachusetts, was tried for sleeping in church. Awakened in church by a tithingman’s long, knobbed staff hitting him on the head, he struck back at the man, and garnered a whipping as punishment, as well as the dark designation as “a common sleeper at the publick exercise.”
Paul Jacob talks about the biggest political issue: real democracy, where politicians aren’t allowed to manhandle and tyrannize citizens. Watch this weekend’s episode of This Week in Common Sense on Rumble:
Or watch on YouTube:
Because Paul is on the road this weekend, the main feature of this weekend’s episode is his talk at the 2019 Global Forum for Direct Democracy in Taichung, Taiwan. Unless you were in Taiwan in 2019, you are unlikely to have heard it.
Mr. Roosevelt is following the great principles established by the Fascist revolution and the genius of Il Duce. A just pride in the spirit and the trail-blazing work of Fascism prompts us to point this out. The situation recalls the Mussolinian phrase ‘Where we have shown the way, others will follow.’
Lá Stampa, Turin, as quoted in The New York Times, March 5, 1933, page 4.
Whenever you find a man who says he does not believe in a real Right and Wrong, you will find the same man going back on this a moment later. He may break his promise to you, but if you try breaking one to him he will be complaining ‘It’s not fair’ before you can say Jack Robinson.
C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity (1952), as quoted for the 26 February entry in A Year with C.S. Lewis: Daily Readings from His Classic Works (2003), Patricia S. Klein, editor.
The author says he stressed that “it would be unwise for Daniel to launch a campaign against the admissions committee,” no matter how solid the data.
Bury the findings, was his advice. The campaign would fail and “probably” do no long-run good. (Implying that bad cultural trends are not even partly reversible, or at least “probably” aren’t; ergo, good men, do nothing.)
Also, publishing “would probably end up hurting him rather than helping him.”
Suppose a scholar like Thomas Sowell, who has compiled massive evidence contradicting the assumption that racism or the legacy of slavery “explains” all economic patterns and disparate outcomes, had followed such vicious advice when starting out?
“Don’t do it! Don’t report your research and conclusions, Mr. Sowell! You’ll never advance by pursuing the truth! Just go along to get along. Like me.”
According to the professor, Daniel was not entirely consistent in his indictment of quotas. The professor could have encouraged him to be more consistent. Instead, he encouraged him to give up.
Our quisling Quillette academic could have told Daniel: “You’re right, and I can help you to strengthen your argument. Why don’t we co-author something about this so that you won’t have to deal with the flak alone?”
Did the possibility even occur to him?
What an education.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts
The fool who does not know his own folly may be doing nothing, and the philosopher who is trying to darken knowledge may be doing worse than nothing; but every sincere attempt to grapple with real difficulties made by a man not utterly incompetent has its value.
Leslie Stephen, from his preface to The Science of Ethics (1882).
Instead, it talks about an amendment requiring any citizen-initiated measure “that affects the property tax revenue of a local government by modifying the property tax assessment rate or mill levy rate to be decided only in a local election.”
The politicians hope that this somniferous wording will hide the true nature of the measure.
“Don’t be bamboozled by Initiative 55’s sly wording,” warns Natalie Menton, an anti-tax, pro-petition-rights activist.
Proponents of Initiative No. 55 say they want citizen-initiated changes in property taxes to be decided “only in a local election” without making clear that “under the current law, this is not possible for more than 90% of local situations.”
Menton gives examples of initiatives that would become impossible if Initiative 55 eludes voter skepticism.
One is any statewide measure to provide relief for owners of agricultural land, which “has a far higher tax assessment rate (300%-plus) than single-family homes.” If 55 reaches ballot and passes, it would become unconstitutional for citizens to place a question on the statewide ballot to reduce this burden.
What we see here is an ancient strategy of politicians. In seeking to expand their power, they pretend that increased power isn’t the agenda at all!
They engage in cover-up.
Don’t let it succeed here, Coloradoans. Don’t sign a petition to put 55 on the November ballot. If it gets there, vote No.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts
Let those who would use the political process to impose their preferences on the behavior of others be wary of the threat to their own liberties, as described in the possible components of their own behavior that may also be subjected to control and regulation. The apparent costlessness of restricting the liberties of others through politics is deceptive. The liberties of some cannot readily be restricted without limiting the liberties of all.
James M. Buchanan, “Politics and Meddlesome Preferences,” in Smoking and Society: Toward a More Balanced Assessment, edited by Robert D. Tollison, page 340.
On February 24, 1917, United States ambassador to the United Kingdom, Walter Hines Page, was shown the intercepted Zimmermann Telegram, in which Germany offered to give the American Southwest back to Mexico were Mexico to declare war on the United States.
On February 24, 1803, the Supreme Court, in Marbury v. Madison, established the principle of judicial review.