Paul Ryan: rights come from nature & God, not government

During an appearance on ABC’s This Week on July 1, Republican Rep. Paul Ryan argued that the Affordable Care Act passed into law by Congressional Democrats and signed by President Barack Obama should be repealed because rights come from “nature and God,” not the government.

“I think this at the end of the day is a big philosophy difference,” he continued. “What Ms. Kennedy and others were saying is that this is a new government-granted right. We disagree with the notion that our rights come from government, that the government can now grant us and define our rights. Those are ours, they come from nature and God, according to the Declaration of Independence — a huge difference in philosophy.”

While Rep. Ryan may believe that rights come from nature and God (not government), let’s take a look at just a few of the rights granted to our nation’s citizens by our government:

  • Womens’ right to vote (granted by 19th amendment)
  • Right to vote for all citizens, regardless of race, color, or previous condition of servitude (15th amendment)
  • Right to bear arms (granted by 2nd amendment)
  • Right of all citizens to live free from involuntary servitude (granted by 13th amendment)
  • Right to a fair and speedy public trial by jury (granted by 6th amendment)

Further, Rep. Ryan’s assertion that rights come from nature and God ignores the fact that the very rights he’s referring to – life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness – were granted by the men who wrote the Declaration of Independence. Further, Rep. Ryan conveniently ignores the supreme hypocrisy in the fact that those rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness didn’t apply to the slaves being held against their will at the time by Americans. And let’s not forget that it was action by the government that finally allowed those slaves to begin to be able to enjoy those rights.


Related Articles

88 thoughts on “Paul Ryan: rights come from nature & God, not government

  1. I believe Rep. Ryan is talking about natural rights:

    Political theorists since the time of the ancient Greeks have argued in support of the existence of natural rights, meaning those rights that men possessed as a gift from nature (or God) prior to the formation of governments. It is generally held that those rights belong equally to all men at birth and cannot be taken away.

    The concept of natural rights received one of its most forceful expositions in the writings of Englishman John Locke (1632-1704), who argued that man was originally born into a state of nature where he was rational, tolerant, and happy. In this original existence man was entitled to enjoy the rights of life, liberty and property.

    However, not all men chose to live within the confines of the natural laws and presented threats to the liberties of the others. At this stage man entered into a social contract (compact) in which a state (government) was formed to guarantee the rights of the members of society.

    I don’t think that the fact that governments at times have not protected people’s natural rights changes the concept that these rights are not the result of a government but are unalienable given by nature (or God).

  2. The dog whistle message in Ryan’s statement is that this country was founded by god. Which of course means that the mere mortals that wrote the founding documents of this nation got it wrong. Cute, eh?

  3. Don’t forget the 10th Amendment that gave states the rights that God forgot to mention.

  4. Uh yeah, the foundational subversion of unalienable rights – see W. Cleon Skousen’s 5000 Year Leap where he outlines his nauseating radical revisionism of American history. There’s a philosophical difference there all right. It’s between thinkers who struggle with the complexities of ideas and believers who uncritically absorb nonsense. Out the frying Rand into the Skousen fire – Ryan should be ashamed of himself. He’s unfit to govern.

  5. Are you saying rights come from government? The founders killed many Tories who held that opinion.
    Those rights came from a free people wielding guns, and killing those who would make them dependent on government, subservient to government.

    So do natural rights exist, in your opinion; or is it just moral relativism?
    And is it only guns that make rights?
    (BTW- Both are Marx/Stalin arguments.)

    I argue that natural rights exist in Christian lands, and that those rights were carved out at gun point in increments, and that America led the way in personal freedom for men, slaves, women- And the rest of the christian world followed. Much of the world still has slavery, and women subservient. Are you blaming america for not being first sooner?

    By blaming america, you try to invert the timeline and rewrite history.
    So much of what you think you know, just isn’t so.
    Sue your college for miseducating you into the marxist dialectic and a hatred of western civilization.
    America led the way on freedom, and the rest of the world slowly followed.

    1. My, my, my. What a delightful little package you’ve outlined. A candied cornucopia of manifest destiny and a number of rather inexplicable conclusions drawn from regions unknown.

      You know, Sofa? You just might be onto something here. Convince me. Please. Discuss.

      Reveal how you came to the conclusion that anyone is “blaming” America – for what is America being blamed, pray tell?

      Just what timeline has been inverted in this thread?

      Please explain Marxist Dialectic for me. I want to be sure I am not engaging in it, but I have to be aware of what it is so I can recognize it. If I been miseducated I sure is wanna know.

      1. So do you acknowledge that america led the way personal freedom for men, slaves, women-
        and the rest of the christian world followed-
        and much of the rest of the world has slavery and subservience?

        1. sofa,

          Once you bring up Christianity, you run right into nuns on a bus:

          Matthew 25

          31 When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:

          32 And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:

          33 And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.

          34 Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:

          35 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in:

          36 Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me.

          37 Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink?

          38 When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee?

          39 Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee?

          40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.

          41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:

          42 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink:

          43 I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.

          44 Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?

          45 Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.

          46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

        2. sofa,

          Greek City state, Athens, 6th Century BCE, Magna Carta (1215), the Renaissance, the Enlightenment, Queen Elizabeth (1533 – 1603), Shakespeare, Martin Luther,……. any of this ring any bells?

        1. Rights come from the people…the intent of our Constitution is to protect the people from the government…the government doesn’t bestow rights on us.

      1. Marxist slavery. Despicable.
        Apple supports marxism in the US and abroad. Despicable. I never buy Apple, and urge others not to support marxism by supporting Apple.

        Marxism and it’s brothers always leads to poverty and slavery and starvation and mass murder of the subjugated population. Everywhere. Always.
        Large lefty government controlled economies:

        Communism Gov owns means of production and directs economy
        Facism Gov controls the civilians who own the means of production (e.g. GM, GE)
        Socialism Private ownership of means of production, under direction/taxation/regulation/control of Gov

        Here’s a table of mass murderers of their own populations in the 20th Century (summary: marxists+facists+socialists killed over 150 million of their own civilian populations in the last century).

        Civilians Killed by their own Governments in the Twentieth Century:
        Soviet Union (Communists) 61,900,000 1917-1990
        China (Communists) 45,200,000 1949-present
        Germany (National Socialists) 20,900,000 1933-1945
        China (Kuomintang) 10,400,000 1928-1949
        Japan (Imperial-Fascist) 6,000,000 1936-1945
        Turkey (Muslims) 2,800,000 1909-1923
        Cambodia (Communists) 2,000,000 1975-1979
        Germany (Communists) 2,000,000 1945-1950
        Vietnam (Communists) 1,700,000 1945-present
        North Korea (Communists) 1,700,000 1948-present
        Poland (Communists) 1,600,000 1945-1948
        Pakistan (Muslims) 1,500,000 1971
        Mexico (Porfiriato) 1,400,000 1900-1920
        Yugoslavia (Communists) 1,100,000 1944-1990
        Russia (Czarist) 1,100,000 1900-1917
        Turkey (Muslims) 900,000 1918-1923
        United Kingdom (Constitutional) 800,000 1900-present
        Portugal (Fascist) 700,000 1926-1975
        Croatia (Fascists) 700,000 1941-1945
        Indonesia (Muslims) 600,000 1965-present

        Strong central government seems to be the problem. And Muslims.

        1. Your long list has nary a Marxist government on it. If you knew more about Marxism that just the word, you’d know that.

    2. sofa, you wrote above: “argue that natural rights exist in Christian lands,”

      More evidence you’re not remotely conservative, you haven’t read the FIRST Amendment. The founders didn’t put it first by accident.

      “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; ….”

      We are NOT a CHRISTIAN nation, or a Jewish nation or a Mormon nation or a theist nation, or an agnostic nation, or an atheist nation, or a Moslem nation…..

  6. Zach needs to take his thought process one step further. Let’s see what the Declaration of Indepenence has to say on the matter:
    “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men…”

    Pretty clear to me. The rights are from God. The government was formed to secure (make safe) these rights man already had. The additional laws passed after the Constitution (women’s votes, keep and bear arms, anti-slavery, etc) were just to codify these God given rights.

    The wording of most of these amendments confirms this. As an example, look at the wording of 2nd Amendment: “….the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
    There is no granting of this rights here at all. It simply says that the inherent right shall not be infringed.

    I suggest Zach may gain more insight by re-visiting a grade school American History class.

      1. The draft was written by Thomas Jefferson. The actual document, as signed, was the effort of many men, including Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, Roger Sherman, Robert Livingston and Thomas Jefferson. It was, however, affirmed as the strong position of 56 men who signed it and put their lives on the line to forward these precepts.

        Now, keep in mind the Declaration is not law. It is, however, the “mission” statement, if you will, of our country. It’s overarching purpose/reason for our country coming into existence. It was the document defining “why”. The Constitution defines the “how”.

        To think of the two as separate documents without a strong correlating bond, is not correct.

        1. Precisely. The Declaration of Independence was written by men, not by God, and the rights outlined in the Declaration were rights the men who wrote that document felt were endowed by the Creator.

          However, since you seem to think those rights (life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness) are endowed by the Creator, explain why the Creator didn’t endow those rights on all men, namely those held in bondage as slaves. While you’re at it, explain how the “all men are created equal” line jibes with the treatment of slaves during that period.

          1. All men are free. Just sometimes, evil men try to enslave them (Monarchists, Marxists, etc). So from time to time, good men have to kill the evil guys, so a few generations can be free. Until they forget and get lazy and get enslaved again. The cycle repeats.

            “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.”
            -Edmund Burke

            “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. It is it’s natural manure.”
            -Thomas Jefferson

            So life&liberty are granted by God, but you must combat evil yourself or be enslaved. If you do nothing, evil will rise up and enslave you again.

            Do not look upon God like the DNC, or like Katrina victims helplessly begging at the Superdome, victims of their own victimhood.
            Old Testament had plenty of Battles and setbacks for the chosen people. Men must be responsible and do something for themselves. Anyone waiting for handouts from Fed.Gov or from God deserves what happens: Slavery and Starvation.

            Zach- You want it given for free, with no effort on your part, guaranteed. Good luck with that. Bible tells you otherwise. And you’ll not get free stuff from me either. Maybe Fed.Gov will give you free handouts with money stolen from your grandchildren.

            1. sofa,

              What crime did the folks in Colorado Springs commit? For what was YOUR god punishing their homes with fire?

          2. Zach – Not up on devine intervention? In your opinion, was the Bible written by men too?. Of course it was. But their words were guided by God.

            From 2 Timothy 3:16: “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness”. Don’t believe this to be true? We are speaking two different languages then and will never come to any agreement here.

            To your next point: “…explain why the Creator didn’t endow those rights on all men, namely those held in bondage as slaves. While you’re at it, explain how the “all men are created equal” line jibes with the treatment of slaves during that period.”

            Please re-read my original post, where I said “The additional laws passed after the Constitution (women’s votes, keep and bear arms, anti-slavery, etc) were just to codify these God given rights.” Man’s inability to properly apply God’s will the first time does not mean it was not God’s will. Luckily, the got it right with the additional amendments to the Constitution.

      2. The King wanted to redistribute their wealth and control their behavior with a multitude of government agencies. The founders declared they were free men, not slaves to an overlord, and killed those who tried to coerce them; tarred, feathered, burned Tory homes and businesses. After independence, the Tories fled for Canada, the Caribbean, or back to England. Those who tried to redistribute wealth were not americans and were not welcome.


    1. People whome the government considered serfs, whom they tried to tax and regulate and control.
      Those people yearned to be free, and wrote that document- Asserting their unalienable rights and their intent to kill those who would try to enslave them.

      1. sofa,

        so you disagree with Paul Ryan trying to “socialize” Wall Streets losses onto the taxpayers? Where has Paul been on

        “Bank Of America Dumps $75 Trillion In Derivatives On U.S. Taxpayers With Federal Approval”

        To put $75 trillion into perspective for you, US GDP in 2010 was around $14 trillion.

        Bank of America is just one bank. The notional assessment of taxpayer exposure to derivatives is much, much higher.

        From Forbes: “The Next Financial Crisis Will Be Hellish, And It’s On Its Way”

        1. If it was Capitalism, then the winners and losers stand on their own. This is not the case.

          In a facist kleptocracy, the government provides favors for those in industry that support the government. What you have here is two parties both pushing central state facism. Two parties doing the same thing, and robbing us as they enslave us and…

          The Tories have created and housed an army of mercenaries in our midst;

          For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States;

          They have erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.

          For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent;

          For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury;

          For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments;

          In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

          But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

      2. sofa,

        the good news is that we both agree on the importance of “personal freedom.” I know, like me, you’re against abortion. But given how frequently you use the word, “freedom,” I know, like me, you don’t want the government compelling women to bear children they do not want. It’s a text book example of intrusive government.

        When is Paul Ryan going to come to the conservative position on this?

        1. No one is free to murder babies. Murder is wrong. (And not because a government says it is or isn’t.)
          All morality begins with the right to life, and the right to defend your life,liberty,and property from anyone who would aggress against them. Without life, there are no other rights and no morals.

          and you keep using ‘conservative’ like you don’t really know what that means….

          1. sofa, if you want to be taken seriously on the rights of the unborn, you have to get local governments to issue death certificates for everything you consider a “baby.” Then you have to hold a public funeral.

            1. I don’t take govt seriously.

              What does govt have to do with what’s moral? Murder is murder.

              Do you see everything as descending down from the almighty govt, the final authority on everything? Sad.
              You’d still be a good Tory, wouldn’t you? Just beg the king for more morsels of wisdom, and be content. Sad.

    2. Ted, if the “rights” are from “God,” what the hell took God until the 18th century?

      Why did Jesus of Nazareth, the 2nd Person of the Trinity NEVER mention anything about freeing the slaves?

      1. Men are Free.
        But other men would enslave them. Evil men, like Stalin, Wilson, FDR, Mao, Castro- Marxists.

        So God made men free, but other evil men keep trying to enslave them. Some men are able to kill their oppressors and regain freedom for a few generations. Our founders laid out a good plan, best ever, historically. Over time that plan freed the slaves and empowered women, andshowed the rest of the world the path of liberty.

        Now from time to time, evil Monarchists and Marxists show up, and try to enslave the populous. Those who do not want to be free- may bow down and lick the boots of their oppressors and beg for more and more free stuff. But that cannot be sustained and leads to accelerating ruin.

        “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. It is it’s natural manure.”

  7. And, to continue, let’s look at the 19th Amendment: “The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.”

    Again, this wording is about the protecting of a right women inherently already had (per the Declaration, by God), but just had, in my opinion, been ignorantly ignored up to this point.

    1. Tad, you just declared the Roman Catholic Church to be heretical and outside the bounds of a Christian faith. The Roman Catholic Church does not consider woman to be fully human. That’s why they refuse to ordain them. I have to say, I think you’re on to something.

      I’m not sure, but I get a little nervous about the “net” of the “rights come from God,” argument.

      Orthodox Christians and conservatives have always believed in the doctrine of original sin. Some people are very good, most are not. A few are spectacularly malevolent. My concern with Ryan and other wingnuts is that they appear to think that with less government, human nature will magically revert to a purity and nobility that it has never before had.

      1. “My concern with Ryan and other wingnuts is that they appear to think that with less government, human nature will magically revert to a purity and nobility that it has never before had. ”

        Ascribing nonsensical ‘magical’ arguments to others which they have not made- Reveals that your arguing with yourself.

      2. Interesting that you’re nervous about individual freedom and responsibility.
        Maybe you would feel safer in a prison, or as a slave: None of that freedom thing to make you nervous…

        “If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!”
        -Samuel Adams

    2. Tad, are you going to extend your “development of Christian doctrine” argument beyond equal rights for women to equal rights for GLBT?

    3. I love Tad’s argument:

      “Women had the right to vote the entire time, despite the fact that they weren’t allowed to vote, necessitating a Constitutional amendment allowing them to vote.”

      Apparently that whole women’s suffrage movement here in the U.S. was unnecessary.

      1. US led the way for women sufferage, due to our form of govt and christian western civilization (which you disparage).
        The world has been a brutal place, but the US led the way on liberty, for men, then slaves, then women. Are you complaining because others did the work for you, but didn’t do it in time to meet your criteria?

        1. You’re horribly misinformed, because the U.S. didn’t lead the way on liberty for slaves.

          Slavery was abolished in 1833 in the British Empire (without a civil war to resolve the issue, mind you), and France abolished slavery for good in 1848 (again, without needing a civil war to resolve the issue).

          Hell, Chile abolished slavery in 1823.

          Facts are pesky things, and in this case you don’t have the facts on your side. Go crawl back under the rock from whence you came.

  8. It was middle school when the ‘acknowledged rights’ vs ‘granted rights’ discussion first came up. I remember it in middle school, high school, and several times in college.

    The marxist mis-education no longer provides the history or founding principles of this land (as part of the effort to re-write history into the marxist dialectic). Not knowing this hostory, the mis-educated are recreating the conditions that brought on the first american revolution.

    History doesn’t repeat, exactly. But it rhymes sometimes.

      1. it’s obvious you don’t grasp the distinction between ‘acknowledged rights’ vs ‘granted rights’, fundamental in american education for 200 years. Yet you don’t grasp it.
        That’s evidence of marxist mis-education.

  9. Class struggle is the central contradiction to be resolved by ‘Marxist dialectics’, because of its central role in the social and political lives of a society.

    Sorry your education never included philosophy, and you missed the distinctions. Wikipedia has some information on the ‘marxist dialectic’ here:

    1. sofa,

      Sorry your education never included capitalism.

      I bought all of Reagan’s shtick about “trickle-down.” Wish I had known then what I know now, we’ve been lowering MARGINAL tax rates on the 1% since the Eisenhower administrations.

      Top Marginal Tax rates 1916 – 2011

      Nothing ever “trickled-down.”

      The 1% used their tax breaks to buy both parties and the media.

      Billionaire Nick Hanauer: “Raise Taxes on Rich to Reward True Job Creators”

      “……When businesspeople take credit for creating jobs, it is like squirrels taking credit for creating evolution. In fact, it’s the other way around.
      It is unquestionably true that without entrepreneurs and investors, you can’t have a dynamic and growing capitalist economy. But it’s equally true that without consumers, you can’t have entrepreneurs and investors. And the more we have happy customers with lots of disposable income, the better our businesses will do.
      That’s why our current policies are so upside down. When the American middle class defends a tax system in which the lion’s share of benefits accrues to the richest, all in the name of job creation, all that happens is that the rich get richer.
      And that’s what has been happening in the U.S. for the last 30 years. ….”

      1. We haven’t had capitalism since FDR. Two party Keynesian Facism has failed, utterly.

        Capitalism continues, like Darwin- whether the DoDobird acknowledges it or not. It’s the unguided hand that has Keynesian Facism crashing and burning worldwide.

        Maybe after this crash and uncivil kerfuffle, we can re-institute Capitalism. Can’t wait.

  10. Reasonable individuals raised in western civilization are not fixated on class struggle like you are- You exhibit the behavior of one well trained in the marxist dialectic.

    If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck…

      1. Stop looking to the Government to fix anything.
        Government is the problem.

        Meritocracy struggles when governments try to control economies, and so skew the cost/benefits that crisis after crisis gets resolved by more and more layers of intervention and perversion. The more govt intervenes the worse it gets. Look at 1920’s and now.

        One possible solution is to forceably remove govt from controlling the economy, as the founders did with King George. And then to constitute a limited government with specific enumerated powers to keep it regular (protect against fraud and theft and anti-trust and bribery [current govt should arrest itself!]).

        1. sofa, who is going to enforce patents?

          Do you know how Ron Johnson got to be a U.S. Senator? He married 3rd base, the daughter of the billionaire who invented shrink-wrap.

          You’re sounding like a Marxist, someone who doesn’t value PRIVATE property. That’s the origin of patent law. When you create something new, that has value, other people cannot steal it.

    1. damn those poor if only they were reasonable and got a job!!!! Never mind that the jobs they have are not living wage or the education they received does not allow them to move to a higher wage.

      1. Thanks Laurie, unlike sofa, you’re talking like a capitalist. It’s the laws of Supply and DEMAND. When the 1% have all the money, DEMAND collapses. That’s where we are now. Massive income inequality destroys the system. Henry Ford understood this. It’s why he paid his workers enough so that they could afford to buy his Model-T.

  11. sofa,

    Please, explain why “free markets” are so dominated by oligopolies and monopolies. I thought Adam Smith said they were bad for the “free markets?”

    I thought real conservatives wanted aggressive enforcement of anti-trust violations to promote competition and innovation. Real conservatives know that you manage risk through de-centralization and diversification. Oligopolies and monopolies thrive on centralization and over-reliance on single points of failure.

    1. Free markets aren’t.
      Oligopolies and monopolies are.

      To protect our life, liberty, and property- We constituted a limited government with specific enumerated powers to keep it regular (protect against fraud and theft and anti-trust and bribery). Next time around, we just need to string up the con-men, instead of electing them.

  12. sofa, you’ll know Paul Ryan is remotely conservative, remotely in favor of capitalism, when he starts talking about the the textbook example of job-killing government regulations: the prohibition of marijuana.

    Don’t hold your breath.

    Unless they have cancer, I would never encourage anyone to use marijuana, but it’s a litmus test for real conservatives, as opposed to acolytes for the 1%, Paul Ryan.

    1. Prohibition and War on Drugs are the products of statists (D and R, both of whom use force to change people’s private behavior).

      No liberty minded person could support either D or R due to such tyranny.

  13. sofa,

    The reason we need to raise taxes on the 1% is because Marx makes so much sense to so many people. You appear to think that using terms like “Marx” and class warfare works like holy water in an old Vampire flick.

    What Americans and the rest of the West have seen is a collapse in any sort of meritocracy. You work hard, you don’t get ahead.

    1. “What Americans and the rest of the West have seen is a collapse in any sort of meritocracy. You work hard, you don’t get ahead.”

      Agree. Capitalism is a meritocracy.
      Once the govt embraced Marxism under Wilson and especially FDR, then our current situation was inevitable.

      I would argue that few think Marx makes sense, because few recognize that they were taught Marx in school, rather than the foundations of america and western civ. So maybe society only stays a meritocracy until the citizenry becomes stupid enough to vote that they give themselves free stuff.


      I don’t use words like Marx and class warfare lightly. My family emigrated from eastern europe after fighting communism and mostly being slaughtered. Spent the 1960 and 1970s visiting eastern europe and knowing what marxism is. Uncle Sam familiarized me with Castro and Central America, Africa, and Asia. So I know it when I see it. And the US is a facist kleptocracy working quickly towards Marxism.

      Want meritocracy. Fight for the return of liberty, capitalism, and personal responsibility.
      Or do nothing. The crash is inevitable, since they’ve run out of other people’s money.
      After that, we’ll if enough people even know what western civilization and america was, to be able to reboot it.
      It would be people over 50, since all the youngsters were raised in public schools and default to marxist behavior.

  14. “Capitalism and communism stand at opposite poles. Their essential difference is this: The communist, seeing the rich man and his fine home, says: ‘No man should have so much.’ The capitalist, seeing the same thing, says: ‘All men should have so much.’”
    -Phelps Adams

  15. Marxism is creepy.
    “Progress” was Marx’s first newspaper in 1847.
    Progressives are creepy.

  16. Wow, I haven’t seen this much monologuing since the last time I went to a performance at Shakespeare in the Park.

    Am I right?

    1. You’re right. I’m also starting to notice sofa is recycling his material from comment to comment, because apparently he’s run out of talking points culled from Fox News and Rush Limbaugh.

  17. Holy Fatuity, Batman! What did I miss?

    I was celebrating Independence Day being that July 2 was the date the Declaration of Independence was ratified; I come back and what do I find? A peculiar sofa-screed that sullies every word the founding fathers ever penned and defiles the sacrifices of every veteran who served this nation. Though incorrigible, though unintelligible, tripe worthy of a great deal of attention.

    Happy Independence Day everybody.

    And to you, sofa: I shall relish tomorrow when I address your inanity.

  18. There are two possibilities. IF there is a god, rights come from that god (if that god says so). If there is NO god, then rights are just a social construct, and rights are or are not whatever a given society agrees they are. I just left nature out of it because believers and non-believers alike think that’s just silly, albeit for completely different reasons.

Comments are closed.