VA-HIST Archives

Discussion of research and writing about Virginia history

VA-HIST@LISTLVA.LIB.VA.US

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Reply To:
Discussion of research and writing about Virginia history <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 28 Oct 2008 17:58:57 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (31 lines)
Sam--

I still think its a false dichotomy.  First of all, I do not think it is self evident that we have more to fear from too much centralized power as we do from too much liberty.  For one thing, the two are connected--too much liberty creates the conditions that lead to tyranny.  

For another, we do not have to stipulate that the the threat between the two is  equal (as you seem to imply below) in order to claim that we need to guard our polity from the dangers of both.  All I need to claim is that the dangers from too much liberty are demonstrable and real, and sufficiently grave to merit our public attention.  I think that this is a reasonable proposition--all you need to do to convince yourself that it is real is to read the various analysts and commentators I described in an earlier post.  I will repost that list if you wish.  (Not to toot my own horn, but if you want to read the ways in which earlier generations of statesmen, thinkers, journalists, public intellectuals, and jurists in our country have addressed these kinds of issues, you can trace them in the documents collected in Scott Hammond, Kevin Hardwick, and Howard Lubert, eds., CLASSICS OF AMERICAN POLITICAL AND CONSTITUTIONAL THOUGHT, published in two volumes by Hackett Press.)

I think that public funding for historical preservation of sites like Fortress Monroe is one of the ways that we ensure ordered liberty in our country--and because ordered liberty is a good thing (whereas unrestrained, disordered liberty is a bad thing) I think the coercion you quite correctly note is justified.

While I find much to admire in Libertarian thought, I think it ultimately fails because it does not attend to the conditions necessary to ensure that liberty will endure.  By privileging liberty, even when taken to extremes, it fails to take into account the degree to which liberty can undermine the public institutions that ensure that it can exist and thrive.

Warm regards,
Kevin

---- Original message ----
>Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2008 08:15:10 -0500
>From: Sam Treynor <[log in to unmask]>  
>Subject: Re: Ft Monroe & public funds  
>To: [log in to unmask]
>
>Kevin,
>
>You're right.  I should have asked which we had more reason to fear, liberty
>or power.
Kevin R. Hardwick, Ph.D.
Department of History
James Madison University

______________________________________
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html

ATOM RSS1 RSS2


LISTLVA.LIB.VA.US