Comments on: Traveling down the road to serfdom

By: Old Soldier

Old Soldier — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 18:30:57 +0000

Nobody has mentioned how serfdom first developed. During the later days of the Western Roman Empire, taxes were so high on the middle class (artisans, craftsmen, farmers) that they were literally selling themselves into slavery because slaves were not taxed. People were willing to trade their physical freedom for economic freedom. The middle class was taxed out of existence – only the poor and the tax-exempt aristocrats were remained.

To stop the loss of tax revenue, the Emperor decreed that free men could no longer sell themselves into slavery and farmers were no longer allowed to leave their farms. They were now medieval serfs.

By: Chemman

Chemman — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 16:48:16 +0000

“Consider a boot stamping on your face forever”
To the squishy middle that bought the hope and change kool-aid, How is the boot feeling about now?

By: Steynian 333 « Free Canuckistan!

Steynian 333 « Free Canuckistan! — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 11:39:53 +0000

[...] KIMBALL– Liberalism is watered-down fanaticism: a thought from Santayana; Traveling down the road to serfdom; A tale of two Presidents, Or, Semper Fi vs. a “tepid response”; The two most frightening [...]

By: David Guaspari

David Guaspari — Tue, 10 Mar 2009 23:42:50 +0000

You mention Obama’s “combination of benevolence and moralism.” Presumably you know Michael Oakeshott’s remark that tyranny results from “the conjunction of ruling and dreaming.” (Quoted from memory.)

By: ahem

ahem — Tue, 10 Mar 2009 08:16:05 +0000

Another vote for willful and intentional.

By: MikeD

MikeD — Tue, 10 Mar 2009 00:32:57 +0000

Sherab @ #20 said: ‘Only honest Congressmen, honest journalists, honest intellectuals and honest people can save America now.”

Then we are lost!!!

By: Kurt

Kurt — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 16:25:28 +0000

While I’m quite willing to accept that O. didn’t like history at all in school, given what is known about his background and his affiliations, I’m also willing to believe the unstated (and purely speculative on my part) corollary: that is, he didn’t learn much history at school, and most of what he knows about American history most likely came from a reading of propagandist “historians” such as Howard Zinn, after Zinn’s work was recommended by his activist mentors.

By: howiem

howiem — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 13:10:45 +0000

ked5 has it right, along with a lot of others. Obama is a trained radical who believes that in order to build a utopia he has to tear down the existing structure. On one hand he gives (entitlements), and on the other he takes away taxes). Don’t for a second think this is “well meaning”. It is all about complete power, not about “doing good”. He is no different than a Hitler, Lenin or any of the tyrants. The only difference is that far too many Americans understand his words (but not the meaning). And why shouldn’t they not understand? he so called “conservative” media keeps calling Obama and his cronies “liberals”. They are about as liberal as Attila the Hun, Stalin or Hitler.
Bob, I am also an advocate of about 99% of what Hayek says (and I haven’t figured which 1% I am against ). If Hayek, von Mises, Milton Friedman, etc., were required reading in every university, I doubt we (used loosely:)) would have come to elect a power hungry totalitarian as president. As Milton Friedman said, “Fundamental differences in basic values can seldom if ever be resolved at the ballot box; ultimately they can only be decided, though not resolved, by conflict.”

By: ccwildbill

ccwildbill — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 13:03:35 +0000

Here are comments from 32(?) or more individuals, essentially all support some action…which can be realized by writing our individual congresscritters, who, with Obama, are ruining our economy, socializing private businesses, and ignoring the pulse of America: the market. Until we can replace them, our opinions count…even if you get form letter responses, like I have. We need to raise our concerns above the noise level, and congress seems to be the source of both the problems and…to listen to them…the solutions (heh).

By: rk

rk — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 05:55:31 +0000

We are always on the horns of a dilemma with Obama.

Is the Brit snub a function of a guy (and staff) who is/are less than competent…or is this a careful snub based on grievance?

Same with the market and capitalism.

The majority have always assumed that Obama was a young in-experienced person, but that he had the right stuff.

But many have been afraid that he’s filled with grievance and Leftism, and that much of his background is in greivance theater.

At the mid-point of the first 100 days we still don’t know for sure, but the evidence is mounting.

And we have tea parties and Jim Cramer. There is even Evan Bayh, and rumors of more. Let’s hope and pray that the Left fails in re-making America.