Thomas Paine Dissertations on First Principles of Government http://www.cooperativeindividualism.org/paine_dissertations_on_first_prin.html
In all matters of opinion, the social compact, or the principle by which society is held together, requires that the majority of opinions becomes the rule for the whole, and that the minority yields practical obedience thereto. This is perfectly conformable to the principle of equal rights: for, in the first place, every man has a right to give an opinion but no man has a right that his opinion should govern the rest. In the second place, it is not supposed to be known beforehand on which side of any question, whether for or against, any man's opinion will fall. He may happen to be in a majority upon some questions, and in a minority upon others; and by the same rule that he expects obedience in the one case, he must yield it in the other. On Oct 2, 9:35 am, "M. Johnson" <[email protected]> wrote: > plainolamerican > the point is that (imo) democracy is not the best system > Sheldon Richman > I mean something else: Why should the people get something through > government–that is, at the point of a gun–simply because they want it? We > make that assumption reflexively, but why? Fifty-seven percent may be willing > to pay higher taxes for universal health insurance, but let’s not overlook > what else they are willing to do:tax the 37 percent whoaren’twilling to pay > higher taxes.(Six percent don’t know if they are willing or not.Sigh.) > H. L. Mencken long ago defined democracy as the “the theory that the common > people know what they want, and deserve to get itgood and hard.”The problem > is that those whodon’twant it get it, too. When it comes to government > programs, there’s no opt-out provision. Alas, what distinguishes “free” from > unfree countries is the freedom tospeakout, not tooptout. In the latter > respect, all are unfree. > What about that 37 percent who would be ignored? If they don’t count, they > needn’t have had their time wasted by the pollster. AsBruno Leoniwrote, “[I]n > assuming that 51 voters out of 100 are ‘politically’ equal to 100 voters, and > that the remaining 49 (contrary) voters are ‘politically’ equal to zero > (which is exactly what happens when a group decision is made according to > majority rule) we give much more ‘weight’ to each voter ranking on the side > of the winning 51 than to each voter ranking on the side of the losing 49.” > (See my article“The Crazy Arithmetic of Voting.”) > Well, it might be said, in our system the majority rules. Standing alone, > this principle sounds rather ominous, so the speaker usually hastens to add, > “but the rights of the minority are protected.” But really now, which is it? > Do the majority rule or are the rights of the minority protected? I really > don’t see how you can have it both ways. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
