5 ms·

Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of ar

by nickik 9y ago

Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few. In war, too, the discretionary power of the Executive is extended; its influence in dealing out offices, honors, and emoluments is multiplied; and all the means of seducing the minds, are added to those of subduing the force, of the people. The same malignant aspect in republicanism may be traced in the inequality of fortunes, and the opportunities of fraud, growing out of a state of war, and in the degeneracy of manners and of morals engendered by both. No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare. —James Madison Pretty much exactly what happened. Pretty smart these guys.

lostlogin 9y ago
Yes, but war also helped some groups find their place. World Wars one and two saw oppressed races (and genders) make gains due to the lack of meat for the grinders and grudging inclusion by the system of those previously excluded groups through pressing need. The inclusion helped push forward their rights, and while things often remained pretty abysmal post war it helped move things along and started movements toward more equality.
- nickik 9y ago
  Short terms shocks have reactions. Many of these things were already going in the right direction. 100 years of freedom (or no WW) between 1914 and now would probebly have been better for these groups.
  - lostlogin 9y ago
    Possibly, but there are numerous examples of minority (and majority in the case of women) groups agitating for the rights that they deserved, and in many cases having the dominant groups support them. I don’t think the social change would have happened at the same rate without the wars.
- MichaelGG 9y ago
  Can you elaborate on the oppressed genders, plural, that were recognised and included due to WW1 and 2? Female I imagine is one. Which others? And even then it was only the Soviets having women fight.
  - lostlogin 9y ago
    I only intended to mean females and that plural is an error. Edit: The Soviets and resistance groups had women fight, but most countries had women in the armed forces and filling roles previously male only. Outside the military there was a pressing manpower shortage and women filled roles that were previously male only. Post war not everyone wanted to give up the positions they had filled and done excelled at.
brobdingnagians 9y ago
Every time I read things by the founding fathers and the era immediately after them, I am always surprised by how many extremely insightful people the time period produced and that they actually got into positions of power where they could organize things according to constitutional principles. Pretty amazing group of people in one place and at one time in a culture and circumstances that could have a large impact.
- graphitezepp 9y ago
  Founding father fetishizing (or whatever you want to call it) is very taboo in lefty circles because of how much conservatives do it. But that doesn't stop me personally from thinking that that group of people had the best ideas and developed the best framework for government the world has ever seen. It's just a shame it didn't work out to their intentions in practice.
  - jonnybgood 9y ago
    The issue is that the “Founding Fathers” are treated as if they thought collectively. They didn’t. Among themselves, they agreed, disagreed, and changed their mind on many things.
    - volgo 9y ago
      The same cannot be said today. If you even hint at non mainstream idea about gender or race in the Silicon Valley, you'll be shunned immediately
      - paublyrne 9y ago
        This is very dependent on the type idea you have, rather than the fact that it may be non mainstream.
        volgo 9y ago
        That's incorrect. Scientific and neutral ideas that do not fit the mold cannot be safely discussed
eeZah7Ux 9y ago
> "armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few" This reads as profoundly anti-statist. Can somebody clarify the context please?
- jonnybgood 9y ago
  Madison was a Federalist and after the War of 1812 he advocated for a stronger national government and military. He was not anti-statist.
- SolarNet 9y ago
  He recognized the difference between government used for domination and government used for liberty. A distinction that today is rarely understood, and hence why he appears as an "anti-statist" when he was advocating for more government power.
Joeri 9y ago
War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few. Counterpoint: in the modern era debts and taxes derive from the social system, not war. The US spends 2 trillion per year on taking care of its retirees and “only” 600 billion on the military. The entire world spends less than 2 trillion on war, so less than the US social security and medicaid budget. The thing governments largely spend their money on is taking care of their people, and taxes largely get redistributed through social systems. The image of the typical government as some malignant force dominating its populace is false (although such governments do exist).
- gshubert17 9y ago
  The budget of the Department of Defense is only a small part of what the United States spends on war. Add in the Department of Energy's portion for nuclear weapons, the Veteran's Administration, the "black budgets" for the CIA, NSA, and others, the accumulated interest on the national debt for various wars (declared and undeclared), and the costs of PTSD-wounded warriors shifted to the public. I don't have a number, but I imagine it's quite a sum.
  - nickik 9y ago
    The State department has become essentially a property managment arm for the DoD. Lots of 'War against Drug' money is used to support the wars. Lots of 'devlopment' aid is used to support war. Massive amount of money are given to Israel and Egypt that is essentially military spending. The list goes on.
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
- lostlogin 9y ago
  The social security and medical costs are higher in veterans than in the general population and the number of veterans receiving state support is significant. This inflates the cost of social security and medical care relative to the defence budget. Your costing of global defence budgets is possibly off a little but not much according to the below. Thanks for your post, I was surprised by the numbers. https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/ssb/v66n2/v66n2p1.html https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/ssb/v66n2/v66n2p1.html https://www.google.co.nz/amp/s/www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/12/12/1570000000000-much-world-spent-arms-year/amp/ https://www.google.co.nz/amp/s/www.telegraph.co.uk/business/...
gshubert17 9y ago
Written in 1795. From: https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Madison/01-15-02-0423 https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Madison/01-15-02-042...
JoeDaDude 9y ago
Great quote, but this is the same James Madison that requested a declaration of war against Great Britain in 1812.
badcede 9y ago
Adam Smith, from The Wealth of Nations, Chapter III: "In great empires the people who live in the capital, and in the provinces remote from the scene of action, feel, many of them scarce any inconveniency from the war; but enjoy, at their ease, the amusement of reading in the newspapers the exploits of their own fleets and armies. To them this amusement compensates the small difference between the taxes which they pay on account of the war, and those which they had been accustomed to pay in time of peace. They are commonly dissatisfied with the return of peace, which puts an end to their amusement, and to a thousand visionary hopes of conquest and national glory, from a longer continuance of the war."

by nickik 9y ago

lostlogin 9y ago

Yes, but war also helped some groups find their place. World Wars one and two saw oppressed races (and genders) make gains due to the lack of meat for the grinders and grudging inclusion by the system of those previously excluded groups through pressing need. The inclusion helped push forward their rights, and while things often remained pretty abysmal post war it helped move things along and started movements toward more equality.

nickik 9y ago
Short terms shocks have reactions. Many of these things were already going in the right direction. 100 years of freedom (or no WW) between 1914 and now would probebly have been better for these groups.
- lostlogin 9y ago
  Possibly, but there are numerous examples of minority (and majority in the case of women) groups agitating for the rights that they deserved, and in many cases having the dominant groups support them. I don’t think the social change would have happened at the same rate without the wars.
MichaelGG 9y ago
Can you elaborate on the oppressed genders, plural, that were recognised and included due to WW1 and 2? Female I imagine is one. Which others? And even then it was only the Soviets having women fight.
- lostlogin 9y ago
  I only intended to mean females and that plural is an error. Edit: The Soviets and resistance groups had women fight, but most countries had women in the armed forces and filling roles previously male only. Outside the military there was a pressing manpower shortage and women filled roles that were previously male only. Post war not everyone wanted to give up the positions they had filled and done excelled at.

brobdingnagians 9y ago

Every time I read things by the founding fathers and the era immediately after them, I am always surprised by how many extremely insightful people the time period produced and that they actually got into positions of power where they could organize things according to constitutional principles. Pretty amazing group of people in one place and at one time in a culture and circumstances that could have a large impact.

graphitezepp 9y ago
Founding father fetishizing (or whatever you want to call it) is very taboo in lefty circles because of how much conservatives do it. But that doesn't stop me personally from thinking that that group of people had the best ideas and developed the best framework for government the world has ever seen. It's just a shame it didn't work out to their intentions in practice.
- jonnybgood 9y ago
  The issue is that the “Founding Fathers” are treated as if they thought collectively. They didn’t. Among themselves, they agreed, disagreed, and changed their mind on many things.
  - volgo 9y ago
    The same cannot be said today. If you even hint at non mainstream idea about gender or race in the Silicon Valley, you'll be shunned immediately
    - paublyrne 9y ago
      This is very dependent on the type idea you have, rather than the fact that it may be non mainstream.
      - volgo 9y ago
        That's incorrect. Scientific and neutral ideas that do not fit the mold cannot be safely discussed

eeZah7Ux 9y ago

> "armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few" This reads as profoundly anti-statist. Can somebody clarify the context please?

jonnybgood 9y ago
Madison was a Federalist and after the War of 1812 he advocated for a stronger national government and military. He was not anti-statist.
SolarNet 9y ago
He recognized the difference between government used for domination and government used for liberty. A distinction that today is rarely understood, and hence why he appears as an "anti-statist" when he was advocating for more government power.

Joeri 9y ago

War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few. Counterpoint: in the modern era debts and taxes derive from the social system, not war. The US spends 2 trillion per year on taking care of its retirees and “only” 600 billion on the military. The entire world spends less than 2 trillion on war, so less than the US social security and medicaid budget. The thing governments largely spend their money on is taking care of their people, and taxes largely get redistributed through social systems. The image of the typical government as some malignant force dominating its populace is false (although such governments do exist).

gshubert17 9y ago
The budget of the Department of Defense is only a small part of what the United States spends on war. Add in the Department of Energy's portion for nuclear weapons, the Veteran's Administration, the "black budgets" for the CIA, NSA, and others, the accumulated interest on the national debt for various wars (declared and undeclared), and the costs of PTSD-wounded warriors shifted to the public. I don't have a number, but I imagine it's quite a sum.
- nickik 9y ago
  The State department has become essentially a property managment arm for the DoD. Lots of 'War against Drug' money is used to support the wars. Lots of 'devlopment' aid is used to support war. Massive amount of money are given to Israel and Egypt that is essentially military spending. The list goes on.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
lostlogin 9y ago
The social security and medical costs are higher in veterans than in the general population and the number of veterans receiving state support is significant. This inflates the cost of social security and medical care relative to the defence budget. Your costing of global defence budgets is possibly off a little but not much according to the below. Thanks for your post, I was surprised by the numbers. https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/ssb/v66n2/v66n2p1.html https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/ssb/v66n2/v66n2p1.html https://www.google.co.nz/amp/s/www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/12/12/1570000000000-much-world-spent-arms-year/amp/ https://www.google.co.nz/amp/s/www.telegraph.co.uk/business/...

gshubert17 9y ago

Written in 1795. From: https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Madison/01-15-02-0423 https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Madison/01-15-02-042...

JoeDaDude 9y ago

Great quote, but this is the same James Madison that requested a declaration of war against Great Britain in 1812.

badcede 9y ago

Adam Smith, from The Wealth of Nations, Chapter III: "In great empires the people who live in the capital, and in the provinces remote from the scene of action, feel, many of them scarce any inconveniency from the war; but enjoy, at their ease, the amusement of reading in the newspapers the exploits of their own fleets and armies. To them this amusement compensates the small difference between the taxes which they pay on account of the war, and those which they had been accustomed to pay in time of peace. They are commonly dissatisfied with the return of peace, which puts an end to their amusement, and to a thousand visionary hopes of conquest and national glory, from a longer continuance of the war."