7 ms·

In 1776, Thomas Paine made the best case for fighting kings −and being skeptical

147 points by rntn 1y ago

rectang 1y ago
It is tempting, given the success that kingly political approaches have seen of late, to adopt those strategies: to fight "your tyrant" with "my tyrant", and to fight your untruth with my untruth, eschewing skepticism. What if the Constitution, as interpreted by the current SCOTUS, really is a suicide pact? We can only hope that Paine's approach will win out instead.
- jauntywundrkind 1y ago
  That'd be a vaguely interesting point, if I—searching my heart—I could find any evidence of this going both way. Congress has never folded power to a president like this before. The Supreme Court has never faced such backlash from district courts (https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/11/us/politics/judicial-crisis-supreme-court-trump.html https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/11/us/politics/judicial-cris...). Scientists & researchers have never been up in arms about us health policy or what is being done. Colleges and universities have never been policed by a president, confronted with loyalty pacts.
  - Avicebron 1y ago
    The economic policies from the 70s until nowish were new as well
  - rectang 1y ago
    To cite one example: aggressive gerrymandering has required a response in the form of California Prop 50. I'm hoping that we can all find our way to competitive districts together, rather than permanently sorting into districts that are the province of one party or another, eliminating free elections in practice. But thanks to SCOTUS interpreting any amount of political gerrymandering as permissible, we may have in fact fallen into an irreparable hole in the US Constitution. Even if some of us are disinclined towards tyranny, we may be faced with a choice: accept that we are shunted towards it by forces beyond our control, or roll over and accept tyrannical rule by others. I continue to hope that it will not come to that and that we can fight our way out of this situation using Paine's methods.
    - BrenBarn 1y ago
      I think there are multiple irreparable holes in the US Constitution. That doesn't mean tyranny is inevitable, though, it just means we need to start fresh (which is what they did when they came up with the Constitution anyway).
      - rectang 1y ago
        Amending the Constitution to fix such holes is impractical when it would require the approval of states whose hold on perpetual minority rule would be threatened. So then we're looking at a constitutional convention. Can you imagine our current crop of politicians cooperating to negotiate something which improves on the current Constitution? I'd expect a prisoner's dilemma with a defect-defect outcome and the winner taking all of the diminished spoils. I think we're stuck with what we've got and we have to hope that enough voters are persuadable, allowing us to emerge from the hole.
        BrenBarn 1y ago
        If we could persuade enough voters to get out of the hole, why can't we persuade enough to fix the hole (and the other holes)?
- thom 1y ago
  The falcon listens credulously to far too many falconers.
tuveson 1y ago
One funny fact about the “No Kings” protests held abroad is that they were called “No Tyants” so as to not be interpreted as anti-monarchist.
- izzydata 1y ago
  I wouldn't mind seeing the British monarchy get abolished as well. It's far outlived any purpose it may have had. Even without them actually participating in government they are basically just celebrities living off the social welfare of the people.
  - vunderba 1y ago
    On a marginally positive note, at least it is largely a ceremonial position and the real power lies with the prime minister/cabinet/parliament.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
  - aurareturn 1y ago
    They project soft power and attract tourists. I would bet that they’re actually a positive on UK’s economy and well being.
    - exasperaited 1y ago
      They also knocked 15-20 percentage points off our Trump tariffs because he's so easily played; he barely even left the castle grounds this time.
  - ProjectArcturis 1y ago
    At this point the British royals are basically tourist attractions. They probably generate more revenue than they consume.
    - exasperaited 1y ago
olooney 1y ago
Paine kind of hit the nail on the head with this one: > "The law is king!" The 2024 Nobel prize in economics[1] was awarded to a team of three who investigated what causes a nation to prosper and identified "rule of law" as an essential ingredient[2]. [1]: https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/economic-sciences/2024/press-release/ https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/economic-sciences/2024/pre... [2]: https://news.mit.edu/2024/mit-economists-daron-acemoglu-simon-johnson-nobel-prize-economics-1014 https://news.mit.edu/2024/mit-economists-daron-acemoglu-simo...
- readthenotes1 1y ago
  So you get a Nobel prize for proving Benjamin Franklin right (who was rephrasing a more ancient saying). Charlie Munger recalled it in 2003 as “Where there is no bread, there is no law; where there is no law, there is no bread.” It's going to be some easy picking if more figure that out ...
  - Yoric 1y ago
    Now remember that there's an entire current in Silicon Valley that advocates against rule of law, at least when applied to them. Oh, and a felon taking some liberties with law sitting at the White House. Yeah, I think reminding people that you don't get prosperity without rule of law is a good idea.
    - BrenBarn 1y ago
      Not a good enough idea, apparently, given that what you said in the first paragraph is happening.
- ecocentrik 1y ago
  Nice slogan but right now in America, money is king and the law is bent to accommodate the wills of rich lawless men.
  - black_13 1y ago
    [dead]
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
Kenji 1y ago
Next up: Fight the political class and the bureaucrats. Enlightenment step by step.
vunderba 1y ago
> Paine labels kingship "the most prosperous invention the Devil ever set on foot for the promotion of idolatry" Given that this kind of deference to a perceived authority (which manifests in hero worship, tribalism, influencers, religion, celebrity veneration, sports figures, etc) seems to be built into the very genetic fabric of 99% of the general populace I despair at ever seeing it end. People simply can't wait to anoint their own personal king (be it Steve Jobs, Elon Musk, MrBeast, etc.)
- technothrasher 1y ago
  I wonder if Paine was aware of the irony in that quote by his indirect reference to the ultimate invented king.
- rootusrootus 1y ago
  > People simply can't wait to anoint their own personal king You really think there are only 1% of us that have no desire at all for any sort of king? I cannot think of a single person deserving of that role, cannot imagine what it would take for me to change my mind. I very much value our systems of government, and I do not ever want any one person to have too much control over them.
  - Barrin92 1y ago
    I don't think it's necessary to take the OP literally, but directionally it's correct. Looking at American society, the Trumps, Kardashians, Clintons, Roosevelts, Kennedys ... for a country that's so proudly republican, how many of their presidents and elites have been blood related? Might add Jesus to the list metaphorically People Americans hoist into power (and many other countries do) often look like a poor man's replacement for a monarch. How many people in any country do actually lay claim to their own values and conscience? How many are genuinely emancipated and govern themselves? In particular in this day and age where most of the wannabe kings are so obviously idiotic it's telling how eager people still are to subject themselves, sometimes in, as David Bentley Hart dubbed it crypto-erotic fashion, almost sadomasochistic and fully aware how incapable the demagogues are.
- 1y ago
deepsquirrelnet 1y ago
> “What would America’s Founding Fathers think if they were alive today?” > For Cross, it is pointless to speculate about the present-day views of men who could not have imagined cotton candy, let alone the machine that makes it. Some things, like “taxation without representation” seem to be timeless. You can call it irony or perhaps in some cases, a spade is still just a spade.
- DangitBobby 1y ago
  Pretty sure they could have imagined cotton candy, anyway. There's nothing special about modern people that makes them more capable of comprehending new technology, it's just a matter of exposure.
- godelski 1y ago
  >> men who could not have imagined cotton candy It's a funny example since it looks like cotton candy might have been around in their time [0]. Machines spun cotton candy came about much later but I'm not overly suspicious of the claims in [0] as meringue[1] certainly existed in their lifetimes and the process isn't dissimilar. I'm certain these men could understand "like meringue, but with sugar!" And "a machine that spins fast!" These would not be great leaps for people at this time. It seems to make them out to be idiots rather than not being prophetic (presumably the intended meaning) [0] https://web.archive.org/web/20150701005917/http://www.cottoncandy.net/history.html https://web.archive.org/web/20150701005917/http://www.cotton... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meringue https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meringue
oldpersonintx2 1y ago
[dead]
Der_Einzige 1y ago
Thomas Paine is one strand of an ideological opposition to authoritarianism that doesn't devolve into lunacy (unlike modern "libertarianism", communism, etc). He was a good man in a time of bad men. One of the few founding fathers who was genuinely against slavery and supported real egalitarianism to the point of being ostracized for it. He was an honest to god liberal with a capital L, and he, unlike Thomas Jefferson, should be the firebrand representation of the modern democratic party. He believed in a universal basic income (Agrarian Justice), free trade, a land value tax. He was a georgist before Henry George. To this day, I look at Georgism as the only meaningful pro-market and good-for-buisness but unapologeticly left-wing movement we have. Thomas Paine should be regarded as our best and most read founding fathers and liberal thinkers. He's often a footnote, or forgotten about. Just like Andrew Yang, Henry George, Smedly Butler, Benjamin Tucker, Lysander Spooner, Sinclair Lewis, Upton Sinclair etc. Instead our modern "anti-authoritarian" movement, or whatever passes for it, claims ideologically descent and active influence from the likes of charlatans and defenders of authoritarianism like Karl Marx, Hegel, Freud, Foucault, Kant, Nietzsche, etc. Remember Thomas Paine.
- KaiserPro 1y ago
  > that doesn't devolve into lunacy I mean he did literally dissolve into lunacy. He also was shunned for his "blasphemous" views on the role of the church. He died in penury, and largely in disgrace. But, he should be read more, the rights of man is surprisingly readable, especially given the time and subject matter.
- hax0ron3 1y ago
  I question Thomas Paine's liberal cred given that he supported confiscation of Loyalists' properties.
- Ray20 1y ago
  > He believed in a universal basic income (Agrarian Justice) I am, of course, only superficially familiar with his works, but calling what Paine proposed a basic income is extremely stupid. This is a trivial concept of viewing territories as a natural resource, specifically, land, not productive assets in general. With the logic that land is not a product of human activity, and therefore, by acquiring land as "ownership", a person obtains it at the expense of everyone else, and it's logical to force them to compensate for this. And it certainly can't be called a basic income if you look at the proposed tax burden. It's simply another form of tax redistribution, and in almost every respect, more capitalist compared to the tax distribution systems of that time, (and certainly of today).
mattgreenrocks 1y ago
It’s not just “kings,” its concentration of power in all spheres of life. The fact that this point is largely lost on the audience of this site just shows how bad things have gotten. People who want to amass power for its own sake need self-reinforcing systems that restrain them.
- MichaelZuo 1y ago
  This seems circular. It’s impossible to successfully restrain another more powerful than you, by definition, as an individual. And to do so as a group introduces the whole mess of politiking and intra-group dynamics that generates any significant power concentration in the first place.
  - guelo 1y ago
    No, billionaires should not be the countervailing power, that just turns into oligarchy. The innovation of America is that We the people, our laws and institutions are. The problem is ideological billionaires have been buying up all the propaganda outlets hobling "we the people"'s power.
    - MichaelZuo 1y ago
      How does this relate to my comment? It seems like it’s responding to something else.
  - ekaryotic 1y ago
    there are physical laws that cannot be broken, every action has an equal and opposite reaction. therefore attempting to restrain a higher power only ends in self restraint. have you considered that the best approach is to go on strike, depriving the higher power of something of yours, whether that be labour, or progeny.
- gigatree 1y ago
  And ironically, the founding fathers did exactly that. The colonies were only started having land stolen and having their property and work taxed shortly after the formation of the federal government.
truCoat 1y ago
Thomas Paine's church, 19th psalm: The spacious firmament on high, With all the blue etherial sky, And spangled heavens, a shining frame, Their great original proclaim. The unwearied sun, from day to day, Does his Creator’s power display, And publishes to every land The work of an Almighty hand. Soon as the evening shades prevail, The moon takes up the wondrous tale, And nightly to the list’ning earth Repeats the story of her birth; Whilst all the stars that round her burn, And all the planets, in their turn, Confirm the tidings as they roll, And spread the truth from pole to pole. What though in solemn silence all Move round this dark terrestrial ball What though no real voice, nor sound, Amidst their radiant orbs be found, In reason’s ear they all rejoice, And utter forth a glorious voice, Forever singing as they shine, THE HAND THAT MADE US IS DIVINE.
pessimizer 1y ago
[flagged]
- RickJWagner 1y ago
  You’re spot on. I haven’t heard a clear answer yet about why ‘King Red’ is bad and the prior ‘King Blue’ is any different.
  - asacrowflies 1y ago
    Have you looked outside or read the news? Never in my lifetime (33) have we seen such government violence against the mass public... only thing I can see similarity was the fight for 14th amendment and civil rights act before I was born. Also an evolution of 9/11 patriot act and ndaa expansions... People have been conspiracy theorizing for YEARS about ice expanding authority within 100 miles of the border and doing what they are doing now....even the ACLU ranted about it.... And now that it's all happening for real... The camps and everything.... We are just supposed to ignore it because it bothers your partisan sensibility??? YOU sir. Are a traitor and a coward, who confuses the path of ease and least resistance as the moral choice.that confuses peace with passive submission and slavery. Give me liberty or give me death. I have full confidence the American people will resolve this. But it is very tragic how much blood and pain itwill cost at this point .
    - RickJWagner 1y ago
      [flagged]
  - beej71 1y ago
    It's not about King red or blue. It's about what the current president is doing right now that is completely unprecedented.
    - RickJWagner 1y ago
      Please explain what it is that has you so upset. I am confident I should be able to find some equally disturbing atrocities from the other side of the aisle. If you study a little history ( from outside your personal media bubble ). You’ll find that no party has a monopoly on shockingly bad behavior.
FrustratedMonky 1y ago
Why would an article about Thomas Paine be flagged? Can we not even talk about the most basic history now? Regular old history from text books is now to controversial? No longer true? What's next? Can't talk about electromagnetism, because some people think magnets are magic?

147 points by rntn 1y ago

It is tempting, given the success that kingly political approaches have seen of late, to adopt those strategies: to fight "your tyrant" with "my tyrant", and to fight your untruth with my untruth, eschewing skepticism. What if the Constitution, as interpreted by the current SCOTUS, really is a suicide pact? We can only hope that Paine's approach will win out instead.

jauntywundrkind 1y ago
That'd be a vaguely interesting point, if I—searching my heart—I could find any evidence of this going both way. Congress has never folded power to a president like this before. The Supreme Court has never faced such backlash from district courts (https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/11/us/politics/judicial-crisis-supreme-court-trump.html https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/11/us/politics/judicial-cris...). Scientists & researchers have never been up in arms about us health policy or what is being done. Colleges and universities have never been policed by a president, confronted with loyalty pacts.
- Avicebron 1y ago
  The economic policies from the 70s until nowish were new as well
- rectang 1y ago
  To cite one example: aggressive gerrymandering has required a response in the form of California Prop 50. I'm hoping that we can all find our way to competitive districts together, rather than permanently sorting into districts that are the province of one party or another, eliminating free elections in practice. But thanks to SCOTUS interpreting any amount of political gerrymandering as permissible, we may have in fact fallen into an irreparable hole in the US Constitution. Even if some of us are disinclined towards tyranny, we may be faced with a choice: accept that we are shunted towards it by forces beyond our control, or roll over and accept tyrannical rule by others. I continue to hope that it will not come to that and that we can fight our way out of this situation using Paine's methods.
  - BrenBarn 1y ago
    I think there are multiple irreparable holes in the US Constitution. That doesn't mean tyranny is inevitable, though, it just means we need to start fresh (which is what they did when they came up with the Constitution anyway).
    - rectang 1y ago
      Amending the Constitution to fix such holes is impractical when it would require the approval of states whose hold on perpetual minority rule would be threatened. So then we're looking at a constitutional convention. Can you imagine our current crop of politicians cooperating to negotiate something which improves on the current Constitution? I'd expect a prisoner's dilemma with a defect-defect outcome and the winner taking all of the diminished spoils. I think we're stuck with what we've got and we have to hope that enough voters are persuadable, allowing us to emerge from the hole.
      - BrenBarn 1y ago
        If we could persuade enough voters to get out of the hole, why can't we persuade enough to fix the hole (and the other holes)?
thom 1y ago
The falcon listens credulously to far too many falconers.

tuveson 1y ago

One funny fact about the “No Kings” protests held abroad is that they were called “No Tyants” so as to not be interpreted as anti-monarchist.

izzydata 1y ago
I wouldn't mind seeing the British monarchy get abolished as well. It's far outlived any purpose it may have had. Even without them actually participating in government they are basically just celebrities living off the social welfare of the people.
- vunderba 1y ago
  On a marginally positive note, at least it is largely a ceremonial position and the real power lies with the prime minister/cabinet/parliament.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- aurareturn 1y ago
  They project soft power and attract tourists. I would bet that they’re actually a positive on UK’s economy and well being.
  - exasperaited 1y ago
    They also knocked 15-20 percentage points off our Trump tariffs because he's so easily played; he barely even left the castle grounds this time.
- ProjectArcturis 1y ago
  At this point the British royals are basically tourist attractions. They probably generate more revenue than they consume.
  - exasperaited 1y ago

olooney 1y ago

Paine kind of hit the nail on the head with this one: > "The law is king!" The 2024 Nobel prize in economics[1] was awarded to a team of three who investigated what causes a nation to prosper and identified "rule of law" as an essential ingredient[2]. [1]: https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/economic-sciences/2024/press-release/ https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/economic-sciences/2024/pre... [2]: https://news.mit.edu/2024/mit-economists-daron-acemoglu-simon-johnson-nobel-prize-economics-1014 https://news.mit.edu/2024/mit-economists-daron-acemoglu-simo...

readthenotes1 1y ago
So you get a Nobel prize for proving Benjamin Franklin right (who was rephrasing a more ancient saying). Charlie Munger recalled it in 2003 as “Where there is no bread, there is no law; where there is no law, there is no bread.” It's going to be some easy picking if more figure that out ...
- Yoric 1y ago
  Now remember that there's an entire current in Silicon Valley that advocates against rule of law, at least when applied to them. Oh, and a felon taking some liberties with law sitting at the White House. Yeah, I think reminding people that you don't get prosperity without rule of law is a good idea.
  - BrenBarn 1y ago
    Not a good enough idea, apparently, given that what you said in the first paragraph is happening.
ecocentrik 1y ago
Nice slogan but right now in America, money is king and the law is bent to accommodate the wills of rich lawless men.
- black_13 1y ago
  [dead]

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

Kenji 1y ago

Next up: Fight the political class and the bureaucrats. Enlightenment step by step.

vunderba 1y ago

> Paine labels kingship "the most prosperous invention the Devil ever set on foot for the promotion of idolatry" Given that this kind of deference to a perceived authority (which manifests in hero worship, tribalism, influencers, religion, celebrity veneration, sports figures, etc) seems to be built into the very genetic fabric of 99% of the general populace I despair at ever seeing it end. People simply can't wait to anoint their own personal king (be it Steve Jobs, Elon Musk, MrBeast, etc.)

technothrasher 1y ago
I wonder if Paine was aware of the irony in that quote by his indirect reference to the ultimate invented king.
rootusrootus 1y ago
> People simply can't wait to anoint their own personal king You really think there are only 1% of us that have no desire at all for any sort of king? I cannot think of a single person deserving of that role, cannot imagine what it would take for me to change my mind. I very much value our systems of government, and I do not ever want any one person to have too much control over them.
- Barrin92 1y ago
  I don't think it's necessary to take the OP literally, but directionally it's correct. Looking at American society, the Trumps, Kardashians, Clintons, Roosevelts, Kennedys ... for a country that's so proudly republican, how many of their presidents and elites have been blood related? Might add Jesus to the list metaphorically People Americans hoist into power (and many other countries do) often look like a poor man's replacement for a monarch. How many people in any country do actually lay claim to their own values and conscience? How many are genuinely emancipated and govern themselves? In particular in this day and age where most of the wannabe kings are so obviously idiotic it's telling how eager people still are to subject themselves, sometimes in, as David Bentley Hart dubbed it crypto-erotic fashion, almost sadomasochistic and fully aware how incapable the demagogues are.
1y ago

deepsquirrelnet 1y ago

> “What would America’s Founding Fathers think if they were alive today?” > For Cross, it is pointless to speculate about the present-day views of men who could not have imagined cotton candy, let alone the machine that makes it. Some things, like “taxation without representation” seem to be timeless. You can call it irony or perhaps in some cases, a spade is still just a spade.

DangitBobby 1y ago
Pretty sure they could have imagined cotton candy, anyway. There's nothing special about modern people that makes them more capable of comprehending new technology, it's just a matter of exposure.
godelski 1y ago
>> men who could not have imagined cotton candy It's a funny example since it looks like cotton candy might have been around in their time [0]. Machines spun cotton candy came about much later but I'm not overly suspicious of the claims in [0] as meringue[1] certainly existed in their lifetimes and the process isn't dissimilar. I'm certain these men could understand "like meringue, but with sugar!" And "a machine that spins fast!" These would not be great leaps for people at this time. It seems to make them out to be idiots rather than not being prophetic (presumably the intended meaning) [0] https://web.archive.org/web/20150701005917/http://www.cottoncandy.net/history.html https://web.archive.org/web/20150701005917/http://www.cotton... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meringue https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meringue

oldpersonintx2 1y ago

[dead]

Der_Einzige 1y ago

Thomas Paine is one strand of an ideological opposition to authoritarianism that doesn't devolve into lunacy (unlike modern "libertarianism", communism, etc). He was a good man in a time of bad men. One of the few founding fathers who was genuinely against slavery and supported real egalitarianism to the point of being ostracized for it. He was an honest to god liberal with a capital L, and he, unlike Thomas Jefferson, should be the firebrand representation of the modern democratic party. He believed in a universal basic income (Agrarian Justice), free trade, a land value tax. He was a georgist before Henry George. To this day, I look at Georgism as the only meaningful pro-market and good-for-buisness but unapologeticly left-wing movement we have. Thomas Paine should be regarded as our best and most read founding fathers and liberal thinkers. He's often a footnote, or forgotten about. Just like Andrew Yang, Henry George, Smedly Butler, Benjamin Tucker, Lysander Spooner, Sinclair Lewis, Upton Sinclair etc. Instead our modern "anti-authoritarian" movement, or whatever passes for it, claims ideologically descent and active influence from the likes of charlatans and defenders of authoritarianism like Karl Marx, Hegel, Freud, Foucault, Kant, Nietzsche, etc. Remember Thomas Paine.

KaiserPro 1y ago
> that doesn't devolve into lunacy I mean he did literally dissolve into lunacy. He also was shunned for his "blasphemous" views on the role of the church. He died in penury, and largely in disgrace. But, he should be read more, the rights of man is surprisingly readable, especially given the time and subject matter.
hax0ron3 1y ago
I question Thomas Paine's liberal cred given that he supported confiscation of Loyalists' properties.
Ray20 1y ago
> He believed in a universal basic income (Agrarian Justice) I am, of course, only superficially familiar with his works, but calling what Paine proposed a basic income is extremely stupid. This is a trivial concept of viewing territories as a natural resource, specifically, land, not productive assets in general. With the logic that land is not a product of human activity, and therefore, by acquiring land as "ownership", a person obtains it at the expense of everyone else, and it's logical to force them to compensate for this. And it certainly can't be called a basic income if you look at the proposed tax burden. It's simply another form of tax redistribution, and in almost every respect, more capitalist compared to the tax distribution systems of that time, (and certainly of today).

mattgreenrocks 1y ago

It’s not just “kings,” its concentration of power in all spheres of life. The fact that this point is largely lost on the audience of this site just shows how bad things have gotten. People who want to amass power for its own sake need self-reinforcing systems that restrain them.

MichaelZuo 1y ago
This seems circular. It’s impossible to successfully restrain another more powerful than you, by definition, as an individual. And to do so as a group introduces the whole mess of politiking and intra-group dynamics that generates any significant power concentration in the first place.
- guelo 1y ago
  No, billionaires should not be the countervailing power, that just turns into oligarchy. The innovation of America is that We the people, our laws and institutions are. The problem is ideological billionaires have been buying up all the propaganda outlets hobling "we the people"'s power.
  - MichaelZuo 1y ago
    How does this relate to my comment? It seems like it’s responding to something else.
- ekaryotic 1y ago
  there are physical laws that cannot be broken, every action has an equal and opposite reaction. therefore attempting to restrain a higher power only ends in self restraint. have you considered that the best approach is to go on strike, depriving the higher power of something of yours, whether that be labour, or progeny.
gigatree 1y ago
And ironically, the founding fathers did exactly that. The colonies were only started having land stolen and having their property and work taxed shortly after the formation of the federal government.

truCoat 1y ago

Thomas Paine's church, 19th psalm: The spacious firmament on high, With all the blue etherial sky, And spangled heavens, a shining frame, Their great original proclaim. The unwearied sun, from day to day, Does his Creator’s power display, And publishes to every land The work of an Almighty hand. Soon as the evening shades prevail, The moon takes up the wondrous tale, And nightly to the list’ning earth Repeats the story of her birth; Whilst all the stars that round her burn, And all the planets, in their turn, Confirm the tidings as they roll, And spread the truth from pole to pole. What though in solemn silence all Move round this dark terrestrial ball What though no real voice, nor sound, Amidst their radiant orbs be found, In reason’s ear they all rejoice, And utter forth a glorious voice, Forever singing as they shine, THE HAND THAT MADE US IS DIVINE.

pessimizer 1y ago

[flagged]

RickJWagner 1y ago
You’re spot on. I haven’t heard a clear answer yet about why ‘King Red’ is bad and the prior ‘King Blue’ is any different.
- asacrowflies 1y ago
  Have you looked outside or read the news? Never in my lifetime (33) have we seen such government violence against the mass public... only thing I can see similarity was the fight for 14th amendment and civil rights act before I was born. Also an evolution of 9/11 patriot act and ndaa expansions... People have been conspiracy theorizing for YEARS about ice expanding authority within 100 miles of the border and doing what they are doing now....even the ACLU ranted about it.... And now that it's all happening for real... The camps and everything.... We are just supposed to ignore it because it bothers your partisan sensibility??? YOU sir. Are a traitor and a coward, who confuses the path of ease and least resistance as the moral choice.that confuses peace with passive submission and slavery. Give me liberty or give me death. I have full confidence the American people will resolve this. But it is very tragic how much blood and pain itwill cost at this point .
  - RickJWagner 1y ago
    [flagged]
- beej71 1y ago
  It's not about King red or blue. It's about what the current president is doing right now that is completely unprecedented.
  - RickJWagner 1y ago
    Please explain what it is that has you so upset. I am confident I should be able to find some equally disturbing atrocities from the other side of the aisle. If you study a little history ( from outside your personal media bubble ). You’ll find that no party has a monopoly on shockingly bad behavior.

FrustratedMonky 1y ago

Why would an article about Thomas Paine be flagged? Can we not even talk about the most basic history now? Regular old history from text books is now to controversial? No longer true? What's next? Can't talk about electromagnetism, because some people think magnets are magic?