Quote of the day—Roberta X

Both of the big parties — matched set of jackboots that they are — assume they own women’s bodies. They just have differing plans for them.

Roberta X
January 14, 2012
They Both Think They Own Me
[I was just listening to Applied Economics: Thinking Beyond Stage One by Thomas Sowell. One of the things he pointed out that it’s the wrong question to ask, “Where did slavery come from?” As near as we can determine slavery has been around (and continues to exist) since before writing was invented. The real question is, “Where did freedom come from?”

With this background it seems likely that the desire to “own” other human is hardwired into some primitive part of most peoples brains. This manifests itself in many different ways.

Some people are more aware of these urges than others and outright claim, “I was born to regulate.” Others have claimed a divine right from the god(s) to rule other people. Even many of those who do not claim ownership or the right to rule others for their personal benefit will insist there be a ruler to take ownership of both them and their neighbors.

It may be that brief twinkle of freedom in history was an aberration and those reaping the benefits of freedom grew too fatigued to support it (see Thomas Paine). I know that at times I feel the fatigue and yearn to have the burden lifted even as I see our freedoms rapidly disappearing.—Joe]

14 thoughts on “Quote of the day—Roberta X

  1. It seems as if there are some people who are unhappy unless everyone around them is subservient to them.

    “Good intentions will always be pleaded for every assumption for authority. It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters.”
    – Daniel Webster

    “Political tags – such as royalist, communist, democrat, populist, fascist, liberal, conservative, and so forth – are never basic criteria. The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire.”
    – Robert A. Heinlein

  2. The freedom you most commonly refer to is what’s known as “negative liberty” or freedom from outside restraint. I would prefer to have effective freedom or the ability to do whatever it is I want to do.

  3. A lot of what the Left describes as “freedom” is better described as “freedom from consequences.”

  4. @Roberta X, It’s possible ubu52 was setting a trap for us. She could be referring to being wealthy enough to do whatever it is she wants to do.

  5. That’s a trap? Um, work hard, kid, work hard and live frugally. Or pick rich parents. If all else fails, marry wealth. But it might not be as “free” as you think. The only thing you’re owed is to be left alone — and governments are not very good at that. I can turn off the TV and ignore junk mail. Mail from IRS, not so much.

  6. I want the same freedoms the really wealthy have: The freedom to fly to Paris for dinner, for example. I want effective liberty, not negative liberty. I already have negative liberty as far as I am concerned. Now I want more.

  7. Ubu, you CAN fly to Paris for dinner, and eat at the fanciest restaurant there.

    Of course what you can’t do is do that on your own. You need a pilot, you need an aircraft, you need out-of-country transportation, you need a restaurant, you need a master chef, and all the ingredients and equipment to ply his trade, and you need waitstaff.

    The insanely rich are no less free than you, but they do have a commodity that all of the above people would be willing to exchange their time, and resources on, and that’s money.

    What you propose is the ability to board a plane in California, fly to Paris, hail a car in Paris and get the driver to take you to the restaurant of your choice. Ask the staff to show you to your table, and direct them which meal you’ll be served that evening. Afterwards you’re saying you’d like to hail another car to take you to the airport where you will return home.

    All of this you feel you should be able to do without compensating the countless people who bore your little dream on their backs.

    That is called “Slavery”.

    You may go a step further and demand that I, and many others who either don’t know you, or from what they read here and in other blogs can conclude that you are nothing short of a lousy human being pay for your dreams out of our own pockets, without so much as you even knowing our names, let alone giving an ounce of gratitude for.

    Is that better, or worse? At least with the first scenario you’d have the stones to look down your nose at the human you were commanding around, the 2nd Scenario you wouldn’t even be in the same Continent…

    You should be ashamed of yourself.

  8. Ubu’s concept of effective freedom seems to be what I would call power. As Weer’d illustrates, the ability to fly to Paris for dinner involves power over other people to make them do things. Most of us approve if that power is earned economic power. I don’t think Ubu cares how that power is acquired, but just wants that kind of power over others.

  9. “I want the same freedoms the really wealthy have: The freedom to fly to Paris for dinner, for example. I want effective liberty, not negative liberty. I already have negative liberty as far as I am concerned. Now I want more.”

    You say you want more, Ubu. Well, so what? Don’t we all? Just how are you supposed to get this “effective liberty”–by having the Government give it to you? That is, by having Joe, Weer’d, Linoge and me give it to you?

    And then what? Who will be giving *us* this “effective liberty”?

    Ironically, the “effective liberty” you seek is hampered at every turn by government: every penny taxed from you is a penny less that can be used for your trip to Paris. Every immigration law passed, every passport photo taken, every vista approval stamped, is a hassle more in preventing you from achieving this “effective liberty”.

    If you *really* want to eat at an expensive restaurant in Paris, Ubu, your best bet is in getting government out of the way, as much as possible–and then, to plan out that trip, and what you are going to do to pay for it, and then to execute that plan to the best of your ability. And, if you *really* want to go, you will make this plan, *despite* the obstacles placed in your way by the many layers of bureaucracy! You have as much power to do all that, as any “rich” person does.

    That is “effective liberty”: to decide what you do, and then figure out what is in your power to do it. It’s only made possible by those “negative liberties” you so despise.

Comments are closed.