We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
What if my idea of the "common good" is different from yours? What if my idea of "the common good" is the freedom and sanctity of the individual? What if I believe that pursuit of individual freedom, self interest, opportunity, and happiness is the highest "common good"?
A paraphrase of Rush Limbaugh, on Monday. He is on a roll, and very funny these days.
Thank you for sharing this quote. I would not have gottten it otherwise. BTW- I love your posts; they seem to always fall in line with things I think of and/or appreciate.
Would you be able to pass along a request to IT to add a Facebook sharing icon for the various posts? I am always suggesting reading from Maggie's to my friends and Facebook is a great way to provide thoughtful comments and essays to my friends. So far, I do it the old fashioned way (Ha!) by coming to it from Facebook. But frankly, I am more apt to pop in here during a quick break or while on hold and note a few things for my evening reading, than I am to sit around on Facebook.
Kind regards to you all; definitely, Maggie's is my favorite blog.
It is the ongoing dilemma of society to find a working and effective balance between the need for cooperation and the need for individual autonomy. History seems to show that, when in doubt, society as a whole gains more benefits by expanding individual autonomy. Adam Smith's free market (which he described favorably and never claimed to have invented) has produced goods and services to relieve human distress and advance material well-being. Statist control always has stifled the production of goods and services.
Some controls remain necessary. We can't have theft and fraud and maintain a successful economy. Environmental issues are more difficult. Dumping sewage into rivers produces health hazards for everyone and I think we'll all agree that has to be controlled.
Since there's no very good definition of "the common good", the libertarian concept is to stop trying for it. Focus on individual well-being. Mind the pence and the pounds will mind themselves.
Oh, I know you can not do Facebook in addition to Maggies, even though it appears you all have plenty of time for leisure (the good kind of course - friends, outdoors, gardening, hunting, etc). I was just wondering about adding it to the list of icons beneath each post - those that are there are similar and include things like Bloglines, Fark, Digg This, etc.
Facebook has this ability too. And hey think about, you get to benefit (?) by having more people read your great stuff.
BTW BD - your recipes are always a huge hit at our household, except none of the eastern kentuckians here or whom we know have ever, seen, heard of, tasted, been around, or discussed Hot Dog Gravy! And we are from a long strong line of eastern kentuckians, including rascals, gun dealers, and inbreeding ;)
Geoff ... The problem with "environmental issues" and environmentalists today is that most of them are willfully lazy and ignorant about what truly damages the environment and what is merely made-up emergencies. The get all excited about polar bears drowning without doing any research on polar bears which are, according to the official taxonomic definition, "the world's largest land-based marine mammal." These marine mammals don't drown even if all the ice around them melts. They have been tagged and tracked by polar bear scientists swimming 500 miles at a clip, with cubs in tow. These bears dine on seals [also 'marine mammals'] and the so-called environmentalists don't seem to worry about them.
That's only one example. These "poor pitiful" animals and their plight are used to arrogate more power and money to the environmentalists and their politicians, and to stifle free enterprise wherever possible.
I agree we need to control theft and fraud in a successful economy, but time after time we have seen naked power grabs by so-called environmentalists using false and misleading information. My husband is a naturalist, and has devoted many years of study to various animals and ecosystems, and he has observed this many times over the years. And no one seems to be willing to do the tough thinking, of putting up relative values of the snail darter, for instance, against the welfare of the humans in a territory which surrounds them. That would take some hard thinking. And politically correct folks are not supposed to make value judgments.