Today is the revered USA “Approval to Print a Declaration of Independence Day“: The Declaration of Independence was not signed [July 4] by the 56 persons whose signatures would eventually adorn it. Perhaps no one signed it that day. …. What Congress actually did that day was agree to print and publish the Declaration authorized two days earlier. … What was voted on July 2 was, however, really decided on July 1. But on June 28, Congress considered Jefferson’s draft of the Declaration, so was the die then cast? Or was it cast on June 10, when Congress voted that “a committee be appointed to prepare a declaration”? The Declaration was first actually declared — read aloud to a crowd (at the State House, now Independence Hall) — on July 8.
@dloye: I agree, its a wondrous thing our country was founded on all those things. Unfortunately, I'm not sure I see the logic of your point or the reason for your confusion. Before we begin bursting with patriotic pride at the principles our country was founded on and showering our love upon it, I note the Soviet Union was founded on the glorious principles of worker's rights and freedom from the tyranny of the Czar.
Clearly, just because a nation or any other group was founded or claims to be founded on certain principles doesn't mean the nation itself adheres (or has adhered) to those principles. Those things you name are all just words that remain empty without consistent actions showcasing their meaning. I think I would prefer celebrating all those ideas in practice instead of celebrating either lip-service to them or their part of a tribal self-identity.
@frelkins: I might be reading too much into it, but on your third comment "On this note, I'm outta here. . ." and on your fourth "Forgive me for returning, gentlemen." make it look like you're still mistaken about the rules on commenting.
"Also, I wonder what happens if you put up a bumper sticker that says "Support Our Civilians"."
Probably people that are like you would think it witty, and people unlike you would find it crass. People that have actually fought in wars and experienced its misery firsthand would find it naive and trite.
A cynic might argue that if the South stayed independent, it would have escaped from the tarriff barriers errected to benefit manufacturers in the North.
And there is the slavery issue, of course.
But the best way to support all troops everywhere would be to stop the wars ASAP.
Robin, this is not necessarily true: many an army has paid its soldiers in loot. Think of Adrimal Croft in Persuasion, who feels sympathy for unfortunate postwar midshipmen, with no promotion or prize money to look forward to.
I have trouble understanding what was great about Lincoln's war.
I understand the survivalist point of the colonies banding together in the 18th century, but it seems to me that the US Civil War may have been the Iraq War II of its time: a huge waste of resources. No one was going to conquor the North by the mid-19th century if they let the South secede, British fantasies notwithstanding.
"Or were you just born with a heart full of neutrality?"
Forgive me for returning, gentlemen. But I saw Zapp & immediately remembered, on this day when we are meant to contemplate liberty:
"[Wisdom consists] in emancipation from personal prejudice. . .I think the essence of wisdom is emancipation, as far as possible, from the tyranny of the here and now. . .No one can view the world with complete impartiality; and if anyone could, he would hardly be able to remain alive.
But it is possible to make a continual approach towards impartiality, on the one hand, by knowing things somewhat remote in time or space, and on the other hand, by giving to such things their due weight in our feelings. It is this approach towards impartiality that constitutes growth in wisdom.
Can wisdom in this sense be taught? And, if it can, should the teaching of it be one of the aims of education? I should answer both these questions in the affirmative. . .It is commonly urged that a point of view such as I have been advocating is incompatible with vigour in action. I do not think history bears out this view.
Queen Elizabeth I in England and Henry IV in France lived in a world where almost everybody was fanatical, either on the Protestant or on the Catholic side. Both remained free from the errors of their time and both, by remaining free, were beneficent and certainly not ineffective. Abraham Lincoln conducted a great war without ever departing from what I have called wisdom."
This post seems to me to display a strong bias against war, a bias no more justifiable than any other. Nobody thinks wars are per se good things. But some of them have been better than the alternative would have been.
"A general comment on bumper stickers: I really like the format. The could be twice as long and still fit on the car, but they seem to have a self imposed limit, something like under a foot."
Genius level observation. You just inspired me to the first bumper sticker I'd actually get. A full, bumper length, bumper width bumper sticker: "My bumper sticker is bigger than yours."
Where can you buy a "Support Everyone's Troops" bumper sticker in green like the one posted in the article?
@dloye: I agree, its a wondrous thing our country was founded on all those things. Unfortunately, I'm not sure I see the logic of your point or the reason for your confusion. Before we begin bursting with patriotic pride at the principles our country was founded on and showering our love upon it, I note the Soviet Union was founded on the glorious principles of worker's rights and freedom from the tyranny of the Czar.
Clearly, just because a nation or any other group was founded or claims to be founded on certain principles doesn't mean the nation itself adheres (or has adhered) to those principles. Those things you name are all just words that remain empty without consistent actions showcasing their meaning. I think I would prefer celebrating all those ideas in practice instead of celebrating either lip-service to them or their part of a tribal self-identity.
Welcome to Planet Paleo, HA. We're glad to have you here.
@frelkins: I might be reading too much into it, but on your third comment "On this note, I'm outta here. . ." and on your fourth "Forgive me for returning, gentlemen." make it look like you're still mistaken about the rules on commenting.
"Some things are worth fighting and dying for."
Especially when someone else does the fighting and dying.
"Also, I wonder what happens if you put up a bumper sticker that says "Support Our Civilians"."
Probably people that are like you would think it witty, and people unlike you would find it crass. People that have actually fought in wars and experienced its misery firsthand would find it naive and trite.
A cynic might argue that if the South stayed independent, it would have escaped from the tarriff barriers errected to benefit manufacturers in the North.
And there is the slavery issue, of course.
But the best way to support all troops everywhere would be to stop the wars ASAP.
Robin, this is not necessarily true: many an army has paid its soldiers in loot. Think of Adrimal Croft in Persuasion, who feels sympathy for unfortunate postwar midshipmen, with no promotion or prize money to look forward to.
I have trouble understanding what was great about Lincoln's war.
I understand the survivalist point of the colonies banding together in the 18th century, but it seems to me that the US Civil War may have been the Iraq War II of its time: a huge waste of resources. No one was going to conquor the North by the mid-19th century if they let the South secede, British fantasies notwithstanding.
Robin questioned an alleged bias toward war here.
@Zapp Brannigan
"Or were you just born with a heart full of neutrality?"
Forgive me for returning, gentlemen. But I saw Zapp & immediately remembered, on this day when we are meant to contemplate liberty:
"[Wisdom consists] in emancipation from personal prejudice. . .I think the essence of wisdom is emancipation, as far as possible, from the tyranny of the here and now. . .No one can view the world with complete impartiality; and if anyone could, he would hardly be able to remain alive.
But it is possible to make a continual approach towards impartiality, on the one hand, by knowing things somewhat remote in time or space, and on the other hand, by giving to such things their due weight in our feelings. It is this approach towards impartiality that constitutes growth in wisdom.
Can wisdom in this sense be taught? And, if it can, should the teaching of it be one of the aims of education? I should answer both these questions in the affirmative. . .It is commonly urged that a point of view such as I have been advocating is incompatible with vigour in action. I do not think history bears out this view.
Queen Elizabeth I in England and Henry IV in France lived in a world where almost everybody was fanatical, either on the Protestant or on the Catholic side. Both remained free from the errors of their time and both, by remaining free, were beneficent and certainly not ineffective. Abraham Lincoln conducted a great war without ever departing from what I have called wisdom."
-- Bertrand Russell, Knowledge & Wisdom
This post seems to me to display a strong bias against war, a bias no more justifiable than any other. Nobody thinks wars are per se good things. But some of them have been better than the alternative would have been.
Eliezer and Hopefully, those both sound like fun mischievous sticker ideas.
Also, I wonder what happens if you put up a bumper sticker that says "Support Our Civilians".
My license plate frame says "Agent of the Singularity".
What makes a man turn neutral? Lust for gold? Power? Or were you justborn with a heart full of neutrality? All I know is that my gut says"maybe."
"A general comment on bumper stickers: I really like the format. The could be twice as long and still fit on the car, but they seem to have a self imposed limit, something like under a foot."
Genius level observation. You just inspired me to the first bumper sticker I'd actually get. A full, bumper length, bumper width bumper sticker: "My bumper sticker is bigger than yours."