A Skewed Thomas Paine.

Tonight I went to a presentation on “the life and influence” of Thomas Paine.  Little did I know that he was a left-wing, Democrat — at least according to panelists, including Eric Foner, Jack Fruchtman, Jr. and Harvey J. Kaye.

It’s interesting how historians tend to always take the “liberal” stance on everything.  This, in turn, indoctrinates students to believe in the this way of thinking.  Then, all students learn the same way of thinking — the same way of interpreting facts.

I believe the panelists tonight mixed up the T. Pain(e)s.

I believe the panelists tonight mixed up the T. Pain(e)s.

“Thomas Paine preached Democracy while the other founding fathers were completely against it,” one panelists said, while another stated, “Those from the CATO Institute consider Thomas Paine to be a Libertarian.”

Ah ha, now we are on to something! Many philosophies can be left up to interpretation! Well, thank you for saying that, teachers and professors of the America! Thank you for telling us this before you bring your political views into the classroom.  Seriously, now.

When I was reading the publication that went along with the presentation, I was appalled at the interpreation of liberty that was presented.  Comparing Thomas Paine to Che Guevara?  Supporting affirmative action in the private sector (when it comes to discrimination when hiring)?  Supporting democracy but at the same time being appalled at Proposition 8?

This goes along with the inconsistency that can be seen by democracy, political parties, and the current state of government.  Individualism may be the only way to appeal to every human being — and I feel as if we can start with giving states more power — and with that power, they would enact on more profitable freedoms and vary enough that one could choose to live in a state that best suits their needs.

But back to Paine.  I found it interesting that when two members of Student Liberty Front disgraced democracy, the panelists pretty much agreed.  And then they did that thing — when they know that the ideas they preach do not work — they continued to smile and prosper because they know that so many Americans have fallen into their idealogy trap and they have no reason to be scared.

Thankfully David Boaz of CATO posted this — otherwise I would almost believe that Thomas Paine was a socialist, middle class supporting, social security loving liberal!  From the article:

Lefties like Harvey Kaye, a professor at the University of Wisconsin-Green Bay and author of Thomas Paine and the Promise of America, like to say

He put the case for political democracy AND social democracy, arguing in The Rights of Man that young people and the elderly should be afforded financial security by their governments. These welfare ideals are under attack right now, in our era of recession.

He has a point, though I suspect that Paine would think that the American welfare state has exceeded the sort of minimal provision for the poor that he had in mind. As for me, I rather like the fact that he proposed to execute any legislator who so much as proposed a bill to issue paper money and make it legal tender. A bit too strong, I concede. But a healthy understanding of what fiat money can do to people who work hard and save their money.

Find some of Thomas Paine’s best writings in The Libertarian Reader.

And by actually citing  Harvey Kaye as a “lefty”, I feel much better — Kaye had no trouble saying that the “correct” way to go is with the Democrats tonight.

So much for liberty, Mr. Paine.


3 thoughts on “A Skewed Thomas Paine.

  1. How many in the audience supported the Democratic party advertising? Were the non-supporters vocal? I too majored in Political Science at the University of MN and the liberal philosophy was overwhelming and skewed many of the philosophers and political writings we studied.

    • Those of us in Student Liberty Front at Drexel were vocal with opposition — I feel like the number of audience members wearing Obama pins were completely brainwashed.

      When we were vocal, the panel members kind of shrugged it off. “Yeah, democracy sucks,” but that was it.

      THEY SUPPORT gay rights and WERE AGAINST Prop 8 — but they still support democracy! Just shows how bloody inconsistent they really are!

  2. “Many thinkers have expressed the need for consistency between means and ends and
    not all were libertarians. Ironically, many statists have claimed inconsistency between
    laudable ends and contemptible means; yet when their true ends of greater power
    and oppression were understood, their means are found to be quite consistent. It is
    part of the statist mystique to confuse the necessity of ends-means consistency; it is
    thus the most crucial activity of the libertarian theorist to expose inconsistencies.
    Many theorists have done to admirably; but we have attempted and most failed to
    describe the consistent means and ends combination of libertarianism.” – Samuel Konkin, New Libertarian Manifesto

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s