Documents prove Obama was member of socialist New Party... (see for yourself)

Originally posted by BurntGermanTongue

Originally posted by TheTardis
You seriously are going to put someone down for making something out of themselves. I know people that work hard too and dont have a lot but you know what. A lot of those people made poor choices in their lives or didnt take advantage of programs offered to them. If you are poor there is a good chance you can get grants and scholarships to college. Even if your not you can get student loans and go to college. I for one did not go to college. Or at least I didnt finish college and I dont have a degree but I own a car, I have a nice place to live and I made a descent living. I figured out what I was good at and I did it. The point is that at least in our system there are opportunities. In some systems there arent and when you stop rewarding hard work you stop getting hard workers. Its plain and simple. I know not everyone makes it in life and some people still struggle despite their best efforts, but I will bet you that 90% of the time. If someone works hard and is smart about it, they can make a good living. But they have to get off their ass and try. Bottom line. But what sickens me is that your sitting there basically telling a guy that BUSTED HIS ASS and earned a lot of money that instead of having nice things and leaving money to his kids and grand kids that he should go give it to some schmuck on the street that isn't working for it. Are you kidding me? Would you? You would work your butt off and earn money and go give it away? If you said yes you are lying. Your just mad that he has it and you want it.

edit on 8-6-2012 by TheTardis because: (no reason given)

1) Most (if not all) programs offered as "opportunities" are government based. These things would not exist in the free market nightmare had we stuck to outdated Austrian economics.

2) How are one's kids a better beneficiary of a man's fortune then the public at large? His kids didn't work hard, they, in fact, would have to work less in order to become equally as successful as their parent.

3) Like I said before, social mobility is a can very seldom be reached. I don't care about how many novels that you've read that say otherwise, it is simply an illusion that existing financial conditions can be improved dramatically.

4) If someone is to work hard, shouldn't they be working hard in something that they enjoy? Some say "laziness would run rampant in the socialist system because people's needs are provided for them in the get go" but this is hardly true. If one one being provided for already, they are going to be more inclined to do something that they enjoy. There are alot of people out there who want to be doctors or lawyers, but simply cannot do that because of the unfair playing field. Because the socialist system ensures that educational opportunities are fair, people are more open to occupations they enjoy. The motivation to do work would shift from money and meeting ones needs, to doing something they enjoy and acceptance by one's peers. Let me say again, if all of your needs were provided to you, you wouldn't simply sit on your ass and be depressed, you would do something that you enjoy, something that you are more open to

Ones kids are a better beneficiary because if someone knew that their family would not be able to have their assets when they die then why work for it to begin with? It would be great if everyone on earth was happy to work 40+ hours a week just for the betterment of society but that isnt the world that we or anyone else lives in. Yes there may be a few humanitarians that will do this but most of us want to see the fruits of our labor. Its human nature and knowing there is no incentive for hard work or dedication will lead to less work and less workers. When people know that they can get money without working then hell. Why work? Thats why his kids are a better beneficiary. Does it suck that some people go hungry? Yes it does. Do I think they should get help. Possibly, but when you do that you open the door for every dishonest or lazy person to take advantage and that is what will happen. Look at our welfare system. Why do you think it is such a mess? A nd why are our jails full? Its because there are dis honest people in the world and no amount of wanting will change that.

Originally posted by TheTardisOnes kids are a better beneficiary because if someone knew that their family would not be able to have their assets when they die then why work for it to begin with?

Uh, the current motivation in the economy is money, not "I want my kids to have money!" I also addressed the issue of motivation, so I would go back on that.

It would be great if everyone on earth was happy to work 40+ hours a week just for the betterment of society but that isnt the world that we or anyone else lives in.

Motivation does not lie just in the betterment of society, like I said, there is alot of motivation in occupations themselves. There would probably be alot more motivation to work considering that socialism calls for the creation of democratic workplaces instead of the current system which is based upon layers and layers of management, like a bureaucracy.

Yes there may be a few humanitarians that will do this but most of us want to see the fruits of our labor. Its human nature and knowing there is no incentive for hard work or dedication will lead to less work and less workers.

As I've said before, this is a baseless argument since human nature is not a static concept, but extremely dependent on environment. Put someone in a capitalist system, they will have to adapt by being competitive and selfish. Put someone in a socialist system, and they will have to adapt by being cooperative to society and their peers. Humanity has existed for 200,000 years, the society based upon what see it as has only existed for 2000 or so

Does it suck that some people go hungry? Yes it does. Do I think they should get help. Possibly, but when you do that you open the door for every dishonest or lazy person to take advantage and that is what will happen. Look at our welfare system. Why do you think it is such a mess? A nd why are our jails full? Its because there are dis honest people in the world and no amount of wanting will change that.

You know, there isn't a limitless funnel of jobs in the U.S., especially considering that most are being imported to other places because they work for cheap, or because companies are down sizing for the same reason, cost efficiency

Originally posted by BurntGermanTongue

Originally posted by TheTardisOnes kids are a better beneficiary because if someone knew that their family would not be able to have their assets when they die then why work for it to begin with?

Uh, the current motivation in the economy is money, not "I want my kids to have money!" I also addressed the issue of motivation, so I would go back on that.

It would be great if everyone on earth was happy to work 40+ hours a week just for the betterment of society but that isnt the world that we or anyone else lives in.

Motivation does not lie just in the betterment of society, like I said, there is alot of motivation in occupations themselves. There would probably be alot more motivation to work considering that socialism calls for the creation of democratic workplaces instead of the current system which is based upon layers and layers of management, like a bureaucracy.

Yes there may be a few humanitarians that will do this but most of us want to see the fruits of our labor. Its human nature and knowing there is no incentive for hard work or dedication will lead to less work and less workers.

As I've said before, this is a baseless argument since human nature is not a static concept, but extremely dependent on environment. Put someone in a capitalist system, they will have to adapt by being competitive and selfish. Put someone in a socialist system, and they will have to adapt by being cooperative to society and their peers. Humanity has existed for 200,000 years, the society based upon what see it as has only existed for 2000 or so

Does it suck that some people go hungry? Yes it does. Do I think they should get help. Possibly, but when you do that you open the door for every dishonest or lazy person to take advantage and that is what will happen. Look at our welfare system. Why do you think it is such a mess? A nd why are our jails full? Its because there are dis honest people in the world and no amount of wanting will change that.

You know, there isn't a limitless funnel of jobs in the U.S., especially considering that most are being imported to other places because they work for cheap, or because companies are down sizing for the same reason, cost efficiency

I am sorry but you obviously live in a different world than the rest of us. Put simply. If all jobs paid the same people would migrate towards the easiest jobs closest to home with the shortest hours. And if there were no reward for working hard people will not work harder. And again if all things paid the same who is going to do the crappy jobs? Who is going to clean septic tanks or crawl down through sewers? And on the flip side who is going to work 80 hours a week running a fortune 500 company and dealing with all that stress if they are not getting the paycheck that goes with it? Your living in a fairy tale. You can act like I am the moron all you want but I have never been to this place your talking about unless your talking about Star Trek. They live in this world without money where people just work for the pride of working. I for one live in a world where if there is a handout to be had you can bet your ass someone is trying to figure out how to get it.

Originally posted by burntheships

Actually, those are socio-communist with a dictatorial style oligarchy head.

What civil society wants to reach is a socio-capitalist republic.

What idiots are trying to get in america is a capitalist corporate oligarchy.

Consider what you argue for..stop living in the past..do you think the founding fathers considered the concept of international super-corporations that would consolidate the wealth of nations into the hands of a few that could then spend most of that money in not just influencing, but simply writing laws?

The founding fathers were not gods, and the constitution is not complete...
We the united states, in order to form a ==more perfect==...etc. Note, more perfect..aka, keep improving, they weren't saying they were making the perfect union...just building towards a ever continued structuring based on reality.

Idealism must be tempered with realism and action, else this experiment called the peoples republic will indeed fail and fall to the two classes and the loss of the nation.

Originally posted by TheTardis
I am sorry but you obviously live in a different world than the rest of us. Put simply. If all jobs paid the same people would migrate towards the easiest jobs closest to home with the shortest hours.

Thank you for not addressing what I said and instead repeating what you have already said. Why would people do this, what would they be doing with their lives? Would you really rather do something easy like a fry cook or would you do something that you ENJOY, like a scientist or a doctor? There are alot of people who want to do what they want, but can't because of the impossibility of social mobility and the limit on educational opportunities. Again, before the dawn of capitalism, this is how things functioned. People did what they wanted, because they wanted to enjoy their life. Why on earth would someone purposefully do something they don't like?

And if there were no reward for working hard people will not work harder. And again if all things paid the same who is going to do the crappy jobs?

Jobs are only crappy now because the private sector emphasizes monotony and loss individuality in the name of productivity. What seem like "crappy jobs" now would be completely overturned when democratic workplaces are established. But you say "That productivity is needed for society to function!" It really isn't, though. Most productivity in jobs is used to make profit or to compete with other companies, so productivity in society isn't measured as a whole. If everyone works and if products are produced for society's NEED rather than for profit, people are going to have to work alot less than they do now

Who is going to clean septic tanks or crawl down through sewers?

I'd hate to tell you this, but there are people who would enjoy that job

And on the flip side who is going to work 80 hours a week running a fortune 500 company and dealing with all that stress if they are not getting the paycheck that goes with it?

Businesses and workplaces would be run democratically, and would not need a centralized separate body to run them. I would suggest researching socialist concepts before you try to talk about socialism

Originally posted by TheTardis
I spent 6 weeks in Munich with my old company working side by side with people that were given 6 weeks vacation the minute they signed on.

According to official statistics, Germany's unemployment rate hit a record low in 2011. Last year, only little under three million people were out of a job on average – a tally last recorded in 1991, a year after German unification.

it is ranked as the second largest country in terms of export. The export in 2009 alone has gained about $ 1.170 trillion towards the Germany economy.

Perhaps the worst possible example you could have given.
See, what you noticed there, with the 6 weeks vacation, is called worker appreciation. Also a reason why workers don't get burned out, have stronger family ties, and have a high degree of job satisfaction.

You are arguing that they don't treat their workers like slave labor.
Look at their economy, their debt, their unemployment, how they blow us out of the water on exporting, how their healthcare is established strong, the older generation treated with dignity. Their people are far more educated that the united states, etc.


Tell me, which part do you find disgusting? I find it idealistic to work towards, and maybe with a bit of worker appreciation verses a demand for better slaves, we might start doing almost as well as Germany.

Originally posted by seridium
reply to post by SaturnFX

 

He seems to be a Neo Con no ?

And a pretty good liar too lol

I think many people are just a bit ignorant. They believe in steriotypes verses doing a touch of research. Almost no excuse on the internet where you can go check facts with a few taps of a keyboard.

I find the most laughable and disingenious part of the argument the whole scorn towards moving towards european socialism...
...
Anyone whom does a bit of research would find for the most part that it would be freaking great if we did that...something about decent paying, good vacation and benefits packages, high education, attempts at cleaning up their energy, streets, etc, lower violent crimes, more personal liberties, etc to be a fine trade off to a few extra percentage points in taxes...

Its almost amazing...like people demanding we keep getting kicked in the parts verses go sit on a comfy chair...then making fun of the chair..like somehow it is a great idea to remain in the kicking zone. The whole argument is illogical, So much that I am a pretty strong believer in subliminal mind control taking over a lot of peoples minds...so much so that they feel negative feedback if they even start researching facts above the noise they are fed.
I think they -actually- believe what they say..and that is scary. Reminds me of a movie I watched called Invasion of the Body Snatchers...where they were still people, but with an alien living in them and controlling them, infecting everyone else as they slept...

Originally posted by SaturnFXConsider what you argue for..stop living in the past..do you think the founding fathers considered the concept of international super-corporations that would consolidate the wealth of nations into the hands of a few that could then spend most of that money in not just influencing, but simply writing laws?

The founding fathers were not gods, and the constitution is not complete...
We the united states, in order to form a ==more perfect==...etc. Note, more perfect..aka, keep improving, they weren't saying they were making the perfect union...just building towards a ever continued structuring based on reality.

This is true, the constitution was written well before the industrial age, the source of all of the problems associated with free markets. There is a reason why Jefferson wanted a new constitution written every so often, he knew it would not have lasted long under great economic change

Go ahead and keep trying to make fun of me or laugh at me. I dont really care. If that is all you have then great. Have you spent 6 weeks with them? I think it was a great example because while I was there they had two strikes because they were trying to change their system. The people there dont like it. It may be productive to an extent but how much more productive could it be if the people were more motivated. The people I worked with were not all that happy with their system. I dont care what you think. I am not here to impress you.

Originally posted by SaturnFX
Consider what you argue for..

Yes indeed.

And you should get your facts straight instead of painting your whitewashed
version of Socialist Utopia up.

I could start picking off those countries one by one, and refute your
"happy free" joy joy you claim you see where ever you are.

Lets start with Denmark shall we? I'll be back later with more.

more than half of Denmark's 300,000 immigrants (out of a total population of 5.3 million)
are unemployed and living on welfare.

www.time.com...

They currently have over an 8% unemployment rate, and its homeless statistics:

total number of homeless people in week 6, 2007, was 5.253 homeless people.
There are of cause some biases why the number of 5.253 persons must be
regarded as a minimum.

Over the last few years, most people in Norway have experienced a great increase in
personal wealth as well as living conditions (Statistics Norway 2008).

This report however, describes a group

that has not benefitted from this development,

namely children considered to be living in poverty.

From an international perspective, poverty is considered a minor problem in
Norway (OECD 2008). However, the acceptable standard of living in a society is
determined by its most “common” level of welfare among the population at a given time www.fafo.no...

Children living in poverty even by welfare standards...homelessness,
unemployment...

And on and on and on....

Yet socialist-led Norway – still living on its benign image abroad –
has instead become the home of four dirty little secrets.

www.guardian.co.uk...

Government pension fund, oil policy, environmental record and arms exports

and one in ten women raped.

Get your facts straight first. Then you can argue. Untill then....

reply to post by TheTardis

I am pointing out that you have no right to attack someone for pulling themselves out of the gutter and making a life for themselves. My kids are not going hungry but they dont have the best of everything. They are going to learn that you have to work for things.. If that is so wrong then tough.. I dont want my kids to think if they sit around and wait then someone will come and give you things. Why is that so bad?

I also learned that you have to work for things! It's reality!!
You just refuse to acknowledge that I am talking about hungry children, right here in the USA. It's not "bad" .... it's responsible and realistic!!

No one asked you to, or accused you of, having your kids think they can just sit around!!!!

I am talking about innocent people who are victims of the corporatocracy/oligarchy that is the USA. Myself as a child and my kids also did not have "the best of everything." .... but we(they) had enough.

My kids also learned that you have to work for things, just like I did. I was showing them pie charts when they were 6 and 8.
You don't have a beef with me, sir. Sorry that you persist in seeing my pov as some kind of attack. It isn't real, but imagined.....You don't emjoy the luxury that the person you are defending has, either.

I really don't understand your thinking, but whatever. Would you like that rich person to send you some money? You asked me for money......
I have none to give you. We live in the same reality, my friend. I am only a few 100 miles north of you. I know about hard work.

Try asking your idol AlonzoTyper, the one you are defending here, for some help. God knows I could use $100,000 to pay off my student loans and my mortgage....

Why can you not open your mind to a future where there are no starving children??!
*sigh*

reply to post by burntheships


I have to agree with you Sir.

I bet you if you asked the normal "Joe or Jane" living in such "Utopia" that if they could be in the USA which they would preferred more.

Heck, If I hear one more medical horror story from England. Like the poor man who had his scrotum eaten away by rats.. while he laid there helpless and no one came to his aide!

reply to post by anon72


That would be sirette, or miss if you please.

I dont mean to be harsh, but one has to speak up when they come
for us...holding out the leash saying dont worry, it will only get better from here.

The sad fact of Socialism - it fails.
And its far from the Utopia thats promised.

reply to post by buster2010


Its strange how you have no clue as to how history has played out. Socialism and communism is an old and antiquated system with a proven track history of lies and greed followed by ruin. Name one socialist country with a lower debt to gdp ratio tan the USA. Doesnt exist and in fact with all of our issues that are caused by our hybrid capitalist/socialist system we still bury them.

Calitalism is the way, truth, and light. Long live it.

reply to post by buster2010


Its strange how you have no clue as to how history has played out. Socialism and communism is an old and antiquated system with a proven track history of lies and greed followed by ruin. Name one socialist country with a lower debt to gdp ratio tan the USA. Doesnt exist and in fact with all of our issues that are caused by our hybrid capitalist/socialist system we still bury them.

Calitalism is the way, truth, and light. Long live it.

reply to post by anon72


And at one point, you believed in Santa, or some other thing that you no longer hold true.

People are allowed to evolve and change, why are you insinuating that The President isn't allowed to do the same?

Have you always had the SAME ideas and philosophies? Have you always believed in what you believe? Because if that's the case, I'm sorry, because a mind is meant to change and evolve as new information and experiences are processed and lived through.

I'm almost positive, that he, as a human, has done the same.

reply to post by SaturnFX


Whats funny is that when people would list out the places that were socialist and redistributive a few years back they would name a whole host of countries like Spain and Greece as utopian societies because of this system.

Looks like your list is shrinking isnt it?

reply to post by burntheships

I dont mean to be harsh, but one has to speak up when they come
for us...holding out the leash saying dont worry, it will only get better from here.

The sad fact of Socialism - it fails.

You failed to mention how many are unemployed in the glorious scheme of capitalism; how many are hungry and homeless; how much violence takes place due to widening chasm between the haves and the have-nots.

And you also fail to present a better idea, or to admit that you are blurring the lines between economic schemes.
The sad fact of Capitalism - it fails. Why? Because that's how people are.
For example, take Solon, who lived 150 years before Plato, and how he managed an identical situation in Athens in the 6th century BCE: source: Plato's Political Philosophy From the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy

The essence of the constitutional reform which Solon made in 593 B.C.E., over one hundred and fifty years before Plato’s birth, when he became the Athenian leader, was the restoration of righteous order, eunomia. In the early part of the sixth century Athens was disturbed by a great tension between two parties: the poor and the rich, and stood at the brink of a fierce civil war.

Huh! Who'd have thunk?

On the one hand, because of an economic crisis, many poorer Athenians were hopelessly falling into debt, and since their loans were often secured by their own persons, thousands of them were put into serfdom. On the other hand, lured by easy profits from loans, the rich stood firmly in defense of private property and their ancient privileges. The partisan strife, which seemed inevitable, would make Athens even more weak economically and defenseless before external enemies.

Sound familiar?

Appointed as a mediator in this conflict, Solon enacted laws prohibiting loans on the security of the person. He lowered the rate of interest, ordered the cancellation of all debts, and gave freedom to serfs. He acted so moderately and impartially that he became unpopular with both parties. The rich felt hurt by the reform. The poor, unable to hold excess in check, demanded a complete redistribution of landed property and the dividing of it into equal shares. Nevertheless, despite these criticisms from both sides, Solon succeeded in gaining social peace.

How about that!

Further, by implementing new constitutional laws, he set up a “mighty shield against both parties and did not allow either to win an unjust victory” (Aristotle, The Athenian Constitution). He introduced a system of checks and balances which would not favor any side, but took into consideration legitimate interests of all social groups. In his position, he could easily have become the tyrant over the city, but he did not seek power for himself.

And there you have it. HE DID NOT SEEK POWER FOR HIMSELF.

After he completed his reform, he left Athens in order to see whether it would stand the test of time, and returned to his country only ten years later. Even though in 561 Pisistratus seized power and became the first in a succession of Athenian tyrants, and in 461 the democratic leader Ephialtes abolished the checks upon popular sovereignty, Solon’s reform provided the ancient Greeks with a model of both political leadership and order based on impartiality and fairness.

Yet we try to reinvent the wheel every generation.

Justice for Solon is not an arithmetical equality: giving equal shares to all alike irrespective of merit, which represents the democratic concept of distributive justice, but it is equity or fairness based on difference: giving shares proportionate to the merit of those who receive them. The same ideas of political order, leadership, and justice can be found in Plato’s dialogues.

So there.
This is far from a new problem we have here. Far, far from it. The challenge is for us as a nation to re-build, and SUSTAIN social peace.
Toss out all the 'labels' and incendiary finger-pointing and blame. What good does that do? Instead, we should start with a very sound idea that is at least 2,600 years old, and that worked UNTIL A TYRANT TOOK OVER....
Get it in place, and then, once it is established, PREVENT a tyrant taking over and "tossing out the checks and balances."

Here, for those of you who don't bother reading entire posts, I'll repeat it: EUNOMIA:

equity or fairness based on difference: giving shares proportionate to the merit of those who receive them. The same ideas of political order, leadership, and justice can be found in Plato’s dialogues

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by burntheships

 

You failed to mention how many are unemployed in the glorious scheme of capitalism; how many are
hungry and homeless; how much violence takes place due to widening chasm between the haves and
the have-nots.

I have many times commented on U.S. unemployment numbers on ATS, along with
homelessness. Just as I have pointed out in this thread that Socialism is not a Utopia,
and will not end hunger, homelessness, and poverty.

There is an old saying "Everyone wants to be equal with the Rich"

It is not in the peoples best interests that those in power would seek to fan the
flames of class divide. It is in the best interests of those already corrupt and power
greedy politicians to use class warfare as a means of raising taxes, so they can
line increase the burgeoning monstrosity of the beastly govenment.

Socialism is not a way to help the poor, that's just a false front they use to get the poor to go
along with the government robbing everyone. The poor actually get hurt the most under socialism

This idea of the widening "chasm" between the haves and have nots can only be
truely addressed by individuals, and what is commonly known as Charity.

For example, take Solon, who lived 150 years before Plato, and how he managed an identical
situation in Athens in the 6th century BCE.

Well, Plato's Republic was a theory, and a flawed one at that.
www.college.columbia.edu...

And Solons attempts at Democracy failed also. He also failed
at ending the "conflict of the classes".

Rose colored glasses taken off:

Solon's laws eased the sufferings of the poor and saved others from slipping into degradation. But Athens continued to be overpopulated in relation to the availability of land and the productivity of its agriculture, and common Athenian citizens continued to suffer from or feel threatened by hunger and poverty. Hoping that a rising economy would, as the saying goes, raise all boats, Solon encouraged trade. After this failed to end economic hardship and unrest, he hoped to create a spirit of cooperation among the common people by launching military campaigns and building empire. With this, Solon instituted another intrusion by the state into the lives of people: the conscription of males from the ages of eighteen to sixty for military service. www.fsmitha.com...

In fact, Solon created classes of society!

He divided the Athenian society into five classes based on people's annual fortune:
the pentacosiomedimni, the medimni, the hippeis, the zeugotae, the thetes.
According to class, one had certain obligations, such as tax and contributions to the war-machine.www.in2greece.com...

There are no Utopias.
Hitler set out to create one and look how successful that was!

And you also fail to present a better idea, or to admit that you are blurring the
lines between economic schemes.

Not to be argumentative, however I have not in any way attempted to blur the lines
of economic shemes. The facts are that no society exists in a static environment.
To have a complete and fair discussion on the subject would actually
require its own thread.

We are born individuals, and we are born into classes. No Government will ever
be able to change that, even A Brave New World would attempt it but would fail.

Without an enemy with a mindless determination to destroy everything good and beautiful, any state struggles with the economic and social problems of unemployment and poverty. So, the idea of a common enemy is a symbol of the evil against which people must unite, and it distracts the people from politically inconvenient issues by relating all evils to the common rhetorical enemy en.wikipedia.org...'s_%22Battle%22

The better idea is known as The United States of America, and The Constituion of
The United States. Unlike the current POTUS, I do not think the document is
archaic and flawed.


www.youtube.com...

"Socialism and communism quickly changed from a movement whose aim was a new society and a new man into one whose ideal was a bourgeois life for all, the universalized bourgeois as the men and women of the future."Erich Fromm, To Have Or To Be?

I'll have to save the best for last, as I am out of room. Continued:

Continued:

The best yet:

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.
www.ushistory.org...