Book: What Would Jefferson Do?

[Pat McCotter]

So, sue me.

[Pat McCotter]

Yep, I've stolen from him and from the taxpayers of the City of Concord.

I borrowed the book from the public library.
I've copied 3.3% of the pages from the book.
I've put the title and author of the book in the cite.
I've put a link to Amazon.com for people to easily go to buy the book if they care to.

Did you read the excerpt? Thom is showing the difference between Hitler and Roosevelt with this chapter. I excerpted it to show the ominous parallels between 1933 Germany and post 9/11 America.

"His federal police agencies stepped up their program of arresting suspicious persons and holding them without access to lawyers or courts"

"Playing on this new nationalism, and exploiting a disagreement with the French over his increasing militarism, he argued that any international body that didn?t act first and foremost in the best interest of his own nation was neither relevant nor useful. "

"His propaganda minister orchestrated a campaign to ensure the people that he was a deeply religious man and that his motivations were rooted in Christianity. He even proclaimed the need for a revival of the Christian faith across his nation, what he called ?New Christianity.? Every man in his rapidly growing army wore a belt buckle that declared ?Gott mit uns?? God is with us?and most of them fervently believed it was true. "

"Within a year of the attack, the nation?s leader determined that the various local police and federal agencies around the nation were lacking the communication and coordinated administration necessary to deal with the threat, particularly those citizens who were of Middle Eastern ancestry and thus considered to be probably terrorist and communist sympathizers, and various troublesome ?intellectuals? and ?liberals.? He proposed a national agency to protect the security of the homeland, consolidating the actions of dozens of previously independent police, border, and investigative agencies under a single leader. He appointed one of his most trusted associates to be leader of this new agency the Central Security Office for the homeland, and gave it a role in the government equal to the other major departments."

"He reached out to industry and forged an alliance, bringing former executives of the nation?s largest corporations into high government positions."

"With his number two man?a master at manipulating the media?the nation?s leader began a campaign to convince the nation that a small, limited war was necessary Another nation was harboring many of the ?suspicious? Middle Eastern people, and even though its connection with the terrorist who had set afire the nation?s most important building was tenuous at best, it held resources their nation badly needed if they were to have room to live and maintain their prosperity. He called a press conference and delivered an ultimatum to the leader of the other nation, provoking an international uproar. He claimed the right to strike preemptively in self-defense, and nations across Europe? at first?denounced him for it, pointing out that it was a doctrine claimed in the past only by nations seeking worldwide empire, like Caesar?s Rome or Alexander?s Greece."

[Pat McCotter]

There were too many of these examples that, instead of excerpting portions of the chapter, I excerpted the entire chapter.

[Ron Helwig]

So, sue me.

you are obviously no friend of property rights...

it is one thing to debate intellectual property laws as it relates to the commons but quite another to steal.

I believe that "Intellectual Property" is an oxymoron.

If you take my chair, I cannot sit.
If you take my chair design, I can still sit.

If I am a chair builder, and I can't build my own designs cheaper/better than someone who "stole" my design, then I don't deserve to stay in that business.

[Lloyd Danforth]

Boy! You've taken a perfectly good conversation about bumper stickers and stuff and really ruined it!

[tracysaboe]

OK, I've scanned it:

you can't do that Pat.

it is against copyright laws...which Jefferson supported that allowed authors to enclose a portion of the social commons (our written and spoken language) to monopolize the product of their labor for a SPECIFIC period of time (to encourage arts and sciences and add to the common good) and then it reverts back to the commons.

Actually that depends on which Jefferson you're talking about. Sometimes Jefferson didn't believe in copyright laws. Didn't believe in their moral validity. On the other hand he still signed in the copy-right act of 1800 because he thought the government needed to "promote" arts and science over other endevors.

Besically Jefferson was nothing more then another power-hungry politician who spoke good when he wasn't in power but did completely opposite things at times when he was. That applies to his little "war" on piracy/privatiering, his trade embargoes, and his purchase of Louisiana.  His copy-right act wasn't his worst offence. At least that was Constitutional.

Tracy

[tracysaboe]

So, sue me!

do you not respect property rights?

Intellectual "property" isn't worthy of the distinction "private."

Indeed, intellectual property rights -- if applied universally would pretty much forbid me from using my REAL private homesteaded property the way I want to. Real private property like land.

Tracy

[Pat McCotter]

Oops! Now you've gone and busted open that rotten egg, now!

[Russell Kanning]

Mike has a principle about being non-rivalrous. I just can't remember it right now.

[AlanM]

Mike has a principle about being non-rivalrous. I just can't remember it right now.

I have principles that can't be rivaled. 

[tracysaboe]

intellectual property rights -- if applied universally would pretty much forbid me from using my REAL private homesteaded property the way I want to. Real private property like land.

IP is non-rivalrous whereas land is rivalrous.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-rivalrous

That's right. It's precisely because Land is scarce and IP isn't that market systems developed to define property rights for land and they didn't and needed to be legislated and imposed by government force with IP.

You're a complete moron Bill. You've been spouting this drivil for 3 years now, and the only reason you seem to be here is so you can twist every thread you come to into your new Georgist debating ground. And any time sombody comes up with an objection you can't answer you just dance around it.

You're nothing but a troll here.

Tracy

[tracysaboe]

That's because you're an idiot who doesn't understand that a land "patent" is a very different thing from a Patent on an invention.

But a person can homestead property with-out said governmental "patents" and did it all throughout the mid-west where terrotorial governments hardly existed.

I rest my case. You're an idiot.

Tracy

[tracysaboe]

Nonsence.

[AlanM]

a title to land is a land patent.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_patent

A wood-framed house is an abode, a teepee is an abode. but a wood-framed house is not a teepee.
A land patent is not an IP patent. Do not equate them unless you can prove it.

[Pat McCotter]

People, people! Let's be sure to lock those buttons so they can't be pushed anymore!