Commencez à lire Ameritopia: The Unmaking of America sur votre Kindle dans moins d'une minute. Vous n'avez pas encore de Kindle ? Achetez-le ici Ou commencez à lire dès maintenant avec l'une de nos applications de lecture Kindle gratuites.

Envoyer sur votre Kindle ou un autre appareil

 
 
 

Essai gratuit

Découvrez gratuitement un extrait de ce titre

Envoyer sur votre Kindle ou un autre appareil

N'importe qui peut lire un ebook Kindle - même sans posséder un Kindle - grâce à nos applications de lecture Kindle gratuites.
Ameritopia: The Unmaking of America
 
Agrandissez cette image
 

Ameritopia: The Unmaking of America [Format Kindle]

Mark R. Levin

Prix éditeur - format imprimé : EUR 12,18
Prix Kindle : EUR 8,29 TTC & envoi gratuit via réseau sans fil par Amazon Whispernet
Économisez : EUR 3,89 (32%)

Formats

Prix Amazon Neuf à partir de Occasion à partir de
Format Kindle EUR 8,29  
Relié EUR 20,78  
Broché EUR 12,34  
CD, Livre audio, CD, Version intégrale EUR 22,98  
Chaque jour, un ebook avec au moins 60% de réduction
Découvrez l'Offre Éclair Kindle et inscrivez-vous à la Newsletter Offre Éclair Kindle pour ne rater aucun ebook à prix exceptionnel. Abonnez-vous dès maintenant



Essayez gratuitement pendant 30 jours Amazon Premium et bénéficiez de la livraison en 1 jour ouvré gratuite et illimitée sur des millions d'articles, et d'autres avantages.


Descriptions du produit

Extrait

EPILOGUE

MY PREMISE, IN THE first sentence of the first chapter of this book, is this: “Tyranny, broadly defined, is the use of power to dehumanize the individual and delegitimize his nature. Political utopianism is tyranny disguised as a desirable, workable, and even paradisiacal governing ideology.”

Plato’s Republic, More’s Utopia, Hobbes’s Leviathan, and Marx’s workers’ paradise are utopias that are anti-individual and anti-individualism. For the utopians, modern and olden, the individual is one-dimensional—selfish. On his own, he has little moral value. Contrarily, authoritarianism is defended as altruistic and masterminds as socially conscious. Thus endless interventions in the individual’s life and manipulation of his conditions are justified as not only necessary and desirable but noble governmental pursuits. This false dialectic is at the heart of the problem we face today.

In truth, man is naturally independent and self-reliant, which are attributes that contribute to his own well-being and survival, and the well-being and survival of a civil society. He is also a social being who is charitable and compassionate. History abounds with examples, as do the daily lives of individuals. To condemn individualism as the utopians do is to condemn the very foundation of the civil society and the American founding and endorse, wittingly or unwittingly, oppression. Karl Popper saw it as an attack on Western civilization. “The emancipation of the individual was indeed the great spiritual revolution which had led to the breakdown of tribalism and to the rise of democracy.”1 Moreover, Judaism and Christianity, among other religions, teach the altruism of the individual.

Of course, this is not to defend anarchy. Quite the opposite. It is to endorse the magnificence of the American founding. The American founding was an exceptional exercise in collective human virtue and wisdom—a culmination of thousands of years of experience, knowledge, reason, and faith. The Declaration of Independence is a remarkable societal proclamation of human rights, brilliant in its insight, clarity, and conciseness. The Constitution of the United States is an extraordinary matrix of governmental limits, checks, balances, and divisions, intended to secure for posterity the individual’s sovereignty as proclaimed in the Declaration.

This is the grand heritage to which every American citizen is born. It has been characterized as “the American Dream,” “the American experiment,” and “American exceptionalism.” The country has been called “the Land of Opportunity,” “the Land of Milk and Honey,” and “a Shining City on a Hill.” It seems unimaginable that a people so endowed by Providence, and the beneficiaries of such unparalleled human excellence, would choose or tolerate a course that ensures their own decline and enslavement, for a government unleashed on the civil society is a government that destroys the nature of man.

On September 17, 1787, at the conclusion of the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia, Delegate James Wilson, on behalf of his ailing colleague from Pennsylvania, Benjamin Franklin, read aloud Franklin’s speech to the convention in favor of adopting the Constitution. Among other things, Franklin said that the Constitution “is likely to be well administered for a Course of Years, and can only end in Despotism as other Forms have done before it, when the People shall become corrupt as to need Despotic Government, being incapable of any other.…”2

Have we “become corrupt”? Are we in need of “despotic government”? It appears that some modern-day “leading lights” think so, as they press their fanatical utopianism. For example, Richard Stengel, managing editor of Time magazine, considers the Constitution a utopian expedient. He wrote, “If the Constitution was intended to limit the federal government, it sure doesn’t say so.… The framers weren’t afraid of a little messiness. Which is another reason we shouldn’t be so delicate about changing the Constitution or reinterpreting it.”3 It is beyond dispute that the Framers sought to limit the scope of federal power and that the Constitution does so. Moreover, constitutional change was not left to the masterminds but deliberately made difficult to ensure the broad participation and consent of the body politic.

Richard Cohen, a columnist for the Washington Post, explained that the Constitution is an amazing document, as long as it is mostly ignored, particularly the limits it imposes on the federal government. He wrote, “This fatuous infatuation with the Constitution, particularly the 10th Amendment, is clearly the work of witches, wiccans, and wackos. It has nothing to do with America’s real problems and, if taken too seriously, would cause an economic and political calamity. The Constitution is a wonderful document, quite miraculous actually, but only because it has been wisely adapted to changing times. To adhere to the very word of its every clause hardly is respectful to the Founding Fathers. They were revolutionaries who embraced change. That’s how we got here.”4 Of course, without the promise of the Tenth Amendment, the Constitution would not have been ratified, since the states insisted on retaining most of their sovereignty. Furthermore, the Framers clearly did not embrace the utopian change demanded by its modern adherents.

Lest we ignore history, the no-less-eminent American revolutionary and founder Thomas Jefferson explained, “On every question of construction, carry ourselves back to the time when the constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed.”5

Thomas L. Friedman, a columnist for the New York Times and three-time Pulitzer Prize recipient, is even more forthright in his dismissal of constitutional republicanism and advocacy for utopian tyranny. Complaining of the slowness of American society in adopting sweeping utopian policies, he wrote, “There is only one thing worse than one-party autocracy, and that is one-party democracy, which is what we have in America today. One-party autocracy certainly has its drawbacks. But when it is led by a reasonably enlightened group of people, as China is today, it can also have great advantages. That one party can just impose the politically difficult but critically important policies needed to move a society forward in the 21st century.”6 Of course, China remains a police state, where civil liberties are nonexistent, despite its experiment with government-managed pseudo-capitalism. Friedman’s declaration underscores not only the necessary intolerance utopians have for constitutionalism, but their infatuation with totalitarianism.

It is neither prudential nor virtuous to downplay or dismiss the obvious—that America has already transformed into Ameritopia. The centralization and consolidation of power in a political class that insulates its agenda in entrenched experts and administrators, whose authority is also self-perpetuating, is apparent all around us and growing more formidable. The issue is whether the ongoing transformation can be restrained and then reversed, or whether it will continue with increasing zeal, passing from a soft tyranny to something more oppressive. Hayek observed that “priding itself on having built its world as if it had designed it, and blaming itself for not having designed it better, humankind is now to set out to do just that. The aim … is no less than to effect a complete redesigning of our traditional morals, law, and language, and on this basis to stamp out the older order and supposedly inexorable, unjustifiable conditions that prevent the institution of reason, fulfillment, true freedom, and justice.”7 But the outcome of this adventurism, if not effectively stunted, is not in doubt.

In the end, can mankind stave off the powerful and dark forces of utopian tyranny? While John Locke was surely right about man’s nature and the civil society, he was also right about that which threatens them. Locke, Montesquieu, many of the philosophers of the European Enlightenment, and the Founders, among others, knew that the history of organized government is mostly a history of a relative few and perfidious men co-opting, coercing, and eventually repressing the many through the centralization and consolidation of authority.

Ironically and tragically, it seems that liberty and the constitution established to preserve it are not only essential to the individual’s well-being and happiness, but also an opportunity for the devious to exploit them and connive against them. Man has yet to devise a lasting institutional answer to this puzzle. The best that can be said is that all that really stands between the individual and tyranny is a resolute and sober people. It is the people, after all, around whom the civil society has grown and governmental institutions have been established. At last, the people are responsible for upholding the civil society and republican government, to which their fate is moored.

The essential question is whether, in America, the people’s psychology has been so successfully warped, the individual’s spirit so thoroughly trounced, and the civil society’s institutions so effectively overwhelmed that revival is possible. Have too many among us already surrendered or been conquered? Can the people overcome the constant and relentless influences of ideological indoctrination, economic manipulation, and administrative coerciveness, or have they become hopelessly entangled in and dependent on a ubiquitous federal government? Have the Pavlovian appeals to...

Revue de presse

“The companion book to Liberty and Tyranny. . . . Levin’s analysis is deadly to liberalism. . . . Ameritopia is historical X-ray vision in book form.”
—Jeffrey Lord, The American Spectator

“A must-read for Americans of all political persuasions. . . . An honest discussion of the dangers presently facing our country. . . . Levin does a fantastic job.”

—Jedediah Bila, Newsmax

“Mark Levin has a unique ability to take complex subjects and boil them down to their essentials.”

—Erick Erickson, Red State

“That Levin wrote this book now demonstrates not only his passion for the United States, but his awareness that he is a statesman defending natural law at a pivotal moment in human history. . . . Mark Levin [does] the lion’s share of our shouting—eloquently—with Ameritopia.”

PJ Media

Détails sur le produit

  • Format : Format Kindle
  • Taille du fichier : 788 KB
  • Nombre de pages de l'édition imprimée : 290 pages
  • Pagination - ISBN de l'édition imprimée de référence : 1439173249
  • Editeur : Threshold Editions; Édition : Reprint (17 janvier 2012)
  • Vendu par : Amazon Media EU S.à r.l.
  • Langue : Anglais
  • ASIN: B005O2YWVC
  • Synthèse vocale : Non activée
  • X-Ray :
  • Classement des meilleures ventes d'Amazon: n°356.843 dans la Boutique Kindle (Voir le Top 100 dans la Boutique Kindle)
  •  Souhaitez-vous faire modifier les images ?


En savoir plus sur l'auteur

Découvrez des livres, informez-vous sur les écrivains, lisez des blogs d'auteurs et bien plus encore.

Commentaires en ligne 

Il n'y a pas encore de commentaires clients sur Amazon.fr
5 étoiles
4 étoiles
3 étoiles
2 étoiles
1 étoiles
Commentaires client les plus utiles sur Amazon.com (beta)
Amazon.com: 4.3 étoiles sur 5  2.121 commentaires
511 internautes sur 580 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile 
5.0 étoiles sur 5 The intense ideological battle for the heart and soul of America is really nothing new...it has been raging since antiquity. 25 janvier 2012
Par Paul Tognetti - Publié sur Amazon.com
Format:Relié|Achat authentifié par Amazon
Take a look around at the sad state of our nation. In the 100 years since the self-proclaimed "progessive" Woodrow Wilson was President of these United States Americans have slowly but surely been ceding their rights and liberties to the state. The "masterminds" in our government, those who are so cock-sure that they know what is best for the rest of us, have been systemically consolidating their power and building a mammoth bureaucracy designed to control nearly every aspect of our lives. Then in 2008 the American people elected Barack Obama who promised to "fundamentally change America". Obama has taken the "statist" agenda to a whole new level and most Americans have become increasingly alarmed at the direction this country is headed in. The battle lines have been drawn and the 2012 election will no doubt prove pivotal in the ultimate direction our nation will take. Those of us who favor the traditional American values of hard work, freedom of speech and free enterprise are going to have to articulate our case in the best possible way to a wider audience of our fellow Americans in order to win the day. Lawyer, author and syndicated radio talk show host Mark R. Levin has given us all a huge assist in this regard with the release of his powerful new book "Ameritopia: The Unmaking of America". Drawing on the writings of the great philosophers on both ends of the political spectrum Levin provides his readers with a plethora of devastating arguments against the direction Obama and the progressives in both political parties are taking this nation. It is a truly compelling read!

I think that it is fair to say that most Americans have only a passing knowledge of the writings of philosophers such as Plato, Thomas More, Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, Charles de Montesquieu and Alexis de Toqueville. Some would attribute this to the "dumbing down of America" that has been inexorably taking place in our schools over the past half-century or so. But the truth is that all of these individuals as well as Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels have exerted a great deal of influence over American political thought in the 235 years of our nation's existence. Plato, More, Hobbes and of course Karl Max all come down on the side of "collectivist" or "utopian" states whereby individuals must necessarily become subservient to the interests of the state. In such an environment individuals "must be managed and suppressed by masterminds for the greater good." There is no tolerance for individual self-interest or even self-preservation. A person's labor and property belong to the state or are controlled by the state. Citing lengthy excerpts from the extensive writings of each of these individuals, Levin points out the obvious flaws in this line of thinking. Mr. Levin succeeds in arming his readers with the ammunition they will need to refute the arguments offered by the leftists and statists in this country on a wide variety of issues like universal health care, the progressive income tax and an ever-expanding and intrusive federal government. To paraphrase an old boxing expression "in this corner" we have the Barack Obama's, Nancy Pelosi's, Lincoln Chafee's and Chuck Schumer's of the world.

Part Two of "Ameritopia" hones in on the writings of John Locke, Charles de Montesquieu, and Alexis de Toqueville who all champion a much smaller, less intrusive government. John Locke in particular had an enormous influence on our Founding Fathers as they went about the rough and tumble business of fashioning the Constitution. It is an indisputable fact that for most of the history of the world mankind has been ruled by despots and repressive governments. The Founding Fathers wanted something much different. John Locke wrote that "laws made by men and governments without the consent of the government are illegitimate and no man is bound to them." Regarding personal property rights Locke explained that there is always going to be an unequal distribution of property resulting from the manner in which a man applies his labor. This is just plain common sense. "As much land as a man tills, plants, improves, cultivates and can use the product of, so much is his property. He by his labor does, as it were, enclose it from the common. He gave it to the use of the industrious and rational; not to the fancy or covetousness of the quarrelsome and contentious." Amen! Meanwhile, another major influence on the thinking of the Founding Fathers was the French philosopher Charles de Montesquieu. Montesquieu warned of "the dangers of a republican government attempting to transform a civil society--including superceding the effects of religion, family, commerce, traditions, customs, mores etc. through legal coercion." Sounds like a page from the Saul Alinsky handbook does it not? Finally, Montesquieu goes on to observe that "There are two sorts of tyranny: a real one, which consists of the violence of the government, and one of opinion, which is felt when those who govern establish things that run counter to a nation's way of thinking." Many of us would argue that this is precisely what has been going on for the past three years.

In the final section of "Ameritopia: The Unmaking of America" Mark Levin explains how the statists have advanced their agenda over the past eight decades and why the 2012 elections stand as a watershed in American history. The choices we face have never been more clear. If you are one of those people still sitting on the fence I urge you to read "Ameritopia". Meanwhile, if you are someone who is largely in agreement with the principles espoused by our Founding Fathers I would wholeheartedly encourage you to pick up a copy of "Ameritopia" as well. Mark Levin's compelling book will help to crystallize the arguments in your mind as your attempt to educate your friends, relatives and neighbors in the coming months leading up to the election. Kudos to Mark Levin for an extremely well thought-out and well-executed project. Very highly recommended!
567 internautes sur 683 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile 
5.0 étoiles sur 5 Ameritopia 18 janvier 2012
Par Polokfla - Publié sur Amazon.com
Format:Relié|Achat authentifié par Amazon
Once again, through very researched detail and very precise wording, Mr. Levin gives us all a very ominous warning about what type of government growth we are careening towards and to what extent our personal liberties will necessarily be lost to that end. The book seems to be condensed to the point where re-reading usually brings out even more points to consider.
If you love what our country has always stood for and honestly want our Democratic-Republic to endure-this is a must read.
And very hard to argue with, hence the ratings attack by the lefists in this review section. It is their modus to simply slime something that they can not logically argue with.
Read and enjoy, then let it stew a week or so then re-read. You're bound to miss something the 1st time.
661 internautes sur 798 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile 
5.0 étoiles sur 5 A reaffirmation of liberty, inalienable rights, civil society, and constitutional republicanism 17 janvier 2012
Par John R. Smith - Publié sur Amazon.com
Format:Relié
If there is one statement that defines Mark R. Levin's work, it is that America's success is based in liberty and that we must not allow ourselves to fall into tyranny. Of course, no one supports tyranny blatantly and so defending liberty is thought to be easy. But the people who support tyranny don't always do so blatantly. In this book, Levin shows how people throughout the ages have supported tyranny through an ideology called utopianism, and thus ushered in tyranny through "intellectual bankruptcy and dishonesty."

In the first part of AMERITOPIA, Levin examines the work of four historical figures, Plato, Thomas More, Hobbes, and Marx. In this treatment, Levin shows how each one promoted what was considered an ideal society and how each one of these ideals is no more than tyranny. In each case, the ideal society contains a highly centralized government which controls the masses through various means--persuasion, deceit, coercion, eugenics, euthanasia--and therefore tears apart the family, community, and faith.

In the second part, Levin counters this with a survey of three thinkers that helped introduce liberty to the Western mindset and establish what he calls Americanism--John Locke, Charles de Montesquieu, and Alexis de Tocqueville. Levin shows how each one viewed human beings as autonomous individuals with God-given abilities and rights. With lawyerly precision, Levin details the many examples of how both Locke and Montesquieu influenced the founders of the United States and how Tocqueville spread Americanism to the European culture of the 19th century.

Finally, Levin explains how the America built upon Locke, Montesquieu, and Tocqueville is at risk of being taken over by the utopian ideology in the 21st century, showing how the various modern movements of liberalism and modern socialism disseminate their intellectual bankruptcy and dishonesty.

The argument is bound to cause a stir, and Levin's penetrating commentary is grounded well by quotes from the original texts. If there is a major flaw in the work, it is in the unforgiving denunciation of the utopian literary genre. While it is clear that most of the works technically classed utopia did include tyrannical elements, the genre is not aimed at building political systems. It is aimed at exploring new possibilities. And while I cannot deny that some pro-liberty works refute the idea of utopianism, Levin cannot deny the fact that some elements of pro-liberty and American texts include visions of the perfect society. Everyone has a vision of what would be ideal--some are made of tyranny, and others can be seen as the "shining city on the hill" and are made of freedom. This says to me that it is not utopia that is at fault, but rather tyranny. Indeed, if utopias are promotions of the ideal society, then it must be said that all active minds engage in the exercise.

Altogether, the point of this book is absolutely correct. America's success is based on liberty and allowing ourselves to fall into tyranny would be catastrophic for humanity. Everyone who is interested in this very important theme and is compelled to do something about it should also consider an excellent book which offers a grand summary of modern economics, how we got to where we are, and what to do about it--Juggernaut: Why the System Crushes the Only People Who Can Save It by Eric Robert Morse.
183 internautes sur 220 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile 
5.0 étoiles sur 5 He's done it again. 21 janvier 2012
Par Culver City Mom - Publié sur Amazon.com
Format:Relié
Great book, but keep the dictionary and encyclopedia nearby. Mark assumes a very high reading level. So novices beware. Should be required reading for all high school and college students.
32 internautes sur 36 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile 
5.0 étoiles sur 5 You'll understand the road we are traveling, the intellectual heritage of the ideas, and the gravity of the situation 7 février 2012
Par D. Brubaker - Publié sur Amazon.com
Format:Relié|Achat authentifié par Amazon
I just finished reading the book this morning. I am not going to attempt a thorough summary as the product description and other reviews have done that well. There is unfortunately no substitute for taking the time to actually read and personally interact with the ideas of this book, so I humbly but strongly suggest 1) getting Ameritopia, and 2) reading it ... right through to the end.

In very broad strokes, though, Levin delineates two general intellectual streams of thought regarding the way society ought to be structured. They are Utopianism and Americanism - and they are diametrically opposed.

Thinkers and proponents of the Utopian stream include Plato (Republic), Thomas More (Utopia), Thomas Hobbes (Leviathan), Karl Marx (Communist Manifesto), Woodrow Wilson, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Barack Obama, and others. There are obviously differences among them, but what they hold in common is the big stuff, and it is really quite striking. The main point is that they all support movement toward the micromanaging of the life of the individual by masterminds, who idealize strict conformity and radical egalitarianism. The actual goal of utopians, though their rhetoric is couched in terms of "looking out for the little guy", is total control and submission of the individual. This translates into dehumanization of all members of society and the amassing of power for the masterminds. They justify their actions largely based upon the (false) moral premise that unequal distribution of property is evil, and that the State in the form of a committee of elites, is somehow both capable and correct in assuming the function of micromanaging the minutiae of society - against all objections or protests from minorities (or even majorities) within it - in order to achieve their vision of absolute control.

Utopians/statists work against actual human rights according to the following process:

1) they deny the claim that any rights are inherent or un-alienable (e.g. God-given to all human beings), insisting instead that the individuals' freedoms are granted by the state and therefore the individual has no inherent claim to them. Thus, Woodrow Wilson spoke not of "rights" but of "privileges" (p.189), and thus FDR modified "inalienable rights" to read "inalienable political rights" (201), paving the way for step two;

2) they then muddy the waters further by elevating to the same standing as basic human rights such things as "the right to protection from unemployment," or "the right to free education," or "the right to universal health care," "the right to leisure" (all of which "rights" were specifically affirmed by the constitution of the Soviet Union, by the way), and so forth. Such things may represent desirable outcomes under certain circumstances and may be instituted (at a local level, to prevent fraud, cronyism or the abuse of the individual via the stifling of the free market), but no reasonable person can argue they are universal rights of the same order as freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, the right of all persons to be treated equally under the law, and so forth. A good test is this (and this is my analysis, not Mark's): Does the "right" asserted cost something to grant? In the case of the utopians' supplementary "human rights", you will notice that they almost invariably do, whereas in the case of actual human rights they do not. The problem with pseudo-human rights such as the right to healthcare is that their guarantee requires an agent and requires resources. For this role the utopian masterminds are happy to step up to the plate once they have created the expectation in the general populace that such things are their rightful due. But the utopian masterminds do not fulfill these pseudo-human rights from their own pockets; no, the expectation they have created has now given them the warrant they sought to then infringe upon the rights of bystanders to an ever-greater degree in order to carry out their process of micromanaging, control, and amassing of power to a centralized governing elite.

3) As one might have noticed, step 2 cannot be fully carried out without the infringement of actual human rights such as free speech, the right to the fruit of one's physical or intellectual labor (AKA private property), freedom of conscience (for example, the right of a private insurance company to charge a copay for contraceptives or to not offer reimbursement for them at all). This is why the muddying of the waters is so important to the statist: he really wants to deny actual human rights but he cannot do so until he has so confused the flocks with talk of entitlements and the assertion as "rights" things which are not rights at all, that the latter are willing to relinquish their basic liberties in order to allow the Statist to implement his/her vision of the "greater good."

4) They systematically undermine the rule of law in favor of whatever they want to do at any given time. Thus, the Constitution becomes "living and breathing," and so forth, and they need not be troubled by the limits it places upon the infringement of the rights of the individual.

Utopians (yes, including American presidents), insofar as they support utopianism, are actually and literally ANTI-AMERICAN. The reasons for this will become clear upon reading and understanding the quotations and discussions inside Ameritopia itself.

Among the reasons, though, are that the Statist/utopian vision is completely incompatible with the United States Constitution and its Bill of Rights, since as already stated, the rights affirmed as universal and God-given in our Constitution are incompatible with utopianism, while principles essential to utopianism (such as the free reign of bureaucratic or judicial caprice, or the denial of private property, or the dehumanizing of the individual) are antithetical to the Constitution. This is why Wilson (who despised checks and balances and bemoaned the difficulty of passing amendments to the Constitution), FDR, Obama, Ginsberg (apparently), and others have held the Constitution in such contempt; since it thwarts their totalitarian purposes, they must re-classify it as "living and breathing" in order to evade its limits and ultimately to disregard it completely.

The most important thinkers forming the intellectual and philosophical basis for Americanism, on the other hand, include John Locke, Charles de Montesquieu, and Alexis de Tocqueville. The political philosophies of the former two were probably the most influential of anyone in the shaping of the Constitution and thus the system of American government (and Mark demonstrates the specifics of their influence in this book); the latter (Tocqueville) visited from France twice after half a century of the American experiment - he "got it" and both understood the wisdom and described the effects and fruits of liberty as they were beginning to blossom in the young republic.

The affirmation of ACTUAL unalienable rights by the Constitution and Bill of Rights, guaranteed by strict limitations upon the reach and function of the federal government, formed the solid foundation upon which has been built the freest society in history, including the inevitability of the abolition of slavery and the basis for the civil rights movement which was not a deviation from, but an appeal to and claiming of, the God-given rights for all people that are recognized and asserted within the U.S. Constitution. A major concern of the framers was the preservation of liberty, and Mark describes this in great detail and contrast to utopianism/statism.

Supporters of Americanism uphold actual human rights and their derivatives. Therefore: equal standing before the law, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, private property (the fruit of one's honest labor), the Takings Clause (that government may not seize private property without a compelling public interest and fair compensation), freedom of religion (or irreligion), the Establishment Clause (the non-establishment of religion in government and vice-versa). I am not going to break down Mark's discussion of these thinkers, but when you read Ameritopia you will see how closely tied they were and how carefully and thoughtfully those who crafted our Constitution considered all of these matters. Remember, the utopian/Statist ideal goes all the way back to Plato - who by the way also insisted on universal healthcare - and its rationing. These are NOT new or "modern" ideas! The Framers were familiar with all these propositions and had seen from experience and from history their various effects on humanity and human society - and they soundly and forcefully REJECTED the things that have now crept back in - repackaged - via Wilson, FDR, Obama, statists in the judiciary, and the massive bureaucratic and unelected 4th branch of government (that exercises executive, legislative, and judicial power all at once).

The tendency of government throughout history has been toward tyranny. Democracy alone is no safeguard against it. The only bulwark against tyranny is the clear thinking of the people, and their adamant affirmation of true human rights buttressed by a firm affirmation of the rule of law, and equally adamant rejection of all things that would thwart such affirmation. Statism/utopianism seeks to transform the United States of America into a tyranny ruled by a busybody elite. They are not all ill-intentioned; they have in many cases simply failed to examine their premises or to think through the unintended consequences. In some cases, though, they have thought through the long-term consequences and just figured that they and their progeny will come out on top within a future tyrannical society. Who knows, but they need to be opposed in matters of substance, and principles of liberty and justice need to be upheld once again as a beacon of true hope, for the sake of freedom-loving people everywhere.

Again, I recommend this book because of its insightful analysis, and also because of the great service Mark has done to us by summarizing and placing into context what would amount to many thousands of pages of reading of primary material. Those things should be read too by as many as are able, but the matter is time-sensitive and important and the reality is that there are a great many people who cannot handle or carve out the time to digest so much in short order. We need all hands on deck.
Ces commentaires ont-ils été utiles ?   Dites-le-nous

Passages les plus surlignés

 (Qu'est-ce que c'est ?)
&quote;
Utopianism substitutes glorious predictions and unachievable promises for knowledge, science, and reason, while laying claim to them all. &quote;
Marqué par 301 utilisateurs Kindle
&quote;
Equality, as understood by the American Founders, is the natural right of every individual to live freely under self-government, to acquire and retain the property he creates through his own labor, and to be treated impartially before a just law. &quote;
Marqué par 293 utilisateurs Kindle
&quote;
Utopianism also attempts to shape and dominate the individual by doing two things at once: it strips the individual of his uniqueness, making him indistinguishable from the multitudes that form what is commonly referred to as the masses, but it simultaneously assigns him a group identity based on race, ethnicity, age, gender, income, etc., to highlight differences within the masses. &quote;
Marqué par 270 utilisateurs Kindle

Discussions entre clients

Le forum concernant ce produit
Discussion Réponses Message le plus récent
Pas de discussions pour l'instant

Posez des questions, partagez votre opinion, gagnez en compréhension
Démarrer une nouvelle discussion
Thème:
Première publication:
Aller s'identifier
 

Rechercher parmi les discussions des clients
Rechercher dans toutes les discussions Amazon
   



Rechercher des articles similaires par rubrique


ARRAY(0xa7985e40)