http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/04/07/abj/ The Sweet Release of Reason Thu, 09 Feb 2012 18:11:50 +0000 hourly 1 http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/04/07/abj/#comment-13570 Daniel Tue, 11 Nov 2008 09:00:16 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=1385#comment-13570 Jefferson was the man. I think we can all agree that slavery was terrible, Jefferson knew this himself. I'm sorry you're so offended but Thomas Jefferson did more for the founding of this country's government than any other single man. Jefferson was the man. I think we can all agree that slavery was terrible, Jefferson knew this himself. I'm sorry you're so offended but Thomas Jefferson did more for the founding of this country's government than any other single man.

]]> http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/04/07/abj/#comment-13569 Daniel Tue, 11 Nov 2008 01:00:16 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=1385#comment-13569 Jefferson was the man. I think we can all agree that slavery was terrible, Jefferson knew this himself. I'm sorry you're so offended but Thomas Jefferson did more for the founding of this country's government than any other single man. Jefferson was the man. I think we can all agree that slavery was terrible, Jefferson knew this himself. I'm sorry you're so offended but Thomas Jefferson did more for the founding of this country's government than any other single man.

]]> http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/04/07/abj/#comment-13568 Chris Newman Tue, 22 Apr 2008 04:46:43 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=1385#comment-13568 Interesting conversation. I just finished Chernow's bio of Hamilton, which I strongly recommend to anyone, but particularly to his vehement detractors. He's a fascinating character who was both amazingly prescient and, from a libertarian perspective, dangerously wrong about important things. I actually think he's an object lesson in how the siren call of statism can attract intelligent, moral people who really do want to do good. The political difference between him and Jefferson can be characterized simply as follows: Jefferson's bete noir was executive tyranny; Hamilton's was mob rule. As libertarians, I think we can agree that either outcome is undesirable, and from there proceed dispassionately to evaluate in a nuanced way the blindspots each man suffered. Demonizing Hamilton and lionizing Jefferson simply doesn't do them justice. In terms of individual character, I actually think it's hard to deny that Hamilton was the more admirable of the two, but he was also undeniably the first best example in our history of the "fatal conceit." But give the man some credit: he was a self made man, and the only one among the major founders (except Franklin) who actually understood and appreciated capitalism. Jefferson wasn't just against a central bank; he was against any bank at all and inveighed against capital finance as nothing more than gambling. The anti-capitalist rhetoric of modern American liberalism starts with him. Yes, Hamilton was far too ready to use central power to set up and fund the institutions he thought America needed to hold its own against the European powers. At least he was coherent and consistent. Jefferson and Madison wanted to do without taxes and standing armies, which is great so long as you have some other way to save the country from war. Instead they instigated conflict with England, and finally got us a war that we were unable to fight. Yes, Hamilton put too much power in the federal government and the executive, but he also (unlike Jefferson) respected the importance of an independent judiciary that could reign it in. Jefferson postured (rightly) against the Sedition Act on constitutional grounds, but had no problem with (indeed, abetted) state courts persecuting Federalist journalists. Meanwhile, Hamilton as a private lawyer is responsible for enshrining the principle that truth is a defense to libel. In short, reality is far more interesting than bad Hamilton good Jefferson, or vice versa. I for one wish the two men had been able to respect and learn from each other. Someone who combined Hamilton's administrative brilliance, practical mind, and understanding of business with Jefferson's wariness of centralized power would have been a great founder indeed. Interesting conversation. I just finished Chernow’s bio of Hamilton, which I strongly recommend to anyone, but particularly to his vehement detractors. He’s a fascinating character who was both amazingly prescient and, from a libertarian perspective, dangerously wrong about important things. I actually think he’s an object lesson in how the siren call of statism can attract intelligent, moral people who really do want to do good. The political difference between him and Jefferson can be characterized simply as follows: Jefferson’s bete noir was executive tyranny; Hamilton’s was mob rule. As libertarians, I think we can agree that either outcome is undesirable, and from there proceed dispassionately to evaluate in a nuanced way the blindspots each man suffered. Demonizing Hamilton and lionizing Jefferson simply doesn’t do them justice. In terms of individual character, I actually think it’s hard to deny that Hamilton was the more admirable of the two, but he was also undeniably the first best example in our history of the “fatal conceit.” But give the man some credit: he was a self made man, and the only one among the major founders (except Franklin) who actually understood and appreciated capitalism. Jefferson wasn’t just against a central bank; he was against any bank at all and inveighed against capital finance as nothing more than gambling. The anti-capitalist rhetoric of modern American liberalism starts with him. Yes, Hamilton was far too ready to use central power to set up and fund the institutions he thought America needed to hold its own against the European powers. At least he was coherent and consistent. Jefferson and Madison wanted to do without taxes and standing armies, which is great so long as you have some other way to save the country from war. Instead they instigated conflict with England, and finally got us a war that we were unable to fight. Yes, Hamilton put too much power in the federal government and the executive, but he also (unlike Jefferson) respected the importance of an independent judiciary that could reign it in. Jefferson postured (rightly) against the Sedition Act on constitutional grounds, but had no problem with (indeed, abetted) state courts persecuting Federalist journalists. Meanwhile, Hamilton as a private lawyer is responsible for enshrining the principle that truth is a defense to libel. In short, reality is far more interesting than bad Hamilton good Jefferson, or vice versa. I for one wish the two men had been able to respect and learn from each other. Someone who combined Hamilton’s administrative brilliance, practical mind, and understanding of business with Jefferson’s wariness of centralized power would have been a great founder indeed.

]]> http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/04/07/abj/#comment-13572 Chris Newman Tue, 22 Apr 2008 04:46:00 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=1385#comment-13572 Interesting conversation. I just finished Chernow's bio of Hamilton, which I strongly recommend to anyone, but particularly to his vehement detractors. He's a fascinating character who was both amazingly prescient and, from a libertarian perspective, dangerously wrong about important things. I actually think he's an object lesson in how the siren call of statism can attract intelligent, moral people who really do want to do good. The political difference between him and Jefferson can be characterized simply as follows: Jefferson's bete noir was executive tyranny; Hamilton's was mob rule. As libertarians, I think we can agree that either outcome is undesirable, and from there proceed dispassionately to evaluate in a nuanced way the blindspots each man suffered. Demonizing Hamilton and lionizing Jefferson simply doesn't do them justice. In terms of individual character, I actually think it's hard to deny that Hamilton was the more admirable of the two, but he was also undeniably the first best example in our history of the "fatal conceit." But give the man some credit: he was a self made man, and the only one among the major founders (except Franklin) who actually understood and appreciated capitalism. Jefferson wasn't just against a central bank; he was against any bank at all and inveighed against capital finance as nothing more than gambling. The anti-capitalist rhetoric of modern American liberalism starts with him. Yes, Hamilton was far too ready to use central power to set up and fund the institutions he thought America needed to hold its own against the European powers. At least he was coherent and consistent. Jefferson and Madison wanted to do without taxes and standing armies, which is great so long as you have some other way to save the country from war. Instead they instigated conflict with England, and finally got us a war that we were unable to fight. Yes, Hamilton put too much power in the federal government and the executive, but he also (unlike Jefferson) respected the importance of an independent judiciary that could reign it in. Jefferson postured (rightly) against the Sedition Act on constitutional grounds, but had no problem with (indeed, abetted) state courts persecuting Federalist journalists. Meanwhile, Hamilton as a private lawyer is responsible for enshrining the principle that truth is a defense to libel. In short, reality is far more interesting than bad Hamilton good Jefferson, or vice versa. I for one wish the two men had been able to respect and learn from each other. Someone who combined Hamilton's administrative brilliance, practical mind, and understanding of business with Jefferson's wariness of centralized power would have been a great founder indeed. Interesting conversation. I just finished Chernow’s bio of Hamilton, which I strongly recommend to anyone, but particularly to his vehement detractors. He’s a fascinating character who was both amazingly prescient and, from a libertarian perspective, dangerously wrong about important things. I actually think he’s an object lesson in how the siren call of statism can attract intelligent, moral people who really do want to do good. The political difference between him and Jefferson can be characterized simply as follows: Jefferson’s bete noir was executive tyranny; Hamilton’s was mob rule. As libertarians, I think we can agree that either outcome is undesirable, and from there proceed dispassionately to evaluate in a nuanced way the blindspots each man suffered. Demonizing Hamilton and lionizing Jefferson simply doesn’t do them justice. In terms of individual character, I actually think it’s hard to deny that Hamilton was the more admirable of the two, but he was also undeniably the first best example in our history of the “fatal conceit.” But give the man some credit: he was a self made man, and the only one among the major founders (except Franklin) who actually understood and appreciated capitalism. Jefferson wasn’t just against a central bank; he was against any bank at all and inveighed against capital finance as nothing more than gambling. The anti-capitalist rhetoric of modern American liberalism starts with him. Yes, Hamilton was far too ready to use central power to set up and fund the institutions he thought America needed to hold its own against the European powers. At least he was coherent and consistent. Jefferson and Madison wanted to do without taxes and standing armies, which is great so long as you have some other way to save the country from war. Instead they instigated conflict with England, and finally got us a war that we were unable to fight. Yes, Hamilton put too much power in the federal government and the executive, but he also (unlike Jefferson) respected the importance of an independent judiciary that could reign it in. Jefferson postured (rightly) against the Sedition Act on constitutional grounds, but had no problem with (indeed, abetted) state courts persecuting Federalist journalists. Meanwhile, Hamilton as a private lawyer is responsible for enshrining the principle that truth is a defense to libel. In short, reality is far more interesting than bad Hamilton good Jefferson, or vice versa. I for one wish the two men had been able to respect and learn from each other. Someone who combined Hamilton’s administrative brilliance, practical mind, and understanding of business with Jefferson’s wariness of centralized power would have been a great founder indeed.

]]> http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/04/07/abj/#comment-13567 Rad Geek People’s Daily 2008-04-18 – Just shut the fuck up Fri, 18 Apr 2008 20:13:39 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=1385#comment-13567 [...] —Will Wilkinson (2008-04-07), comments on ABJ @ The Fly Bottle … what I would like to stress, at the moment, is that if you ever, ever find yourself thinking that it might possibly be appropriate to reply to a remark like that by saying something like this: [...] [...] —Will Wilkinson (2008-04-07), comments on ABJ @ The Fly Bottle … what I would like to stress, at the moment, is that if you ever, ever find yourself thinking that it might possibly be appropriate to reply to a remark like that by saying something like this: [...]

]]> http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/04/07/abj/#comment-13566 Pages tagged "baleful" Wed, 16 Apr 2008 06:15:48 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=1385#comment-13566 [...] tagged balefulOwn a Wordpress blog? Make monetization easier with the WP Affiliate Pro plugin. ABJ! saved by 3 others     JacobBarton000 bookmarked on 04/16/08 | [...] [...] tagged balefulOwn a WordPress blog? Make monetization easier with the WP Affiliate Pro plugin. ABJ! saved by 3 others     JacobBarton000 bookmarked on 04/16/08 | [...]

]]> http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/04/07/abj/#comment-13565 Micha Ghertner Tue, 15 Apr 2008 16:46:05 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=1385#comment-13565 Talk about self-reductio... Talk about self-reductio…

]]> http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/04/07/abj/#comment-13610 Micha Ghertner Tue, 15 Apr 2008 16:46:00 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=1385#comment-13610 Talk about self-reductio... Talk about self-reductio…

]]> http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/04/07/abj/#comment-13564 Bill Tue, 15 Apr 2008 14:57:29 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=1385#comment-13564 Will, give me some of what you are smoking, I could use an escape from reality. You ask do you really think a central bank is worse than owning other human beings? Well yes I do. because actual slavery was eventually abolished, but the central bank is still arouond and it has made slaves of us all. There is no difference, in fact, the bank is worse because it is slowly bleeding the country to death and no one is seriously talking about getting rid of it. Will, give me some of what you are smoking, I could use an escape from reality. You ask do you really think a central bank is worse than owning other human beings? Well yes I do. because actual slavery was eventually abolished, but the central bank is still arouond and it has made slaves of us all. There is no difference, in fact, the bank is worse because it is slowly bleeding the country to death and no one is seriously talking about getting rid of it.

]]> http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/04/07/abj/#comment-13597 Bill Tue, 15 Apr 2008 14:57:00 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=1385#comment-13597 Will, give me some of what you are smoking, I could use an escape from reality. You ask do you really think a central bank is worse than owning other human beings? Well yes I do. because actual slavery was eventually abolished, but the central bank is still arouond and it has made slaves of us all. There is no difference, in fact, the bank is worse because it is slowly bleeding the country to death and no one is seriously talking about getting rid of it. Will, give me some of what you are smoking, I could use an escape from reality. You ask do you really think a central bank is worse than owning other human beings? Well yes I do. because actual slavery was eventually abolished, but the central bank is still arouond and it has made slaves of us all. There is no difference, in fact, the bank is worse because it is slowly bleeding the country to death and no one is seriously talking about getting rid of it.

]]>