Monday 21 February 2022
The Associate by John Grisham
Tuesday 8 February 2022
RIGHTS OF MAN by Thomas Paine
It appears Paine was writing before the French Revolution got bloody and long before the Napoleonic wars. In the beginning both the American and the French Revolution must have seemed the ideal way to go and Paine can definitely be marked down as an idealist.
There was a lot wrong with how France had been governed before the revolution. The aristocracy didn't have to pay tax and so the tax burden was mainly put onto the shoulders of the developing middle-class. There had been previous unrest in France but this time the peasants had the middle-class on their side. Otherwise there could not have been success. The clergy remained, for the most part, on the side of the aristocracy and so paid the price for being so. To this day religious items are not welcome in civic buildings. There is still the separation of state and religion.
Among the accumulated woes of a century were wars that had gone badly for the French and disastrous money making schemes to do with colonization that had sent the Monarchy broke. The king tried on numerous occasions to get the Aristocracy to vote for their properties and general incomes to be taxed but they would have none of that. Meanwhile life in cities such as Paris were deteriorating. The uprising could have been prevented but that is not what happened.
Investing ultimate power in one man or one woman is argued against by Paine. Also he found the idea of providing a king or queen with millions to spend each year, out of the pockets of those being governed, an unjust expenditure. According to Paine, Washington wasn't paid to be president of the USA but did a great job anyway. Regardless, he had wealth and therefore security others of his day did not have.
Paine makes much out of the aristocracy of a Monarchy being generally self-serving and yet, in this day and age, in order for someone to become president of the USA, it takes capital that has to come from somewhere including those born into wealth and wish to become wealthier. It also takes funds in the UK and Australia to run for Prime Minister as well as party support. People need to know who they will be voting for and why. Successful campaigns, especially in the USA, are not free. They have to be funded. So does this make those with money equivalent to the aristocracy of the past? I would say yes.
It should also be noted the role freemasonry played in US history. Benjamin Franklin, for example, was a freemason and cities such as New York, Philadelphia and Washington D.C. owed their financial prominence to Freemasonry. This doesn't seem to factor into any of Paine's arguments for Democracy, American style, being better than Monarchy. What's more, Freemasonry has also played a role in Australian society and no doubt also that of Canada and Britain. The compass and other symbols of freemasonry can be found today on buildings in various parts of Sydney, New South Wales as well as Bulli on the south coast of New South Wales.
Paine remained hopeful that democracy together with capitalism would eventually outshine and replace Monarchy and dictatorship throughout Europe if not the entire world. The saving grace of democracy is that it is flexible and no one can be president or prime minister for life. There are elections and so the possibility for improvement always exists. Communism, as far as I understand it, can only work in small communities and not for any great length of time.
One of the things Paine was interested in introducing to the British was the old age pension which would come about approximately a century after Rights of Man. He worked it out to be affordable and for the general good of all.
Today the old age pension in Australia and no doubt elsewhere is slowly being replaced by superannuation. When I asked an economist a few years about the money already gathered by taxation for the old age pension for people reaching 65, I was informed it had already been spent by the government.
For generations now taxation has been the means of providing the poor right up to the middle classes with a way to live in their declining years. Can superannuation really provide an adequate safety net?
I know of a worker who had his super so reduced thanks to collapsing insurance companies and banks in the USA he had to continue working long after he wanted to retire. Could this happen again? It is quite possible and so there may always be the need for an old age pension.
-
Poisonous People by Lyn McConchie! A New Zealand writer takes on Sherlock Holmes and with some success. Two not so short stories concerni...
-
Darling Harbour, Sydney, NSW, Australia These photos were taken about five years ago when no one had ever heard of the corona virus. I r...