Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2016 10:39:18 GMT -5
What you write is true, but it is still and issue we wrangle with. The strength of the federal government is constantly being debated, and state's rights is still a matter of debate and contest. We are both a confederation and a federation. I don't see it changing in the near future. Certainly your points are well taken. As one who has years of Libertarian experience, I have a natural inclination to States Rights. Through those years continued study of such as James Madison and the history of Confederacies have altered my point of view to being less intense. In this path I have become far more strongly a Constitutionalist. There, States Rights are defined within the Constitution’s Federalist approach and not in a Confederate approach. That this means less direct involvement of the citizen in government is true and that is somewhat unsettling to an hoary old anarchist and libertarian, but that same Federalist Constitutional approach recognizes the Common Law origin of Rights and Sovereignty being within the individual prior to the Constitution with the functional reality that the Constitution provides no rights to anyone and can operate only on defined functionality from within the Constitution. Of course these realities do not eliminate contention between citizens, but those contentions are part of (actually a desired element) of the James Madison approach. That is, rather that producing a homogeneous political stew, it is the abrasive contact between factions which are the role of the citizens. Abrasive contact that assures no single interest and perspective gaining control of government. Rather the political body continually developing new approaches. Of course this is dependent on political discourse working within the Constitutional structure. Since the early 1900s this has been challenged with the Woodrow Wilson theory of administrative government which is meant to work outside of Constitutional government with the singular goal of efficient government. Of course this is entirely outside of the intent of the Founders and the structure of the Constitution. Sorry for the rambling, but once started my background often takes over and one thing just leads to another. Don't apologize. I enjoy and appreciate your well thought-out posts. You seem to write from experience instead of knee-jerk reaction. Carry on. P.S. - I also appreciate your cohesive writing. Just one question: What does men an tol mean?
|
|
|
Post by Soulman on Jul 29, 2016 10:47:17 GMT -5
we had a loan NOT A HAND OUT during ww2 and we finally repaid that loan IN FULL about two or three yrs ago what gratitude we owe no gratitude to anyone ... Quite right Mouse. May I also suggest, that while these moneys were technically a loan, from a self-serving perspective of the United States, they were as much an investment in Europe in the interests of the United States as anything. Without a strong rebuilding of Europe into major economic powers (include Japan in that assessment) the world would have taken a very dark path with little hope but continued war in the West. Such would not have been in the interests of the United States or anyone for that matter. Today we could make an analogy from that period to the current period of needs for energy. A case can be made that having Europe dependent on the Mideast for energy, is a major handicap on the economic growth for the West. The United States can supply all the energy it needs plus all the energy needs of Europe. In fact, wean the West from any energy needs from the Mideast. If in that effort the energy sources of Canada and Mexico are included, it is likely that North America and Europe will have all energy needs covered for 200 to 400 years based on current known sources. Add to this the coal reserves both in North America and Eastern Europe and there is no need to deal with the Mideast at all. This would be an investment in the best interests of the West as well as an investment in World Peace. A good post.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2016 10:51:50 GMT -5
we had a loan NOT A HAND OUT during ww2 and we finally repaid that loan IN FULL about two or three yrs ago what gratitude we owe no gratitude to anyone ... Quite right Mouse. May I also suggest, that while these moneys were technically a loan, from a self-serving perspective of the United States, they were as much an investment in Europe in the interests of the United States as anything. Without a strong rebuilding of Europe into major economic powers (include Japan in that assessment) the world would have taken a very dark path with little hope but continued war in the West. Such would not have been in the interests of the United States or anyone for that matter. Today we could make an analogy from that period to the current period of needs for energy. A case can be made that having Europe dependent on the Mideast for energy, is a major handicap on the economic growth for the West. The United States can supply all the energy it needs plus all the energy needs of Europe. In fact, wean the West from any energy needs from the Mideast. If in that effort the energy sources of Canada and Mexico are included, it is likely that North America and Europe will have all energy needs covered for 200 to 400 years based on current known sources. Add to this the coal reserves both in North America and Eastern Europe and there is no need to deal with the Mideast at all. This would be an investment in the best interests of the West as well as an investment in World Peace. I have to comment, the loans were at such a low interest-rate, and so many deferments were provided (and over such a long period of time) that the U.S. actually ended-up putting out a great deal of money. A million dollars in 1940 was not the same as a million payback in 2006 (with negligible interest.) I am sorry to use the term "hand-outs" and I retract that. I get irritated at the typical British stance. However, the Marshall Plan monies, of which Britain was the major recipient, was squandered. That's a fact.
|
|
|
Post by men an tol on Jul 29, 2016 11:10:41 GMT -5
Certainly your points are well taken. As one who has years of Libertarian experience, I have a natural inclination to States Rights. Through those years continued study of such as James Madison and the history of Confederacies have altered my point of view to being less intense. In this path I have become far more strongly a Constitutionalist. There, States Rights are defined within the Constitution’s Federalist approach and not in a Confederate approach. That this means less direct involvement of the citizen in government is true and that is somewhat unsettling to an hoary old anarchist and libertarian, but that same Federalist Constitutional approach recognizes the Common Law origin of Rights and Sovereignty being within the individual prior to the Constitution with the functional reality that the Constitution provides no rights to anyone and can operate only on defined functionality from within the Constitution. Of course these realities do not eliminate contention between citizens, but those contentions are part of (actually a desired element) of the James Madison approach. That is, rather that producing a homogeneous political stew, it is the abrasive contact between factions which are the role of the citizens. Abrasive contact that assures no single interest and perspective gaining control of government. Rather the political body continually developing new approaches. Of course this is dependent on political discourse working within the Constitutional structure. Since the early 1900s this has been challenged with the Woodrow Wilson theory of administrative government which is meant to work outside of Constitutional government with the singular goal of efficient government. Of course this is entirely outside of the intent of the Founders and the structure of the Constitution. Sorry for the rambling, but once started my background often takes over and one thing just leads to another. Don't apologize. I enjoy and appreciate your well thought-out posts. You seem to write from experience instead of knee-jerk reaction. Carry on. P.S. - I also appreciate your cohesive writing. Just one question: What does men an tol mean? My people first came to the Americas during the early 1700s. They came from Scotland, Wales, and Cornwall. In Cornwall is a small (read tiny) and ancient village with our family name and North of that is the Bodmin Moor. As with so much of this land, there are many types of ‘Standing Stones.’ One of these is The Menantol. The Menantol is a large round (wheel like) stone with a hole in the middle. It stands up right and the tale of its history is that it is a magic stone. That is, if someone is sick, friends and family take them to the stone, lift them up and pass them through the hole (I think that it is three times). This will cure the illness. There are also the Dancing Sisters Stones. Supposedly Sisters dancing on the moor when they shouldn’t have been doing it and they were turned to stone, doomed to eternal dancing in place. Of course rational people such as you or I, know these are only stories, but I can’t help but wonder if there isn’t some degree of truth in them. When my people came here to the Americas, they went into the mountains, Virginia, Tennessee, Georgia, the Carolinas, and they brought with them these stories (beliefs). In my father’s time (as a very young boy) there was an old (witch) woman in North Georgia. If someone was injured and bleeding, it was said that she could lay her hands on the wound and say words from the Bible and the bleeding would stop. A myth? A story? I suppose, but I knew people who absolutely believed such to be true. So, for me The Menantol is only a story, a myth, of course. Well Maybe. But then maybe not.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 30, 2016 0:38:39 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by men an tol on Jul 30, 2016 6:58:42 GMT -5
Please feel free Shades to post them or any of that area. While we (my family) has a connection to that area, I suspect that many others also have connections there. The village that we have a connection to (at least by name) is Herodsfoot. Of course any of the 'Standing Stones' represent a special historic past for humans.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 30, 2016 7:54:20 GMT -5
Don't apologize. I enjoy and appreciate your well thought-out posts. You seem to write from experience instead of knee-jerk reaction. Carry on. P.S. - I also appreciate your cohesive writing. Just one question: What does men an tol mean? My people first came to the Americas during the early 1700s. They came from Scotland, Wales, and Cornwall. In Cornwall is a small (read tiny) and ancient village with our family name and North of that is the Bodmin Moor. As with so much of this land, there are many types of ‘Standing Stones.’ One of these is The Menantol. The Menantol is a large round (wheel like) stone with a hole in the middle. It stands up right and the tale of its history is that it is a magic stone. That is, if someone is sick, friends and family take them to the stone, lift them up and pass them through the hole (I think that it is three times). This will cure the illness. There are also the Dancing Sisters Stones. Supposedly Sisters dancing on the moor when they shouldn’t have been doing it and they were turned to stone, doomed to eternal dancing in place. Of course rational people such as you or I, know these are only stories, but I can’t help but wonder if there isn’t some degree of truth in them. When my people came here to the Americas, they went into the mountains, Virginia, Tennessee, Georgia, the Carolinas, and they brought with them these stories (beliefs). In my father’s time (as a very young boy) there was an old (witch) woman in North Georgia. If someone was injured and bleeding, it was said that she could lay her hands on the wound and say words from the Bible and the bleeding would stop. A myth? A story? I suppose, but I knew people who absolutely believed such to be true. So, for me The Menantol is only a story, a myth, of course. Well Maybe. But then maybe not. It's amazing that you have such a detailed and specific family history. I only have documented family history on my mother's father side, which is dramatic, but doesn't include those very specific, intimate details.
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Jul 30, 2016 7:56:50 GMT -5
Please feel free Shades to post them or any of that area. While we (my family) has a connection to that area, I suspect that many others also have connections there. The village that we have a connection to (at least by name) is Herodsfoot. Of course any of the 'Standing Stones' represent a special historic past for humans. we have a couple of standing stones nearby in a field..and I think I did tell you theres a local farm named herod farm our area was a very Celtic area back in the day and one of the last big battles between Celts and Romans took place about a mile or so away. .plus were have Roman roads and the remains of Roman camps galore near by friend of mine is an archeologist much involved with digs pertaining to the Roman and Celts etc..some good finds too during the digs[which can only take place during our so called summers]also in this area, are so I am kept up to date on finds etc also along side standing stones being used as indicators to travelers are Coombs..which were for centuries used by traverlers as landmarks for their journeys a Coomb is a natural half circle of a not terribly high cliff the base of which is very rock strewn but capable of being seen from afar..in length usually a few miles[2-6] along the edge and height enough to cause serious damage if one fell over the edge a couple of years ago my friend was charged with mapping the old Roman roads and pathways in the area..this had to be done in the winter when its so much easier to make out the differences of the ground...it was really interesting
|
|