The following links provide basic background material on issues discussed on this blog.
PLEASE SUGGEST ADDITIONAL LINKS BY COMMENTING BELOW
RECENT INTERVIEWS AND ARTICLES:
- 1/20/12 Karl Denninger Interview – Leverage -How Cheap Money Is Destroying The World
- 1/18/12 Politico: The Bain of Mitt Romney’s Campaign
- 1/ /12 Josh Kosman MSNBC Interview
- 1/16/12 Josh Kosman January,16 2012 – FoxBusiness Interview – The Good and Bad of Bain Capital
- 1/15/12 Josh Kosman RTV January 15 Interview
- 1/15/12 Josh Kosman January 15, 2012 – Press Conference
- 1/14/12 Myrtle Beach Online: Romney’s Bain Capital Made Millions Off Georgetown Steel While Morale, Finances Suffered
- 1/12/12 Josh Kosman January 12, 2012 – Interview With NewDeal20
- 7/ /10 Josh Kosman – *****July 2010 PBS Newshour Interview*****
OLDER BOOKS AND REFERENCE MATERIAL:
****Richard Salsman ****
AND AN IMPORTANT NOTE:
This blog is not the time or place to relive the debate between Jefferson and Hamilton, but here is an example of the type of argument that Newtonians should be prepared to address. What a sad testament of the depths to which the reputation of the author of the Declaration of Independence has fallen!
“Verbal assaults by anti-capitalists like Gingrich, Perry and Santorum rely not only on Marxist and Christian prejudices against money-making but also on populism, a century-old American creed which holds that “the people” are the metaphysical equal of God on Earth, and as such must be assiduously obeyed and served. Populism glorifies “the people” per se, and in conformity with democracy (rule by “the people”), it endorses anything the numerical majority may wish, regardless of whether it’s true, right, or just.
In a democratic age populism appeals to political demagogues greedy to secure a majority of votes against elite rivals who on principle refuse to pander to mob passions. Populism always saw religious and the pastoral life of manual or farm labor as morally superior; in America it was rooted in the Jeffersonian myth that only farmers created wealth, that “those who labor in the earth are the chosen people of God,” while all others (those engaged in commerce, industry, and finance) were supposedly unproductive parasites. As a faith-based creed, populism always tended to corrode respect for elite achievement, individualism, urban life, secularism, and capitalism.”
For an eloquent contemporary explanation and defense of the Anti-Federalist position championed by Thomas Jefferson, see the 1824 essay CONSOLIDATION by Thomas Cooper, MD. Cooper was a close friend of Jefferson and president of the University of South Carolina College. Here is Cooper’s summary of the position denounced as political demagoguery:
The Antifederalist, Republican, Democrat, Radical (quocumque nomme gaudes) is of opinion that as history clearly shows the tendency of all power to exceed its proper limits, no more power should in any case be delegated than the circumstances imperiously require to produce the goods intended. That the holders of all power should be responsible for the use of it to those who gave it. That if any excess be excusable on either side, it is better to concede rather too little than too much, as it is much more easy to add than diminish. They are of the opinion that the people and the state governments of this country never meant to institute a magnificent, imposing, expensive, national government, with extensive powers and high prerogatives, calculated to control or prostrate the quiet, unpretending, cheap and salutary governments of the separate states — but a government with so much power, and no more, as might be necessary to manage the political transactions of common and general interest in which each and every state had the same common concern; interfering with state authorities as little as possible. That the more simple the apparatus, the fewer the officers of government, and the less they required state rights to be conceded, the better. That if power sufficient be not conceded, it ought not to be boldly seized by direct usurpation, or clandestinely obtained by taking advantage of verbal ambiguity, by implication and construction, but applied for by submitting the case under the constitutional form of an AMENDMENT to the legislatures of the respective states; this being the mode of proceeding specially designated by the framers of our Constitution to meet the case. They are of opinion that although parsimony be one thing and frugality another, the cheapest government is the best government if it answers the purpose in other respects. They particularly object to expensive standing armies, and even to a great extent of naval power in time of peace, not that these institutions should be reduced to insignificance, but kept under cautious control. They hold that the public character and conduct of all public men and public bodies, from the President to a Tide Waiter, is fair subject for temperate remark; that nothing brings a government so surely into contempt as its dread of discussion and examination, and that in all such cases the verdict on trial ought to be with the jury on the law and on the fact, uncontrolled by the court. They adhere to the principles of public liberty as set forth in the Declaration of Independence, and in the Federal Constitution, particularly claiming a free press, untrammeled by any previous restriction, and extending to every subject of human investigation, as the dearest and most valuable characteristic of a truly republican government.
For my own part, I go farther, and reviewing the events of the last thirty years, I am decidedly of opinion that the Republican Party has forgotten, in great part, the principles that originally characterized it; and they have permitted and acquiesced in one encroachment after another, til the power of the President of the United States, the power of the Congress of the United States, and more than all, the power of the Supreme Court of the United States (the most dangerous body in the Union) HAS INCREASED, IS INCREASING, AND OUGHT TO BE DIMINISHED.