BREAKING NEWS

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

Western Rome was over by 400 AD. Constantinople had another millennium though.

The transition from aristocracy to democracy never seems to go very well.

Liberty is so rare (U.S. only), there’s not enough precedent.

Well, we certainly agree on all that.

The way I figure it, liberty and democracy are both valuable, but they make uneasy bedfellows. Here's hoping the U.S. can avoid sacrificing too much of either.

[kybkh]

Western Rome was over by 400 AD. Constantinople had another millennium though.

The transition from aristocracy to democracy never seems to go very well.

Liberty is so rare (U.S. only), there’s not enough precedent.

Well, we certainly agree on all that.

The way I figure it, liberty and democracy are both valuable, but they make uneasy bedfellows. Here's hoping the U.S. can avoid sacrificing too much of either.

You know why liberty is so rare? Because normally the rulers have considerably more wealth than the rulees but, thanks to slavery the american, non-aristocrats were able to create enough wealth they were able to "buy" their freedom. So while some may say slavery was America's original sin, it was actually what made ending the english empire's reign of terror come to an end and allowed the creation of a free land for all who would embrace it.

[SuburbanFarmer]

Western Rome was over by 400 AD. Constantinople had another millennium though.

The transition from aristocracy to democracy never seems to go very well.

Liberty is so rare (U.S. only), there’s not enough precedent.

Well, we certainly agree on all that.

The way I figure it, liberty and democracy are both valuable, but they make uneasy bedfellows. Here's hoping the U.S. can avoid sacrificing too much of either.

You know why liberty is so rare? Because normally the rulers have considerably more wealth than the rulees but, thanks to slavery the american, non-aristocrats were able to create enough wealth they were able to "buy" their freedom. So while some may say slavery was America's original sin, it was actually what made ending the english empire's reign of terror come to an end and allowed the creation of a free land for all who would embrace it.

... that’s an interesting reading of history.

You sure the French didn’t play a role in the rebellion? Or that the English empire ended in the 18th century?

[Martin Hash]

Slavery? Somebody's been reading the 1619 project. If it was slavery then South America would have had liberty too since they imported 10x more slaves. If slavery caused liberty, the Middle East would be the biggest liberty nation. If serfs & peons are the equivalent of slaves then all of Europe & China would have liberty; not to mention Africa itself.

Liberty is the result of an ideology and happenstance; women couldn't vote at the time, they're the egalitarians.

[kybkh]

Fair enough, I still figure the wealth and leisure time slavery afforded the Founding Fathers was crucial in creating the happenstance that led to the Revolution and the winning of the war.

[Martin Hash]

Fair enough, I still figure the wealth and freedom of leisure time slavery afforded the Founding Fathers was crucial in creating the happenstance that led to the Revolution and the winning of the war.

Pirates made lots of money too, maybe it was them? Or goldminers? I've heard only rich people can have good ideas.

[Martin Hash]

Being White? Being from Europe? Being Male? How much credit do we give those factors for liberty?

Maybe it was the funny wigs? Maybe the funny clothes? Maybe the funny way they talked? I can come up with lots of causal connections if you give me a chance... Wait, maybe those or correlative; I always get the two mixed up.

[kybkh]

How's the saying going? I toil so you can be spoiled?? Obviously the merchant/landed class of the US led the charge in creating a new nation. They were enabled to do so because they weren't worried about where their next meal was coming from. Am I missing something? Their wealth and status also gave them standing when dealing with the foreign nations.

Not sure how you discount the wealth generated by slavery when most of the influential leaders of the time owned slaves.

I am not saying this to detract from the achievements, my point is that without slavery and the extraordinary wealth it created, the likelihood of a class of citizens rising up that could take on the British aristocracy is remote.

[Martin Hash]

Aristocracy all over Europe was the same thing. Where's the liberty there?

[Xenophon]

The United States only had slavery for 80 years, fyi.