Fascinating dynamic: A “company” appointed by the crown and granted land in Virginia oppresses it’s people horribly only to find that the only way the people would prosper was if they were given their own land.
The worldview discussion possible from this article is… Astounding. 🙂
The result of this communism was what we might expect: each individual gained only a negligible amount of goods from his own exertions â€” since the fruit of all these went into the common store â€” and hence had little incentive to work, or to exercise initiative or ingenuity under the difficult conditions in Virginia. And this lack of incentive was doubly reinforced by the fact that the colonist was assured, regardless of how much or how well he worked, of an equal share of goods from the common store. Under such conditions, with the motor of incentive gone from each individual, even the menace of death and starvation for the group as a whole â€” and even a veritable reign of terror by the governors â€” could not provide the necessary spur for each particular man. Â
“National Guard soldiers, who have policing powers, used tear gas to repel a small group of opposition candidates near the legislature on a busy downtown street, TV images showed, after they appeared to clash with parliament workers.
“‘We were walking toward the assembly. We were going to read a document, and without warning the National Guard started firing tear gas,’ candidate Stalin Gonzalez told opposition TV station Globovision. The parliament issued a statement accusing the candidates of trying to force their way into the building.” Â
I have often considered that one of the necessary steps to restoring liberty in America may be to impeach and remove federal judges who have blatantly made up fiction about things allegedly in the constitution. (For example, the recent case of Judge Vaughn Walker and “gay marriage.”)
“Such judicial activism has been an ongoing problem for decades. In response, a conservative legal movement has arisen to offer resistance through public and scholarly argument, the election of constitutionalist presidents and senators, and, ultimately, the appointment of judges and justices who will confine themselves to the requirements of the constitution and refrain from imposing their own values as law. Such efforts have been fruitful but never fully effective. Judicial activism has been slowed but not stopped, with the result that democratic self-governance and the rule of law continue gradually to erode. Since even the incremental surrender of these fundamental principles of American republicanism is unacceptable, it is time to weigh the use of stronger medicine. It is time to consider the impeachment of federal judges as a remedy to judicial activism.”