Date of publication: 2017-07-09 12:16
There is an observation in Machiavel , with regard to the conquests of Alexander the Great, which I think, may be regarded as one of those eternal political truths, which no time nor accidents can vary. It may seem strange, says that politician, that such sudden conquests, as those of Alexander , should be possessed so peaceably by his successors, and that the Persians , during all the confusions and civil wars among the Greeks , never made the smallest effort towards the recovery of their former independent government. To satisfy us concerning the cause of this remarkable event, we may
We may observe, had the historian been relating Nero ’s extravagance, and had he made use of such an expression, it would have had much less weight these rhetorical exaggerations being so apt to creep into an author’s style, even when the most chaste and correct. But it is mentioned by Herodian only by the by, in relating the quarrels between Geta and Caracalla.
Can one imagine, that it had ever been possible, by any laws, or even by any art or industry, to have kept all the money in Spain , which the galleons have brought from the Indies ? Or that all commodities could be sold in France for a tenth of the price which they would yield on the other side of the Pyrenees , without finding their way thither, and draining from that immense treasure? What other reason, indeed, is there, why all nations, at present, gain in their trade with Spain and Portugal but because it is impossible to heap up money, more than any fluid, beyond its proper level? The sovereigns of these countries have shown, that they wanted not inclination to keep their gold and silver to themselves, had it been in any degree practicable.
As for Fundamentalism, it is defined as folowign the Fundamental tenets of the Protestant Christian Faith. It 8767 s not all about Authoritrianism and it isnt about oppressing others who disagree. Thats assumed because we use the term Fundamentalist as a pejorative these days, but tis not inherant in what Fundamentalism is.
So you agree the episode was meant as an attack on the Church, but you believe it was limited to the Church as it was, not as it is now. I disagree, why attack the Church at all unless you are trying to say something relevant to today? I don 8767 t know whose decision it was to include Bruno and to corrupt his story, but I can 8767 t see it as anything but a deliberate move to cause controversy and that screams Seth MacFarlane. But it doesn 8767 t matter if I 8767 ve got the wrong culprit, the crime is the same.
8775 What you have missed in your comment is that the Roman Inquisition and Bruno 8767 s murder happened in the midst of one of the greatest paradigm shifts in recorded human history, the Copernican Revolution. 8776
Disregard also means 8775 to treat as unworthy of consideration or respect 8776 . What I 8767 m getting at is that many so-called scientists have the belief that only science can bring answers, and that anything outside the scope of science is unworthy of consideration. The belief in a god, in other planes of existences, in an afterlife for instance.
The only passage I meet with in antiquity, where the obligation of obedience to government is ascribed to a promise, is in Plato ’s Crito : where Socrates refuses to escape from prison, because he had tacitly promised to obey the laws. Thus he builds a tory consequence of passive obedience, on a whig foundation of the original contract.
The lower sort of people and small proprietors are good judges enough of one not very distant from them in rank or habitation and therefore, in their parochial meetings, will probably chuse the best, or nearly the best representative: But they are wholly unfit for county-meetings, and for electing into the higher offices of the republic. Their ignorance gives the grandees an opportunity of deceiving them.