If ‘we are the government,' then anything a government does to an individual is not only just and untyrannical; it is also ‘voluntary' on the part of the individual concerned... if the government conscripts a man, or throws him into jail for dissident opinion, then he is ‘doing it to himself' and therefore nothing untoward has occurred. Under this reasoning, any Jews murdered by the Nazi government were not murdered, instead, they must have ‘committed suicide,' since they were the government (which was democratically chosen), and therefore anything the government did to them was voluntary on their part... the overwhelming bulk of the people hold this fallacy to a greater or less degree.
Murray RothbardRelated topics
anything bulk commit degree dissident fallacy government hold less man nothing opinion under naziRelated quotes
When the time-table is so arranged as to call for speed nearly equal to the full capacity of the engine, it is very obvious that the risks of failure in making time, must be much greater than at reduced rates, and when they do occur, the efforts made to gain time must be correspondingly greater and uncertain. A train whose prescribed rate of speed is thirty miles per hour, having lost five minutes of time, and being required to gain it, in order to meet and pass an opposing train at a station ten miles distant, must necessarily increase its speed to forty miles an hour; and a train whose rate of speed is 40 miles per hour, under similar circumstances, must increase its speed to 60 miles per hour.
Daniel McCallum
In war, science has proven itself an evil genius; it has made war more terrible than it ever was before. Man used to be content to slaughter his fellowmen on a single plane - the earth's surface. Science has taught him to go down into the water and shoot up from below and to go up into the clouds and shoot down from above, thus making the battlefield three times a bloody as it was before; but science does not teach brotherly love. Science has made war so hellish that civilization was about to commit suicide; and now we are told that newly discovered instruments of destruction will make the cruelties of the late war seem trivial in comparison with the cruelties of wars that may come in the future.
William Jennings Bryan
I have a great respect for religion, and the subject has always fascinated me [...]. Much of this fascination lies in the stunning historical paradox that organized religion has fostered, throughout Western history, both the most unspeakable horrors and the most heartrending examples of human goodness in the face of personal danger. (The evil, I believe, lies in an occasional confluence of religion with secular power. The Catholic Church has sponsored its share of horrors, from Inquisitions to liquidations-but only because this institution held great secular power during much of Western history. When my folks held such sway, more briefly and in Old Testament times, we committed similar atrocities with the same rationales.)
Stephen Jay Gould
The main development I want to discuss has already occurred: Keynesian economics is dead [maybe ‘disappeared' is a better term]. I don't know exactly when this happened but it is true today and it wasn't true two years ago. This is a sociological not an economic observation, so the evidence for it is sociological. For example, you cannot find a good, under 40 economist who identifies himself and his work as ‘Keynesian'. Indeed, people even take offense if referred to in this way. At research seminars, people don't take Keynesian theorizing seriously any more-the audience starts to whisper and giggle to one another. Leading journals aren't getting Keynesian papers submitted any more.
Robert Lucas, Jr.
In spite of ferocious differences of opinion about other moral issues, there seems to be something approaching consensus that it is cruel and malicious to interfere with the life-enhancing illusions of others -unless those illusions are themselves the cause of of even greater ills. The disagreements come over what these greater ills might be- and this has led to the break down of the whole rationale. Keeping secrets from people for their own good can often be wise, but it takes only one person to give away a secret, and since there are disagreements about which cases warrant discretion, the result is an unsavory miasma of hypocrisy, lies, and frantic but fruitless attempts at distraction.
Daniel Dennett