27. (8-26-2012) There is an inverse relationship between the size and power of government and the extent of individual freedom. Some legislators and bureaucrats err grievously when succumbing to an apparently innate need or desire to tell other human beings how to lead their lives…and impose blanket rules and programs without accommodating geographic, economic, and/or social – much less innate human – differences. The [first principles discussed by various authors]ATJ dissect and discredit the immodesty of demagogues who seek to control men, supposedly for their own good. The exercise of the liberal’s fatal conceit – as Hayek termed it – diminishes our lives by destroying the essence of individualism (individualism, which is freedom of choice or agency, to succeed, to fail, and to be held responsible)ATJ.
Thomas N. Tripp – First Principles: Self-governance in an Open Society, 2008
29. (8-26-2012) [A] moral underpinning is necessary for freedom to exist among individuals. The freedom that results also allows individuals to protect themselves from an overweening government – a moral act as well. Ultimately it may be as simple…as this: If we have a moral society it doesn’t much matter what type of government we have (a moral citizenry will correct its own mistakes). If our society is not moral, it equally doesn’t much matter what type of government we have (an immoral society will not follow the lead of decency, and it will not be cowed by the force of government). Of course, individuals typically exhibit both moral and immoral behavior…thus what type, and what extent, of government we choose does become important.
- Thomas N. Tripp – First Principles, 2008
32. (8-26-2012) [T]he foundation of our national policy should be laid in private morality; if individuals be not influenced by moral principles, it is vain to look for public virtue.
- John Adams, 1735-1826