[MD] Barfuesserkirche (ZMM & Dewey)

[Platt Holden]

Jim Engele

First, a warm welcome to the MOQ discussion group. I see where we have
some differences of opinion. Good. Here you'll find no rabble storming the 
stage and threatening the speaker if  views expressed are politically 
incorrect, although from time to time you'll see a few here resorting to 
name calling when bereft of rational argument.  

> Platt:  "...I can see where most European countries might welcome his
> socialist views."
> 
> This says more about your understanding than it does about David's. 
> European countries can not be considered to be 'socialist', they are a much
> more complex combination of qualities including capitalism, socialist is
> too simplistic.

>From Wikipedia's entry on "socialism." "Socialism refers to a broad array 
of doctrines or political movements that envisage a socio-economic system 
in which property and the distribution of wealth are subject to social 
control." Universal health care, prevalent throughout Europe but not in 
the U.S., is a typical socialistic program. In France, private business 
cannot make a move without government permission, especially in the hiring 
and firing of employees. Hidden behind every government regulation is an 
incipient socialist, and Europe is notorious for a plethora of government 
regulations although liberals in the U.S. are trying hard to catch up.

> David said(I'm copying this from Platt's email): "Freedom and individuality
> are not inborn givens. They are the results or the fruits of a consciously
> tended communal life."
> 
> This sounds like it fits the MOQ.  Freedom and Individuality are 
> intellectual qualities.

Right. But intellect is not nurtured by a "consciously tended" society. 
Intellect is at war with society.

> Sociologically, they are to be supressed to the
> greater good of the society, but in some nations, they are valued at a
> level that exceeds that of the values of the society.

Yes. Society attempts to suppress individual freedom "in the public 
interest." Run for your life when you hear those words. It's the appeal of
all dictators. In the U.S. freedom and individuality reigns supreme and is 
protected by law, but still under constant attack by socialist do-gooders.

> The MOQ says that
> when two generally accepted values from two levels conflict, the values
> from the higher level should prevail.  When there is no conflict, the
> values of the lower level should remain intact.

Yes. The higher intellectual level is more moral than the social. 
 
>  In the US, the preamble to the constitution states the premise that the
> authority to govern comes from the people not from the divine.  This is the
> example that the US set for the world.

Authority to govern comes from the people, but the authority to be free 
and pursue one's happiness comes from the divine. Government's role in the 
U.S. is to protect and preserve individual freedom, not to play Granny to 
undisciplined children.

> Unfortunately it seems the battle
> between nationalist isolationism and the higher intellectual levels are
> still raging here in the US possibly more so than in Europe.

Not sure what you mean by "battle between national isolationism and higher
intellectual levels." Intellect has nothing to say about globalism other 
than to side with free trade.

> Platt said:  "...in the founding document of the U.S., individuals are
> "endowed by their Creator" with life, liberty and the pursuit of
> happiness."
> 
> This is from the declaration of independance.  If there were to be one
> document that defined the US it would be the constitution which is a
> positive statement of what Americans stand for.

Disagree. The seminal document of the U.S. was the Declaration. The
war against Britain was fought and thousands of patriots died in order to 
assure individual liberty. The Constitution wasn't ratified until six 
years after the British surrendered at Yorktown. 

> The DoI is a rejection of
> British values concerning the colonies, in other words within the context
> of British values.

It was a rejection of British values and declaration of unalienable 
individual rights, i.e., a declaration of intellect's supremacy over 
society, later codified in the Bill of Rights in the Constitution. No 
other government in the world is charged with protecting individual 
freedom and intellectual values more than the U.S.  

Platt