To the intellectual giants
who began
the world over again in America
three
centuries ago, and to Ayn
Rand who
has given us the philosophy
to begin
over again—again—in today's
world
and this time make it last.
Abstract. In January 1776 a British-born firebrand by the name of
Thomas Paine proclaimed in his pamphlet “Common Sense” that “We have it in our power
to begin the world over again.” Up until then, no prediction had ever come close
to the optimism of that vision.
Paine was referring to a new nation,
one that was to become the United States of America. It would be the first in history
founded on the Enlightenment principle of individual rights. To secure those rights,
America’s founders, imbued with the spirit of its Declaration of Independence, designed
a constitution to minimize initiated physical coercion in human affairs. And equally
important, it was a constitution that looked to limit America’s government to a
single function, to protect its citizens from those who would practice that evil.
Armed—charged—with such a constitution,
America, in its first century and a half, grew and flourished at a rate and to an
extent never before seen. America was the freest and most prosperous nation in history.
Long has it stood as a beacon of freedom to the world’s oppressed. America in the
late 18th century truly did begin the world over again, her rise was that extraordinary.
But the beacon has dimmed.
What conditions existed in 1776
America to convince Thomas Paine that America had the power to begin the world over
again? How did its constitution drive America’s rise? Why is she now in decline,
though still a great power? Is a permanently free sovereign state even possible
today, or is it too late?
This essay explores these questions
and answers “No” to the last. It is not too late.
The Authors:
The authors have produced two works that are prequels to the vision advanced in
this essay: the 2014 nonfiction book, The Prometheus Connection, and the 2021 novel, The Prometheus Frontier. Kevin Osborne holds a PhD in Philosophy from
the City University of New York. Alex Bleier, with degrees in Math, Philosophy,
and Technical Communication has an extensive career in computer consulting, spanning
the gamut from Fortune 500 companies to Silicon Valley startups and now to the newly
formed Thomas Paine Institute.
We want first to answer this question: What conditions existed
in 1776 America to convince Paine that America had it in its power to begin the
world over again? He states in “Common Sense” that “In [these] pages I offer nothing
more than simple facts, plain arguments, and common sense.”[1]
Evidently, for Paine it bordered on the self-evident. Simple
facts, plain arguments, common sense reveal that the following conditions, already
existing in America, gave her the power to which he was referring.
In the case of Real Estate, it was the “simple fact” that the
thirteen original colonies were spread over nearly half a million square miles.
Paine knew that the colonies, by defeating Britain, would be in a position to gain
sovereign control of that land. Through the 1788 Treaty of Paris, that is exactly
what happened: the thirteen original colonies officially became the United States
of America.
The colonies had defense capability. As Paine pointed out, the
colonies taken as a whole have “the largest body of armed and disciplined men of
any power under Heaven.” It had allies from France, Spain, and the Netherlands.
Regarding naval power, he states “no country on the globe is so happily situated,
or so internally capable of raising a fleet as America. Tar, timber, iron, and cordage
are her natural produce. We need go abroad for nothing.”[2]
The colonies had fiscal resources from taxes, bonds, foreign
loans. As Paine puts it, “Debts we have none.”[3]
For Human Resources, the colonies, lit as they were by the Enlightenment
reverence for reason, learning, and freedom, had largely literate populations. These
were populations which gave birth to the intellectual giants known as America’s
Founding Fathers.
Most importantly, Paine knew the colonists, imbued with the Enlightenment
spirit, possessed the philosophic principles to justify casting off the oppressive
yoke of the British Crown. At the end of “Common Sense,” he galvanized the colonists
to action when he declared “nothing can settle our affairs [grievances with Britain]
so expeditiously as an open and determined Declaration of Independence.”[4]
Thomas Jefferson rose to that challenge within months, with America’s
Declaration of Independence advancing a philosophic principle which was to become
immortal. This is the principle of the unalienable right to Life, Liberty, and the
pursuit of Happiness. Paine knew that the colonists had the philosophy to begin
the world over again. History proved him right.[5]
Immediately after winning independence, America’s survival was
less than certain. Its economy was a primitive agrarian one, dependent on manufactured
imports, and supported by a meager population of barely three million (one third
that of England).
This is not to say the new nation was without strengths. It had
abundant though untapped natural resources and a population that doubled every twenty
years, the fastest rate in the world. It was also a population that, though lacking
higher education, was largely literate. And even more importantly, it was, as Hezekiah
Niles, a publisher of the time noted, a population imbued with “a universal ambition
to go forward” reflecting the optimistic Enlightenment mindset of the age.
Scholars point out that America’s founders framed a basically
laissez-faire constitution to capitalize on and protect these strengths. Article
One Section Eight restricted the government’s ability
to intervene in the marketplace. Sections Eight and Ten established
sound currency. Section Nine prohibited states from erecting trade
barriers. Amendment Five protected private property.[6]
Not always remembered, yet vital for jumpstarting America’s nascent
economy, were words in Article One Section Eight giving Congress the
power to “promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited
Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings
and Discoveries.” This simple statement was revolutionary. It was the first time
the constitution of any nation included an intellectual property clause.[7]
How did this happen? To put it simply, the Founders, in their
wisdom, studied the history of patents and learned what not to do. They
looked to the patent system of England, the country then leading the Industrial
Revolution, and found it wanting. Laws limited the ability of inventors to sell
or license the rights to their inventions. Patent application fees were very high.
This meant only the very wealthy had the capital to commercialize their inventions.[8]
The framers of America’s patent system wanted to avoid such limitations.
They wanted a patent system that would unleash the entrepreneurial energy of ordinary
people.[9]
The 1787-1788 constitution and the laws promulgated from it accomplished exactly
that.
In contrast to England, America’s patent system was exceedingly
friendly to inventors. It explicitly included provisions designed to support trade
in patent rights. Both the courts and the U.S. Patent Office facilitated such transfers.
And judges developed principles to protect the rights of all involved.
Patents as tradable assets were entirely unique to America’s
patent system. By 1880, eighty-five percent of American patents were licensed by
their inventors. In England it was a mere thirty percent. It was the first time
in the history of economics that an ordinary person, simply by applying reason,
intelligence, and street smarts, could not only make a living as an inventor, but
could become prosperous.
The impact of America’s patent system on America’s rise was staggering.
There was a riot of innovation. As philosopher Andrew Bernstein captures it, “The
19th century in America was the single greatest era of technological
and industrial advance in history.” He points to such inventions as the reaper,
the sewing machine, the telegraph, the airbrake for railroad cars. Later came the
camera, the incandescent light bulb, the motion picture projector, the phonograph.
Ripple effects triggered innovations in other sectors of the economy, such as, the
revolution of transportation by automobile and airplane, and of manufacturing by
mass production.[10]
If the inventive geniuses of the time are regarded as giants,
the industrialists and business leaders were titans. This is the term reserved for
the demigods of Greek literature, of whom Prometheus was one. To this day, titan
is the term applied to such figures as Andrew Carnegie (Steel), John D. Rockefeller
(Oil), James J. Hill (Railroads), J.P. Morgan (Banking and Finance). Contrary to
the slur, “Robber Baron,”[11]
each figure, in his own way and in his own field, personified Prometheus. Each had
towering vision or foresight—the literal translation of the name “Prometheus.”[12]
Vision was a defining characteristic of the age. The vision of
the constitution’s framers gave free rein to the focused vision of inventors, and
these two forces—the framers and the inventors—provided the material infrastructure—the
capital—for the towering vision of the business titans.
These three powers—framers, inventors, titans—were the catalysts
for the greatest industrial growth in world history at a rate never witnessed before.
Truly, they changed the face of America and justified the prescience of Thomas Paine.
Truly they began the world over again. They were empowered to do so—and,
without hesitation—did.[13]
It was the
height of America’s Industrial Revolution.
How did America’s constitution drive—power—her meteoric rise?
The answer: the Founding Fathers framed the constitution in order to minimize initiated
physical coercion or the threat thereof in human affairs. And equally important,
they implicitly looked to limit government to a single function, that of protecting
its citizens from those who would practice that evil. America’s original constitution
was a largely laissez-faire constitution, that is, a constitution largely in support
of laissez-faire capitalism.
The declaration and constitution were truly revolutionary. Nothing
like them, before or since, has ever been attempted. And because of them, America
became the wealthiest and most powerful nation in history.
The Declaration of Independence unleashed the nation’s inventive
geniuses, entrepreneurs, and industrialists, freeing them to go where their vision—guided
by reason—took them.
What made America’s explosive rise possible? The answer in a
word: Freedom.
America’s original “laissez-faire” constitution was an extraordinary
achievement. But the constitution was not explicitly laissez-faire, and within
a century of its ratification in 1787, omissions and loopholes started to erode
its original laissez-faire character.
Major omissions include failures to explicitly banish
initiated physical coercion or the threat thereof and to explicitly limit government
to the sole function of protecting individual rights. Loopholes are the ambiguous,
vague, open-to-interpretation expressions the Constitution contains, such as public
welfare, common good, and public interest.
As a result of these constitutional flaws, the government’s takeover
of America’s economy had started in earnest by the third quarter of the 19th
century. A major event was the 1877 Munn v Illinois Supreme Court decision.
Munn established the precedent that any property “clothed with a public interest”
should be subject to government regulation and control. Thus, in one fell swoop,
the Supreme Court effectively handed control of the American economy to the government.
“Public interest” embraced it all. That vague expression, ever
open to interpretation, surely applies to any business property. That is exactly
how the Supreme Court interpreted it in 1877.
And the precedent was set.
Munn was a major landmark and ominous harbinger of even greater
assaults on economic freedom. Two laws in particular stand out: 1887’s Interstate
Commerce Act and 1890’s Sherman Antitrust Act. Munn, Sherman, and Interstate Commerce
were full frontal regulatory assaults marking the demise in America of what had
been largely unfettered capitalism until then. The creation of the Federal Reserve
and the Sixteenth Amendment (Income Tax), both in 1913, clinched the demise.
There are many other programs, but these five alone are enough
to dramatize the reality that, by the second quarter of the 20th century,
coercive government had taken control of America’s economy. Coercive regulation,
as it inevitably does, multiplied ever since, in sync with an ever-growing income
tax to fund it all.[14]
Why does regulation inevitably multiply? Several forces drive
it. Precedence is one, as Munn illustrates. Any regulation sets the precedent
for more regulation of the same kind. Fiscal Constituencies is another force.
Large entitlement programs create huge voting blocks. These voting blocks are powerful
forces which penalize any politician who would seek to roll back their entitlements.
Self-Perpetuation is still another force. Most regulations ride into existence
on the wings of “public interest” and “public welfare.” Attempts to roll back regulations
meet strident opposition from their advocates. The notions of “public interest”
and the like almost always trump freedom.
As with economics, America’s regulatory takeover of education
hijacked an already existing system which was largely private and successful.[15]
In the early colonies, private schools prevailed and provided
an excellent education. This is not to say that all educators believed that private
schools were the ideal. Educator Benjamin Rush is remembered for stating, “Let our
pupil be taught that he does not belong to himself, but that he is public property”—this
from a thinker who later signed the Declaration of Independence. Other views Rush
articulated during his life were in the same vein. He was dead serious about the
individual being public property. And he was not alone.
During the century following America’s founding, major figures
pushed for dramatic changes in education. Two such figures are Horace Mann (1796-1859)
and John Dewey (1859-1952). Mann, as secretary of the Massachusetts Board of Education,
founded the Common School Movement in 1837, ensuring that every child would receive
a public education, funded by local taxes. And Dewey was the towering figure
in American “Progressive” education which began in the 19th century and
prevails to this day.
In his enormously influential book, The School and Society,[16]
Dewey made it clear that all learning is ultimately for the purpose of “saturating
him [the student] with the spirit of service.” Schools should train children to
fit into the social system rather than to think independently. Academic subjects
should be watered down or outright replaced. Thus did Social Studies, for one example,
replace the study of History. What little US history is taught is often, as philosopher
Andrew Bernstein puts it, “leftist anti-American propaganda.” He cites the example
of a history written by Howard Zinn, a Marxist historian who was an active member
of the Communist Party USA for years. Zinn’s bestselling People’s History of
the United States,[17]
Bernstein states, “is no more than a Communist slur against America.” With two million
copies sold, it is widely used in government schools.[18]
Bernstein notes that John Dewey’s stature and erudition led to
an army of progressive educators who were even more opposed to academic education
than he was. William Heard Kilpatrick was one of them. Kilpatrick was a leading
progressive educator of his time. From 1918 to 1940, he headed the Philosophy of
Education department at Columbia University Teachers College. During those years,
the Teachers College graduated more than thirty thousand educators from all states
of the union, a large number of whom became America’s education leaders. Columbia
Teachers College under Kilpatrick became a super-spreader of progressive education
in America.[19]
What is the legacy bequeathed to America by the above forces?
Bernstein summarizes as follows: Today, nearly 90% of America’s school children
aged five through high school, go to public schools. Schools get their students
by compulsory attendance laws—force. Typically, neither private school nor
homeschooling is an affordable alternative for parents. The money taken from them
in property taxes would help, but that money funds public education—a legacy
of Horace Mann. Force rules throughout the government school system.
Bernstein, over a long career, has received a great many of America’s
government K-12 students into his college classrooms. He describes the academic
performance of many students with a single word that speaks volumes: “Heartbreaking.”
[20]
Indoctrination has spread beyond K-12 to most public and so-called
“private” colleges and universities, almost all of which are heavily dependent on
funds from federal or state governments. Because of this financial dependence, these
entities do not dare teach ideas or policies that conflict with those promulgated
by government authorities.
Government Regulation Is Initiated
Coercion
Government regulation is initiated physical coercion or the threat
of it. And it is a threat which is ever present. Once established, a regulation
is backed by the coercive power of government. Noncompliance is not an option unless
one is willing to risk fines or arrest. Through regulation, government coercively
molds what it believes to be good behavior. “We need to pass strong regulations,”
is how a Nobel laureate in economics put it, “embodying norms of good behavior,
and appoint good regulators to enforce them.”[21]
This view is endemic in today’s culture and is rarely challenged. Government coercion
is simply accepted, like death and taxes, as the way things are.
On the above pages, we concentrated on Economics and Education.
But government regulation is ubiquitous, whether it be in Science, Health Care,
or any other enterprise.
America’s Decline—In Essence
Just as America’s phenomenal rise can
be captured by a single concept, Freedom, America’s decline can be captured
by the single concept, Coercion. As we saw, the
rise resulted from a largely laissez-faire constitution, and her decline resulted
from the erosion of that constitution by coercive government intervention, ever
intensifying to this day.[22]
The state of today’s America is not unique to America. Government
coercion and the ever-present threat of it, is seen in all nations today, as a to-be-expected
way of life.
Nations fall into two categories. Outright Dictatorship is one
category, characterized by “one-party
rule—executions without trial or with a mock trial, for political offenses—the nationalization
or expropriation of private property—and censorship.”[23] All other nations (the great majority)
fall under a mixed category of freedom and controls.[24]
Never has there been a totally free
nation. America, for the first and only time in history, came close, but ultimately,
“close” was not good enough. The constitution, as discussed earlier, contained seeds
of self-destruction: omissions and loopholes waiting to germinate. And finally,
they did.
Viewing the big picture, America’s first century and a half marked
her meteoric rise, to the freest and wealthiest nation in history; her second century
and a half has marked her tragic decline, to that of—not a dictatorship—but
that of a largely coercive regulatory state. Having explored how each happened,
we can now offer a provisional answer to our all-important question:
Is the Vision of a permanent, totally
free sovereign nation truly possible
or is it ever to remain beyond our reach?
Were Thomas Paine alive today, his answer would likely be a qualified
one: He would probably say “Yes,” in light of the philosophy of Ayn Rand.[25]
He would see that Rand’s philosophy is vastly more powerful than what America’s
founders had in the late 18th century. And philosophy is what drives
all the rest.
But he would caution that Real Estate and Defense are far greater
challenges than they were three centuries ago. He would see that there exists no
real estate in today’s world, not even an island, which is not already under the
sovereign control of some nation, with the exception of the polar regions.[26]
Defense is equally challenging, given the reach and devastating firepower of modern
weapon systems. Paine would be aware of these realities.
Can Philosophy alone address them? Clearly no—not directly. But
indirectly, the answer could be Yes. Potentially, Rand’s Objectivist philosophy
could inspire the human and fiscal resources needed to take on the challenges of
real estate and defense. And perhaps prevail over them.
Assuming that where the case, what might the vision of a totally-free
sovereign state look like in the real world, that is, in actual physical reality?
The modern movement of Seasteading believes it answers that question.
Futuristic artist renderings of the architecture, buildings, and interconnecting
infrastructures of Seasteading projects are positively eye-popping. Clearly, they
convey the spirit of beginning the world over again.[27]
Unfortunately, Seasteading,[28]
(or its offshoots, such as Free Private Cities) involves forming a Special
Economic Zone (SEZ) within a host nation.
But a host nation surrenders none of its sovereignty and does
not take kindly to perceived threats to it. There is the grand vision of floating
nations, beyond the sovereign borders of any country. But floating nations are
prohibitively costly.[29]
How successful is Seasteading as the actualization of the vision
of a permanent, totally free sovereign nation? Seasteading is actually a far cry
from that vision. Seasteads receive concessions and permissions from a Host Nation
but no sovereign status.[30]
Nor do the leaders of the movement have a plan for changing that reality. Two of
them, Joe Quirk and Patri Friedman simply state, “We have no specific, coherent
vision of a better future to entice people with or to inflict on them.”[31]
There exists only one place where the
vision of a permanent, totally free sovereign nation has been actualized. That place
is the human imagination, specifically the realm of fiction. Today's world seemingly
poses insurmountable challenges to that vision, but the fiction writer works in
the realm of “What Ifs,” ideas waiting to be plucked, applied to the problems at
hand as possible solutions, and then dramatized for the reader to consider as well.
Over the centuries a great body of
utopian literature has devoted itself to new-beginning scenarios, starting with
Plato’s Republic.[32]
In other literature it is more of a subtheme. Philosopher
novelist Ayn Rand, for instance, in her 1957 novel, Atlas Shrugged, presents
a character who ingeniously hastens the collapse of a self-destructing dystopian
social system in order to clear the way for a new beginning.
In 2021, the authors of this essay published The
Prometheus Frontier, a novel that imagines a new beginning by directly meeting
the world's enormous challenges to that vision, despite the world's dystopian character.
Consider a few of the highlights: The protagonist, Marek Rankl,
addresses Real Estate and Philosophy first, two of the greatest challenges. Rankl
Marine Enterprises (RME) assumes ownership of a thousand square mile fictional island,
Arete, from an aged and economically exhausted Caribbean dictator. Such an acquisition
requires vast fiscal resources, and RME has those resources.
For Philosophy, Marek Rankl starts with a seminal founding document,
a Declaration of Freedom which defines the Prometheus Frontier's basic philosophy. It is a philosophy
which is to inspire and guide all other activities and then ensure the Frontier's
long term survival and flourishing.
RME charters the Thomas Paine Society, two dozen RME associates
with the ten year mission “to begin the world over again” by successfully addressing
each remaining challenge. In the novel, we see this happen through the eyes of the
protagonist's great grandson, Alek, who has arrived on Arete knowing nothing about
it, but is taken through its evolution via a series of portals, flashbacks augmented
by elements of science fiction.
Thus can fiction bring to life, in the human imagination, a fully
functioning, flourishing, and free social system and then ensure its survival long
term. Is this fictional scenario feasible in today's world? The balance of this
essay addresses that question.
We return now to the present day, to a world in which government
repression of individual rights is seen in all nations. This has been true throughout
history, which raises the question, Why?
In this essay, we focused on America's history to identify the
answer. As we saw, her meteoric rise during the first century and a half after founding,
was due to a largely laissez-faire constitution. And thus her decline to a nation
in which rights are largely repressed stands out as all the more dramatic, visible,
and therefore instructive. It contains three vital lessons.
Lesson One, a newly-founded nation needs to explicitly
prohibit initiated physical coercion throughout the realm.
Lesson Two, at the same time, a newly-founded nation
must make crystal clear that this prohibition applies to initiated coercion from
any source, whether government or private, and that a proper government at any level
(federal, state, local, or otherwise) uses force only in retaliation against
those who have already initiated or threatened that evil.
Lesson Three, if a newly-founded nation fails to
codify these prohibitions in its constitution, it will inevitably discover it has
institutionalized an irreversibly repressive social system.
These three lessons, so vivid in America's history, are confirmed
in the history of all nations. As we saw earlier, once established, repressive social
systems are continually reinforced by the entrenched bureaucracies that led to them
in the first place and are determined to keep them that way. That is, repressive
social systems, once established, are irreversible. They are like
a ratchet wrench set to work in one direction only. If you attempt to reverse direction,
the ratchet slips.
The implication of the three lessons is great for the vision
of beginning the world over again. Consider the realities: All nations without exception
are repressive, and repressive social systems are irreversible once entrenched.
As a result, if we are to begin the world over again with a fully free social system,
we must have a new place. And properly formulated, our vision must have the following
elements:
A social
system of pure Capitalism
starting
life in a new place,
as a fully
sovereign nation state.
Is such a vision feasible in a world where government repression
of individual rights is seen in all nations? Is it feasible in a world where the
nation which has always been the greatest champion of individual rights, America,
is in decline?
America's tragic decline in freedom, specifically in the freedom
of its citizens from initiated government coercion, does not have to be a death
knell. Sometimes it seems as if it could very well be leading to that. But America
has been oscillating between periods of greater or lesser freedom for many decades,
and we maintain that a more likely prognosis is that this oscillation will persist,
despite those who believe the death knell for Western Civilization was sounded long
ago.
Our conviction is that America's long-term decline is not a death
knell but a clarion call. It is a clarion call for a great new beginning, potentially
far greater than the last one, three centuries ago in late 18th century America.
We have an array of positive forces in our favor. Consider: America,
the nation of individual rights and unlimited opportunity, remains a beacon to the
freedom lover. It is the nation of Prometheus, the great mythical icon of reason-based
defiance, the defiance which was the founding spirit of the American nation.[33]
The spirit which, in visual form, is symbolized by the torch of reason and freedom
on the cover of this essay.
There is America's ongoing superpower status in the world, despite
its long gradual decline as the premier champion of individual rights. There is
its history of innovation and its magnetic power to draw talent from many nations,
talent that adds to the unmatched legacy of achievement that continues to this day.
America was the adopted nation of a towering intellect, a Russian
immigrant, from whom we inherited a philosophy for beginning the world over again—again—and
this time get it right. Her name is Ayn Rand. Her philosophy: Objectivism.
The role of the Declaration of Freedom, the Frontier's philosophy,
an application of Rand's philosophy, cannot be overemphasized. First, it explicitly
avoids the constitutional loopholes and omissions critiqued in this essay under
the heading "America's Decline." Second, the Founders make the Declaration
an integral part of the Frontier's Constitution by making it the Preamble. Third,
Article One, Section One of the Constitution's body will explicitly articulate the
"Primacy of the Declaration of Freedom Principle." This principle mandates
that all Constitutional articles, clauses, and amendments, in perpetuity, will be
fully consistent with the Preamble. For the full text of the Declaration of Freedom,
in three parts, see the below Appendix.
We are immensely fortunate to be living in this era, with the
potential of a new beginning before us, ever beckoning. Beginning the world over
again—again—the
vision promoted in this essay, could be a long time in coming. Conceivably, it could
start on America's island territory of Puerto Rico, politically reconfigured as
our "new place" (think Hong Kong and its 99-year lease). Or some other
part of the world at large.
But whatever locus the new beginning or "place" takes,
and no matter the challenges, it will surely have Americans behind it, to nurture,
support, and inspire. And ensure its flourishing in perpetuity.[34]
Great challenges face any vision
of beginning the world over again, especially when it is to be based on the philosophy
of Objectivism. In the Objectivist world there are a number of organizations working
to address and overcome those challenges.
There is the Prometheus Foundation,
the Objective Standard Institute, the Ayn Rand Institute, the
American Capitalist Party, the Atlas Society. And there are others
outside the Objectivist orbit, like the Foundation for Economic Education and the
Mises Institute, each of them focused on bringing about a Capitalist social system.
And each is working to prepare the world by targeting a specific portion of that
world, whether a large population or small. Oftentimes, they target the same audiences,
with different material, or emphases.
There is also a pronounced division
of labor. There are Objectivist intellectuals "laboring" in the field
of education, historical analysis, energy policy, and so on. Others still, such as those who founded the American Capitalist
Party, are engaging the political realm. Yes, it is to be expected that a natural
division of labor is evident in the many organizations looking to actualize the
vision of a social system of pure Capitalism.[35]
Enter the Thomas
Paine Institute (TPI), the latest addition to the fray.
The Thomas Paine Institute
(TPI) is a think tank, with leaders who are in full agreement with the Objectivist
philosophy of Ayn Rand. It invites all Objectivists and active minded non-Objectivists
to share its vision and become TPI members.
TPI’s uniqueness—setting it apart from all other Objectivist
initiatives—is twofold.
First, it is unique in its vision of what a new beginning
would entail, namely, a social system of pure Capitalism, to be given birth, from
its inception, in a new place, and inaugurated as a fully independent sovereign
nation state.
Second, it is unique in being solely focused on the challenges
that must be overcome to actualize that vision in the world of today.
TPI is committed to a soaring vision: a social system of pure
Capitalism to be given birth in a new place and inaugurated as an independent sovereign
nation state.
But bringing a vision like this into concrete physical reality
requires that we begin at the beginning. It takes talented intellectuals. And thus,
do we seek colleagues in spirit who enjoy great challenges and are willing to commit
time to meeting them. We discussed those challenges in the above pages. Although
they are great, they are not insurmountable.
We, the founders of TPI, now repeat, once again, Thomas Paine's
call late in the eighteenth century, with the addition of one word: We have it in our power to begin the world over again—again.
What do we have to offer? We offer the same soaring value that
the original Thomas Paine offered. We offer the promise of a new beginning. And
along with it, we offer the unmatched exhilaration of working toward it over time.
The above pages give you key details of the work needed. Perhaps
our sense of urgency has become your own. We invite you to share your thoughts with
us.
Imagine a role at TPI beckoning to you,
yours for the taking.
The public relations team will promote TPI’s vision with other
freedom-loving organizations, newsletters, and magazines. The public relations team
will generate articles and white papers to promote TPI.
Our political position is set forth in our Declaration of Freedom,
in which we advance the vital importance of government for a free society to exist
and flourish. In other words, we disavow anarchists and anarcho-capitalists.
The initial organization of the Thomas Paine Institute will include
a Board of Directors, an Executive Director, and Research Staff.
Board of Directors: The Board of Directors will set the
strategic direction, oversees finances, and will ensure the organization fulfills
its mission. We are seeking board members who support the vision of the Thomas
Paine Institute to begin the world over again.
Executive Director: The Executive Director will lead the
day-to-day operations, implementing the board's vision and managing staff.
Research Staff: The research staff will conduct research,
produce reports and policy recommendations. We are seeking volunteers with expertise
in specific fields like real estate, defense, finance, human resources, philosophy,
law, and computer hardware and software technology.
***
Philosopher Andrew Berstein captures well the ever-present driving
forces which will make it happen.
The
human capacity to reason and the yearning for freedom and prosperity, will survive
as long as humanity itself; no degree of irrational philosophy or repressive government
will suffice to stamp these out.[36]
*********
Originally
created for the novel, The Prometheus Frontier ©2021 by Kevin Osborne.
No part of this Declaration of Freedom may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval
system, or transmitted, in any form or medium -- print, audio, video, or otherwise--without
the prior written permission of the Thomas Paine Institute, 3246 Suite 147, Centennial
Blvd., Colorado Springs, CO 80907
Declaration of Freedom
Preamble for the Constitution
of [Name]
This Declaration of Freedom is adapted by Alex Bleier,
Jerrold Meyer, and Kevin Osborne, from
The Prometheus Frontier, the novel, Copyright ©2021.
FOUNDATIONAL
TRUTHS
When in the course of human events, the nation that was once
the freest the world has ever seen, whose government—a Constitutional Republic—was
the first and only one in history explicitly founded on the moral principle of individual
rights—when that nation, for centuries the sole beacon for the world’s oppressed—when
that nation itself loses sight of what it means to be free and, instead, makes initiated
physical coercion and the violation of individual rights a way of life—it is then
necessary to restart freedom in a new place.
We the men and women of [Name] hereby announce that we have
given birth to such a place and proudly advance this declaration of freedom—freedom
from initiated physical coercion—as its seminal founding document.
We hold certain fundamental truths to be observable and inducible
facts of reality:
— that all
individuals are born equal in their possession of reason, the distinguishing faculty
elevating them above all other creatures,
— that individual
human life—the ultimate value and standard of the good—in order to survive and to
flourish, requires the free exercise of our faculty of reason. For, unlike all other
creatures, humans have no automatic knowledge of how to survive. Humans must use
reason,
— that the
initiation of physical coercion, because it abrogates the free exercise of reason
and thereby human life, must be abolished from all human affairs,
— that standing
in opposition to this evil are individual rights, which all men and women possess,
the most fundamental of which are life, liberty, property, and the pursuit of happiness,
— that the
absolute, objective basis of rights is not an alleged supreme being or social group
or government but the immutable requirements for an individual human life to survive
and flourish in a social context.
— that a
constitutionally controlled government is nonetheless an absolute necessity, strictly
limited to the sole sacred purpose of securing and protecting individual rights
against initiated physical coercion,
— that such
a government equally protects all men and women against such coercion and itself
uses force only in retaliation against those who have initiated that evil or have
threatened to do so.
THE CASE FOR
A NEW START
But when government itself makes it a practice to initiate
physical coercion, or to legalize its initiation by others, it defaults on its sole
sacred function which is to protect its citizens from initiated force. We declare
that throughout the world, governments exhibit this evil. Respect for reason demands
that we set forth the evidence. To wit:
— Throughout
the world, all nations pay lip service to rights in their constitutions, but then
permit groups, even their own governments, to take them as sanctions to violate
individual rights. This corrupts the meaning of rights which, when correctly understood,
are possessed only by individuals.
— A right is
a moral principle defining and sanctioning a man's freedom of action in a
social context.[37] Correctly induced, rights protect the individual
from the group, especially that largest and most powerful of groups—government.
Yet throughout the world, all governments, without exception, have
institutionalized the violation of the individual rights of their citizens.
— Property
rights mean that individuals have the right to dispose of the product of their labor,
or their earnings from it, as they see fit, providing they do not infringe or threaten
the rights of others. Property rights protect individuals from slavery—slavery in
any part of their lives, or in any portion. Property rights are moral sanctions
for individuals to seek, gain, and dispose of the product of their work—not sanctions
for some group to expropriate and dispose of it. Yet, throughout today’s world,
throughout history, that evil is seen.
— In all
the world’s nations, debased governments, and the groups they enable, regulate all
sectors of their country’s life, including, in many nations, matters of religion
or conscience. In developed nations, endemic public-private-sector cronyism produces
corruption, coercive monopolies, and legalized plunder. Vast fiscal constituencies
require countless government agencies and ever mounting debt. Cradle-to-grave dependence
on government makes self-reliance—once a matter of cultural pride in more enlightened
nations—a lost virtue. Pillaging by rampant pressure group warfare enervates
entire cultures. Throughout the world, these depredations are seen.
— We
support efforts to incrementally roll back government regulations. But repressive
social systems are continually reinforced by the entrenched bureaucracies that led
to them in the first place and are determined to keep them that way. For this and
other reasons, repressive socioeconomic systems, once entrenched, are virtually
irreversible. Attempts to effect change with incremental improvement can help to
control damage and alleviate human suffering but cannot bring about lasting change.
History has always demonstrated this.
We declare that if political freedom is the goal, that is,
freedom from initiated coercion, then the world’s populations have only one course
of action. That course is to start over in new places, from scratch, with constitutions
banishing the initiation of force throughout the realm, including the most common
source of initiated force, that from government against its citizens. This course
is what our new nation, [Name], is taking, and this Declaration of Freedom is the
preamble of [Name’s] constitution.
PURE
CAPITALISM: [NAME’S] SOCIOECONOMIC SYSTEM
We the founders of [Name] proudly proclaim this Declaration
of Freedom and renounce initiated physical coercion. Indeed, our socioeconomic system
utterly outlaws it. Our social system enables all human interactions, with no exception,
to take place through voluntary persuasion and trade by the free exercise of reason.
This is what pure Capitalism is:
“Capitalism is a social system
based on the recognition of individual rights, including property rights, in
which all property is privately owned.”[38]
We proclaim that Capitalism is, and always shall be, the socioeconomic
system of [Name].
Under [Name’s] system of pure Capitalism, the Constitution,
for which this declaration is the preamble, prohibits the government, at any level,
from intervention into finance, economy, education, medicine, science, religion,
or any other activity or enterprise, including those yet to be developed.
We recognize that as long as human nature is volitional, certain
forces from within and without will initiate and threaten physical coercion. But
our government exists to execute a sole sacred function. [Name’s] government addresses
physical force initiated from within by a legal system of police and courts. It
addresses physical force initiated from without by a virtually impregnable system
of defense. And [Name] will not want for impassioned citizens and allies to defend
freedom, with enlightened professionals leading the way on the intellectual and
military ramparts.
As we set out on this grand endeavor, we the leaders of [Name]
proudly adopt an exalted oath uttered long ago by the founders of the nation to
which we alluded at the opening of this declaration. It is fitting that we adopt
their oath as our own, for the inspiration of their original founding is timeless.
We mutually pledge
to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.
With these words ringing down through the ages, we know that
all men and women of good will on Earth—East and West—will join us in our quest—our
quest for a new Age of Reason—our quest to begin the world over again, with the
birth of a new Enlightenment.
SIGNATURES:
To follow the work of the Thomas Paine
Institute or to join our efforts, write
to us and join our mailing list at: info@thomaspaineinstitute.com
