Greg Reese Report - A Brief History Of Israel And Iran For vital health info visit and subscribe free at https://www.ForbiddenTreatment.com Support this channel at our store https://www.HealthHarmonic.com Source: https://gregreese.substack.com https://www.ReeseReport.com
Monday, June 30, 2025
Republicanism Richard Dagger
Republicanism Richard Dagger
Political Science Faculty Publications
2011
Republicanism Richard Dagger
University of Richmond, rdagger@richmond.edu
University of Richmond UR Scholarship Repository
Political Science
Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.richmond.edu/polisci-faculty-publications Part of the American Politics Commons, Ethics and Political Philosophy Commons, and the
Political Theory Commons
Recommended Citation
Dagger, Richard. "Republicanism." In The Oxford Handbook of The History of Political Philosophy, edited by George Klosko, 701-11. New York: Oxford University Press, 2011.
This Book Chapter is brought to you for free and open access by the Political Science at UR Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Political Science Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of UR Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact scholarshiprepository@richmond.edu.
CHAPTER 43
REPUBLICANISM
RICHARD DAGGER
REPUBLICANISM is an ancient tradition of political thought that has enjoyed a remark- able revival in recent years. As with liberalism, conservatism, and other enduring political traditions, there is considerable disagreement as to exactly what republicanism is and who counts as a republican, whether in the ancient world or contemporary times. Scholars agree, however, that republicanism rests on the conviction that government is not the domain of some ruler or small set of rulers, but is instead a public matter-the res publica-to be directed by self-governing citizens.
This conviction historically has led republicans to be suspicious of or downright hostile to monarchy, to the point where opposition to monarchy is often taken to define republicanism. Hence the eminent historian of political thought Quentin Skin- ner refers to 'a republican (in the strict sense of being an opponent of monarchy) ... ' (Skinner 2008: 84). Dictionaries frequently add to this negative definition the positive feature that republicans advocate government by elected representatives. Both points are correct insofar as republicans have generally opposed monarchy and favored representative government, but there is also reason to be cautious here-and reason to look more closely at the definition of republicanism before turning to its history.
DEFINING REPUBLICANISM
··················································································································
Caution is necessary because important thinkers commonly linked to the republican tradition, such as Aristotle and Cicero, were neither unequivocally opposed to monarchy nor clearly committed to representative government. As they saw it, a form of government is good if it will promote the public good. The problem with monarchy is not that it cannot do this; in some circumstances, Aristotle says, monarchy is the form of government most likely to promote the public good. The problem is that monarchs are all too likely, when unchecked by others, to become tyrants. That is why Cicero and other
702 RICHARD DAGGER
classical republicans came to favor the mixed constitution (or mixed government) as a way of preserving the rule of law. A mixed constitution blends the rule of one with the rule of the few and of the many, so that the monarchical element will be limited rather than absolute, with the monarch under the law rather than above it. In this limited, constitutional sense of' monarchy', republicans need not be opposed to monarchical governments. If, however, one means by 'monarchy' rule by one person who holds complete, unchecked authority, then a republican will necessarily be opposed to monarchy.
The connection between republicanism and representative government is similarly complicated. As the historical accounts of the development of political representation indicate, the terms 'republic' and 'republican' antedate the idea of government by elected representatives. Mixed constitutions require that the few and the many have a voice, but not that the members of either group elect those who speak for them. The rule of law cannot be effective where no one makes laws, or discerns them in nature or custom, but the legislator or legislators need not be elected. If the circumstances allow, in fact, republicans may even embrace a form of direct democracy in which the people as a whole are free to assemble, debate, and cast their votes for or against proposed laws. To be sure, modern and contemporary republicans are typically advocates of representative government, but that is because they do not think that circumstances are
favorable to the exercise of direct democracy-not, at least, when the public business must be conducted on a scale as large as that of the modern state.
Geoengineering Watch Global Alert News, June 28, 2025, #516
|
Chapter 10: The Ruling Elite: Before Marx, there was Roosevelt
Chapter 10: The Ruling Elite: Before Marx, there was Roosevelt
Before Marx, there was Roosevelt
In 1841, Clinton Roosevelt, son of Elbert Cornelius Roosevelt (1767-1857)[371] of the New York banking family, wrote The Science of Government Founded on Natural Law in an effort to implement the
Illuminati plan for the U.S. The book advocated a network of highly structured, regulated communities. Roosevelt integrated a conspiratorial framework to communize the U.S. population and gradually eliminate the U.S. Constitution. Horace Greeley and Charles Dana, of the New York Tribune, and Roosevelt were directed, along with a select committee to raise funds for the enterprise which was also being financed by the Rothschilds.
Roosevelt (1804-1898), a distant cousin of Franklin and Theodore, may have inspired Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal and the National Recovery Act. He apparently derived many of his ideas from the numerous works of Johann Adam Weishaupt, who revised Illuminism with the objective of world domination. In 1835, Roosevelt founded the Equal Rights Party in New York City, also known as the Loco-Foco Party (1835-1845). He ran for Congress as a member of the Equal Rights Party.[372] Party members, including poet Walter Whitman, came from the anti-Tammany Democrats and the Working Men’s Party.
The Loco-Focos, a radical political faction of the Democrat Party, possibly an Illuminati front organization, was largely active in the Northeast. The dogma of the Working Man’s Party (1828-1830) greatly influenced the radicals in the Loco-Focos. These parties merged into the Equal Rights Party in 1833 and eventually became the Socialist Party in 1901.[373]
Roosevelt claimed that there was no difference in the most predominant national
economic principles of Adam Smith who wrote The Wealth of Nations (1776) and the principles of Francis Wayland, a Baptist Minister and Brown University President (1827-1855) and Frances Wright, feminist, abolitionist, and social reformer and Robert Dale Owen (1801-1877). Adam Smith promoted free trade and equalization of nations. Wright and both Robert Owen and his son, Robert Dale Owen embraced those same general
BOMBSHELL: The tech wizards don’t know how their own AI works; it’s a black-box mystery
I’ve been saying I don’t know how it works, since I had my first conversation with ChatGPT. Of course, I don’t know how a can opener works, either. But seriously, this idea that chatbots “train” on a “large language model,” and then answer user questions in perfect grammatical English, at lightning speed, and sometimes INVENT fictional answers, but can’t really invent because they can’t choose—the whole business doesn’t add up, as far as I’m concerned. Turns out I’m not alone. Axios: “The wildest, scariest, indisputable truth about AI’s large language models is that the companies building them don’t know exactly why or how they work.” “The engineers know what they’re setting in motion, and what data sources they draw on. But the LLM’s [Large Language Model’s] size — the sheer inhuman number of variables in each [chatbot’s] choice of ‘best next word’ it makes—means even the experts can’t explain exactly why it chooses to say anything in particular.” “As OpenAI’s researchers bluntly put it, ‘we have not yet developed human-understandable explanations for why the model generates particular outputs.’” “Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei, in an essay in April called ‘The Urgency of Interpretability,’ warned: ‘People outside the field are often surprised and alarmed to learn that we do not understand how our own AI creations work. They are right to be concerned: this lack of understanding is essentially unprecedented in the history of technology.’ Amodei called this a serious risk to humanity—yet his company keeps boasting of more powerful models nearing superhuman capabilities.” “A new report by AI researchers, including former OpenAI employees, called ‘AI 2027,’ explains how the Great Unknown [the mystery of how AI works] could, in theory, turn catastrophic in less than two years.” How do you like them apples? “We’re unleashing it on the world, but we don’t know how it works. And, you know, it goes off on weird tangents…” I had a long conversation with ChatGPT about how it “decides” which particular fictions to “invent” when it comes up with fictions. It gave me a detailed answer (which I published in this podcast), but I still didn’t feel I got down to a bottom line explanation. It seems like there’s a gap between its programmed guidelines and the specific answers it constructs. A hole, a moment when it does something unknown. |
Jury Deliberates for Less than 15 Minutes: Rules in Favor of Ascension Health
Jury Deliberates for Less than 15 Minutes: Rules in Favor of Ascension HealthThis was a very complex medical case to be decided in 15 min. IMO, it appears some of the jurors did not understand the case or the questions they were to deliberate on. Case in point, juror #587.
June 19, 2025: In the 13-day jury trial of the wrongful death and medical battery of Grace Schara vs. Ascension Health (St. Elizabeth’s Hospital), it appears the jury deliberated for less than 15 minutes delivering a greater than 5/6’s verdict in favor of the defendants (Ascension Health). Below is a 06:45 video of the judge explaining to the juror next steps and the reading of the verdict. Grace Schara Wrongful Death Jury Trial | Day 13 | Children’s Health Defense  I tracked video time so you can see that the judge excused the jurors at around 08:12:00 and then they were reconvened in the court room to deliver the verdict before 08:40:00.When I double-checked the time the court reconvened, the recorded live-feed of the court room started again at around 8:28:00. That’s only 16 minutes for dismissal, deliberation, confirming a 5/6’s verdict and reconvening in the court room! It’s important to note that this was a very complex medical case and the verdict came back way too fast. IMO, it likely took the court clerk longer to read the verdict in court then for the jury to deliberate it. (Sarcasm - it appears there was no deliberation). Did the Jury Understand the Case? Or the Questions They Were Asked to Deliberate on?In my opinion, there’s legitimate speculation to believe that the jurors not only did not understand the complexity of the case, but they didn’t even appear to understand the questions they were asked in regard to whether or not the negligence of the medical staff contributed to the death of Grace. |
"The Last Boomer" Podcast Ep 003 Friday June 20, 2025 at 8PM EDT
"The Last Boomer" Podcast Ep 003 Friday June 20, 2025 at 8PM EDTReview of Notice to HHS and Self-Censorship; Dr Henry Ealy (Dr Henele) and Jeremiah Hosea dropping in for conversation at 8:45PM EDT
Hi All, Episode 3 of “The Last Boomer” Podcast with John Beaudoin, Sr. airs on Friday June 20, 2025 at 8:00PM on Rumble. The link is provided in the prior sentence. But here it is again Hope to see you there. Bring your questions ot the Rumble chat. John 14:6 TRUTH John Beaudoin, Sr. aka, The Real CdC aka, The Last Boomer aka, Coquin de Chien |
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)