Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

For what it's worth, Thoreau was writing from the relative safety of his friend's property. I can't help but wonder if his opinion on the utility of government would have been different if, while Emerson was out, somebody decided to come along and trash his cabin for fun.

Meanwhile, the old saw about those who trade freedom for safety deserving neither Liberty nor safety actually referred to the colonial government considering allowing the Penn family to forgo taxes in perpetuity in exchange for deploying some mercenaries to fight on the colonial frontier. Benjamin Franklin was talking to the legislature, and reminding them that they have the liberty of setting the law as they see fit - by giving up that Liberty via a guarantee of perpetual freedom from taxation for temporary safety, they (The legislature) would deserve neither.

In practice, government is forever a balancing act between liberties and safety. One can start at social contract theory and work one's way out from there if one wants a formal grounding, or one can go the common sense route and understand that if you go around cheating people, eventually people are going to gang up on you because we are social creatures.



Your historical recollection is incorrect. Thoreau was a strong proponent of limited government and it's utility. What he was against was tyrannical overreach and abuse of power, such as, for example, a gov't investigating who lied in a spat between coworkers.


If the civil court system is "tyrannical overreach," it's one people have been quietly tolerating (and benefiting from) for thousands of years.


I never said all civil law was bad.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: