Reflections on the Revolution in France/Rights of Man (Giants of Political Thought)

Reflections on the Revolution in France/Rights of Man (Giants of Political Thought) by Wendy McElroy and George H Smith, discussing works by Edmund Burke and Thomas Paine (Contributor)

This is a quick audio introduction to two famous works from over two centuries ago. The audiobook includes various voice actors to discuss the essays and their authors. There was some controversy with Burke as he seemed to take on different views. This short audiobook provides good background, but is not a source of the original works. 

The Pioneers of Land Reform: Thomas Spence, William Ogilvie, Thomas Paine

The Pioneers of Land Reform: Thomas Spence, William Ogilvie, Thomas Paine

This is a collection of three early thoughts on land reform. In general, they advocated letting people that worked the land and added value collect the value. They wanted to limit excessive rent seeking in order to optimize economic growth. The methods that they sought about doing it differed. On one extreme, all land would be taken from the land holders and rented out to others. (Seems like there could be a lot of "ownership" issues and potential for corruption here.) On the other moderate side, there would be an inheritance tax that would be used to provide a form of universal basic income to everyone. (I wonder what would happen if the property was just transferred before the death?)  It is interesting looking at these a few centuries later. There are parts of the arguments that are easy to pick apart, while other "concerns" seem to be non-issues today. 

Common Sense

No, this isn't about the book from the Fox News guy. This is the nearly 250 year old original. However, it is surprising how many of the arguments are quite similar to arguments given today (though with twists.)

Paine spends a good chunk of the time attacking the British form of government. He has no use for a hereditary monarch (and quotes ample scripture to oppose it.) The institutions of parliament are also criticized. If parliament is supposed to be smarter than the King, why can the King overrule parliament?

In lobbying for independence, Paine points out the small size of the US as an asset. If the US got much bigger, it may be too difficult to actually unite in rebellion. Governing would also be much more of a challenge. He also cites the complacency of the British. They are already getting rich off trading, and don't need to worry about local matters as much.

Hmmm. This seems like it could be a good argument against the current state of the United States government. He argues for smaller scale, and regular elections so that the representatives are in touch with the needs of their constituents. (I'm guessing he didn't assume that would mean continuous campaigning and living in D.C.)

His view of religion and politics is also much different than the modern view. He uses biblical "stories" throughout to backup his points. However, he also proclaims great support for religious plurality within the country. (Freedom to use religion in politics without forcing certain religious believes on others.)

He also seemed to be an early Keynesian (predating Keynes himself by a couple centuries.) He was in favor of creating a national debt for the betterment of the colonies. (His immediate use for the money was for military, so perhaps "Reagan" would be the closer roll model.)

What would he advocate today? Perhaps he would be a leftist advocating improvement of social issues at home. Or maybe a rightist advocating a build up of the military. Or maybe some guy out in Montana advocating his own little country.