This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 27 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Mark Alexander Inactive
    Mark Alexander
    @MarkAlexander

    • #1
  2. Clavius Thatcher
    Clavius
    @Clavius

    Mark Alexander (View Comment):

    This is an excellent one, but I believe I have used it before.

    • #2
  3. Hang On Member
    Hang On
    @HangOn

    Utter nonsense.

    • #3
  4. Samuel Block Support
    Samuel Block
    @SamuelBlock

    Hang On (View Comment):

    Utter nonsense.

    You think? I wouldn’t call the two incompatible, but “count[ing] on having both at once” seems like a mistake. 

    • #4
  5. Hang On Member
    Hang On
    @HangOn

    Samuel Block (View Comment):

     

    You think? I wouldn’t call the two incompatible, but “count[ing] on having both at once” seems like a mistake. 

    Exactly. It is possible to have peace and freedom. It is possible to have freedom and not peace. It is possible to have peace and not freedom. And it is possible to have neither peace nor freedom.

    Utter nonsense.

    • #5
  6. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Mark Alexander (View Comment):

     

    I bet Heinlein couldn’t do all of those.

    In particular, I bet he couldn’t program a computer.  USE one, okay.  But program?  Not really.  Even if he thought he was, he probably wasn’t.

    I suspect his buildings probably wouldn’t last very long either.

    • #6
  7. Chuck Coolidge
    Chuck
    @Chuckles

    Mark Alexander (View Comment):

    You calling me an insect?  :)

    • #7
  8. Arahant Member
    Arahant
    @Arahant

    kedavis (View Comment):
    I suspect his buildings probably wouldn’t last very long either.

    Did you know one of his hobbies was stone masonry?

    • #8
  9. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Arahant (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):
    I suspect his buildings probably wouldn’t last very long either.

    Did you know one of his hobbies was stone masonry?

    Sounds like he could make a good wall, or a patio… but a full building?

    • #9
  10. Judge Mental Member
    Judge Mental
    @JudgeMental

    Arahant (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):
    I suspect his buildings probably wouldn’t last very long either.

    Did you know one of his hobbies was stone masonry?

    Built his own house.

    • #10
  11. Arahant Member
    Arahant
    @Arahant

    Judge Mental (View Comment):

    Arahant (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):
    I suspect his buildings probably wouldn’t last very long either.

    Did you know one of his hobbies was stone masonry?

    Built his own house.

    He and his (third) wife were both engineers.

    • #11
  12. Mark Alexander Inactive
    Mark Alexander
    @MarkAlexander

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Mark Alexander (View Comment):

     

    I bet Heinlein couldn’t do all of those.

    In particular, I bet he couldn’t program a computer. USE one, okay. But program? Not really. Even if he thought he was, he probably wasn’t.

    I suspect his buildings probably wouldn’t last very long either.

    Keep in mind that this comes from his novel “Time Enough for Love” and is one of the entries in the Notebooks for Lazarus Long…

    • #12
  13. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Mark Alexander (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Mark Alexander (View Comment):

     

    I bet Heinlein couldn’t do all of those.

    In particular, I bet he couldn’t program a computer. USE one, okay. But program? Not really. Even if he thought he was, he probably wasn’t.

    I suspect his buildings probably wouldn’t last very long either.

    Keep in mind that this comes from his novel “Time Enough for Love” and is one of the entries in the Notebooks for Lazarus Long…

    Lazarus Long had plenty of time to not specialize.

    • #13
  14. D.A. Venters Inactive
    D.A. Venters
    @DAVenters

    I think we (by that I mean the vast majority of people in modern times) always have both to some degree or another.  It can vary from place to place, of course.  Modern Americans have a great deal of both, relatively speaking. 

    But, there’s always the chance, even in America, however small, of being assaulted, randomly or otherwise, and life always has it’s arguments, controversies, scandals, etc…some big and some small which interrupt the feeling of peace.  And you can’t just do whatever you want – gotta get a building permit for your fence, or a license to drive, or whatever.  But generally speaking, peace and freedom, as long as you don’t insist on their absolute forms, co-exist all the time.

     

     

    • #14
  15. Clavius Thatcher
    Clavius
    @Clavius

    D.A. Venters (View Comment):

    I think we (by that I mean the vast majority of people in modern times) always have both to some degree or another. It can vary from place to place, of course. Modern Americans have a great deal of both, relatively speaking.

    But, there’s always the chance, even in America, however small, of being assaulted, randomly or otherwise, and life always has it’s arguments, controversies, scandals, etc…some big and some small which interrupt the feeling of peace. And you can’t just do whatever you want – gotta get a building permit for your fence, or a license to drive, or whatever. But generally speaking, peace and freedom, as long as you don’t insist on their absolute forms, co-exist all the time.

     

     

    Yes, it is provocative (or even nonsense as HangOn says) as it said in a way to prompt discussion.  Some level of freedom must be given up to have peace as a set of societal rules establish peace.  But I would agree, it is not all or nothing.

    And taking it to the extreme in either direction would be absurd.  On one side, you have the peace of Landru (from “The Return of the Archons”) and on the other you have anarchy.

    • #15
  16. Saint Augustine Member
    Saint Augustine
    @SaintAugustine

    I think Apollo in Battlestar Galactica Classic said something like this:

    The choice before us is not between war and peace, but between war and slavery.

    • #16
  17. She Member
    She
    @She

    This is the Quote of the Day. June’s sign-up sheet is here, and the days are going fast.  Get ’em while they’re hot!

    If you’re new at this game, it’s a easy way to get your feet wet and start a conversation; if you’re an old-timer, you already know the ropes.  Either way, please sign up to speak up.

    Another ongoing project to encourage new voices is our Group Writing Project. June’s theme is “Journeys.”  If you’d like to weigh in, please sign up for Group Writing too!

     

    • #17
  18. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Clavius (View Comment):

    D.A. Venters (View Comment):

    I think we (by that I mean the vast majority of people in modern times) always have both to some degree or another. It can vary from place to place, of course. Modern Americans have a great deal of both, relatively speaking.

    But, there’s always the chance, even in America, however small, of being assaulted, randomly or otherwise, and life always has it’s arguments, controversies, scandals, etc…some big and some small which interrupt the feeling of peace. And you can’t just do whatever you want – gotta get a building permit for your fence, or a license to drive, or whatever. But generally speaking, peace and freedom, as long as you don’t insist on their absolute forms, co-exist all the time.

     

     

    Yes, it is provocative (or even nonsense as HangOn says) as it said in a way to prompt discussion. Some level of freedom must be given up to have peace as a set of societal rules establish peace. But I would agree, it is not all or nothing.

    And taking it to the extreme in either direction would be absurd. On one side, you have the peace of Landru (from “The Return of the Archons”) and on the other you have anarchy.

    Landru had anarchy too, but only during The Red Hour.

    • #18
  19. Clavius Thatcher
    Clavius
    @Clavius

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Clavius (View Comment):

    D.A. Venters (View Comment):

    I think we (by that I mean the vast majority of people in modern times) always have both to some degree or another. It can vary from place to place, of course. Modern Americans have a great deal of both, relatively speaking.

    But, there’s always the chance, even in America, however small, of being assaulted, randomly or otherwise, and life always has it’s arguments, controversies, scandals, etc…some big and some small which interrupt the feeling of peace. And you can’t just do whatever you want – gotta get a building permit for your fence, or a license to drive, or whatever. But generally speaking, peace and freedom, as long as you don’t insist on their absolute forms, co-exist all the time.

     

     

    Yes, it is provocative (or even nonsense as HangOn says) as it said in a way to prompt discussion. Some level of freedom must be given up to have peace as a set of societal rules establish peace. But I would agree, it is not all or nothing.

    And taking it to the extreme in either direction would be absurd. On one side, you have the peace of Landru (from “The Return of the Archons”) and on the other you have anarchy.

    Landru had anarchy too, but only during The Red Hour.

    A whole night during Festival.

    • #19
  20. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Well technically The Red Hour was just the starting point.

    • #20
  21. Del Mar Dave Member
    Del Mar Dave
    @DelMarDave

    Clavius:

    “You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don’t ever count on having both at once.” ― Robert A. Heinlein

    In this time of assault on liberty, I felt that this quote was appropriate.

    Agreed, and I offer a corollary: freedom and equality (of result, today referred to as “equity”) can not co-exist.

    • #21
  22. Clavius Thatcher
    Clavius
    @Clavius

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Well technically The Red Hour was just the starting point.

    Yes, of course.

    • #22
  23. Clavius Thatcher
    Clavius
    @Clavius

    Del Mar Dave (View Comment):

    Clavius:

    “You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don’t ever count on having both at once.” ― Robert A. Heinlein

    In this time of assault on liberty, I felt that this quote was appropriate.

    Agreed, and I offer a corollary: freedom and equality (of result, today referred to as “equity”) can not co-exist.

    I think you have a better statement here than Heinlein’s.

    • #23
  24. JoshuaFinch Coolidge
    JoshuaFinch
    @JoshuaFinch

    In its broadest sense, freedom means absence of obligations — an accurate description of today’s prevailing mindset, which promotes rights or privileges at the expense of obligations.

    When there was a military draft, young men lost their freedom at the age of 18. However, serving in the military instilled virtues such as courage, a sense of mutual responsibility, and national pride.  Those virtues are critical for ensuring the peace of the land.

      

    • #24
  25. Arahant Member
    Arahant
    @Arahant

    JoshuaFinch (View Comment):
    In its broadest sense, freedom means absence of obligations — an accurate description of today’s prevailing mindset, which promotes rights or privileges at the expense of obligations.

    There is a difference between liberty and license.

    • #25
  26. Saint Augustine Member
    Saint Augustine
    @SaintAugustine

    Arahant (View Comment):

    JoshuaFinch (View Comment):
    In its broadest sense, freedom means absence of obligations — an accurate description of today’s prevailing mindset, which promotes rights or privileges at the expense of obligations.

    There is a difference between liberty and license.

    Remind me to post that Austin Powers line I like later from the compy.

    • #26
  27. Saint Augustine Member
    Saint Augustine
    @SaintAugustine

    Saint Augustine (View Comment):

    Arahant (View Comment):

    JoshuaFinch (View Comment):
    In its broadest sense, freedom means absence of obligations — an accurate description of today’s prevailing mindset, which promotes rights or privileges at the expense of obligations.

    There is a difference between liberty and license.

    Remind me to post that Austin Powers line I like later from the compy.

    • #27
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.