The Distinguished Citizen Quotes

Now that the wars are coming to an end, I wish you to prosper in peace. May all mortals from now on live like one people in concord and for mutual advancement. Consider the world as your country, with laws common to all and where the best will govern irrespective of tribe. I do not distinguish among men, as the narrow-minded do, both among Greeks and Barbarians. I am not interested in the descendance of the citizens or their racial origins. I classify them using one criterion: their virtue. For me every virtuous foreigner is a Greek and every evil Greek worse than a Barbarian. If differences ever develop between you never have recourse to arms, but solve them peacefully. If necessary, I should be your arbitrator.

In the end, though, freedom depends upon citizens who are able to make a distinction between what is true and what they want to hear. Authoritarianism arrives not because people say that they want it, but because they lose the ability to distinguish between facts and desires.

Nihilism is the rejection of the principles of civilisation as such . . . I said civilisation, and not: culture. For I have noticed that many nihilists are great lovers of culture, as distinguished from, and opposed to, civilisation. Besides, the term culture leaves it undetermined what the thing is which is to be cultivated (blood and soil or the mind), whereas the term civilisation designates at once the process of making man a citizen, and not a slave; an inhabitant of cities, and not a rustic; a lover of peace, and not of war; a polite being, and not a ruffian.

Maybe the critics are right. Maybe there's no escaping our great political divide, an endless clash of armies, and any attempts to alter the rules of engagement are futile. Or maybe the trivialization of politics has reached a point of no return, so that most people see it as just one more diversion, a sport, with politicians our paunch-bellied gladiators and those who bother to pay attention just fans on the sidelines: We paint our faces red or blue and cheer our side and boo their side, and if it takes a late hit or cheap shot to beat the other team, so be it, for winning is all that matters. But I don't think so. They are out there, I think to myself, those ordinary citizens who have grown up in the midst of all the political and cultural battles, but who have found a way-in their own lives, at least- to make peace with their neighbors, and themselves. ...I imagine they are waiting for a politics with the maturity to balance idealism and realism, to distinguish between what can and cannot be compromised, to admit the possibility that the other side might sometimes have a point. They don't always understand the arguments between right and left, conservative and liberal, but they recognize the difference between dogma and common sense, responsibility and irresponsibility, between those things that last and those that are fleeting. They are out there, waiting for Republicans and Democrats to catch up with them.

Tyranny is a habit which may be developed until at last it becomes a disease. I declare that the noblest nature can become so hardened and bestial that nothing distinguishes it from that of a wild animal. Blood and power intoxicate; they help to develop callousness and debauchery. The mind then becomes capable of the most abnormal cruelty, which it regards pleasure; the man and the citizen are swallowed up in the tyrant; and the return to human dignity, repentance, moral resurrection, becomes almost impossible.

...God knows, when spring comes to Paris the humbles mortal alive must feel that he dwells in paradise....it [is] the the intimacy with which his eye rests upon the scene. It [is] his Paris. A man does not need to be rich, nor even a citizen, to feel this way about Paris. Paris is filled with poor people - the proudest and filthiest lot of beggars that ever walked the earth... And yet they give the illusion of being at home. It is that which distinguishes the Parisian from all other metropolitan souls. When I think of New York I have a very different feeling. New York makes even a rich man feel his unimportance. New York is cold, glisttering, malign. The buildings dominate. There is a sort of atomic frenzy to the activity going on; the more furious the pace, the more diminished the spirit...Nobody knows what it's all about. Nobody directs the energy. Stupendous. Bizarre. Baffling. A tremendous reactive urge, but absolutely uncoordinated.

While we are zealously performing the duties of good citizens and soldiers, we certainly ought not to be inattentive to the higher duties of religion. To the distinguished character of Patriot, it should be our highest glory to add the more distinguished character of Christian.

As with our earlier worship of saints and facts, there is something silly about grown men and women striving to reduce their vision of themselves and of civilization to bean counting. The message of the competition/efficiency/marketplace Trinity seems to be that we should drop the idea of ourselves developed over two and a half millennia. We are no longer beings distinguished by our ability to think and to act consciously in order to affect our circumstances. Instead we should passively submit ourselves and our whole civilization -- our public structures, social forms and cultural creativity -- to the abstract forces of unregulated commerce. It may be that most citizens have difficulty with the argument and would prefer to continue working on the idea of dignified human intelligence. If they must drop something, they would probably prefer to drop the economists.

A citizen can hardly distinguish between a tax and a fine, except that the fine is generally much lighter.

I should like to distinguish two things which are very often confused. The Christian conception of marriage is one: the other is the quite different question--how far Christians, if they are voters or Members of Parliament, ought to try to force their views of marriage on the rest of the community by embodying them in the divorce laws. A great many people seem to think that if you are a Christian yourself, you should try to make divorce difficult for every one. I do not think that. At least I know I should be very angry if the Mohammedans tried to prevent the rest of us from drinking wine. My own view is that the Churches should frankly recognize that the majority of the British people are not Christians and, therefore, cannot be expected to live Christian lives. There ought to be two distinct kinds of marriage: one governed by the State with rules enforced on all citizens, the other governed by the Church with rules enforced by her on her own members. This distinction ought to be quite sharp, so that a man knows which couples are married in a Christian sense and which are not.

What is the use of beauty in woman? Provided a woman is physically well made and capable of bearing children, she will always be good enough in the opinion of economists. What is the use of music? -- of painting? Who would be fool enough nowadays to prefer Mozart to Carrel, Michael Angelo to the inventor of white mustard? There is nothing really beautiful save what is of no possible use. Everything useful is ugly, for it expresses a need, and man's needs are low and disgusting, like his own poor, wretched nature. The most useful place in a house is the water-closet. For my part, saving these gentry's presence, I am of those to whom superfluities are necessaries, and I am fond of things and people in inverse ratio to the service they render me. I prefer a Chinese vase with its mandarins and dragons, which is perfectly useless to me, to a utensil which I do use, and the particular talent of mine which I set most store by is that which enables me not to guess logogriphs and charades. I would very willingly renounce my rights as a Frenchman and a citizen for the sight of an undoubted painting by Raphael, or of a beautiful nude woman, -- Princess Borghese, for instance, when she posed for Canova, or Julia Grisi when she is entering her bath. I would most willingly consent to the return of that cannibal, Charles X., if he brought me, from his residence in Bohemia, a case of Tokai or Johannisberg; and the electoral laws would be quite liberal enough, to my mind, were some of our streets broader and some other things less broad. Though I am not a dilettante, I prefer the sound of a poor fiddle and tambourines to that of the Speaker's bell. I would sell my breeches for a ring, and my bread for jam. The occupation which best befits civilized man seems to me to be idleness or analytically smoking a pipe or cigar. I think highly of those who play skittles, and also of those who write verse. You may perceive that my principles are not utilitarian, and that I shall never be the editor of a virtuous paper, unless I am converted, which would be very comical. Instead of founding a Monthyon prize for the reward of virtue, I would rather bestow -- like Sardanapalus, that great, misunderstood philosopher -- a large reward to him who should invent a new pleasure; for to me enjoyment seems to be the end of life and the only useful thing on this earth. God willed it to be so, for he created women, perfumes, light, lovely flowers, good wine, spirited horses, lapdogs, and Angora cats; for He did not say to his angels, 'Be virtuous,' but, 'Love,' and gave us lips more sensitive than the rest of the skin that we might kiss women, eyes looking upward that we might behold the light, a subtile sense of smell that we might breathe in the soul of the flowers, muscular limbs that we might press the flanks of stallions and fly swift as thought without railway or steam-kettle, delicate hands that we might stroke the long heads of greyhounds, the velvety fur of cats, and the polished shoulder of not very virtuous creatures, and, finally, granted to us alone the triple and glorious privilege of drinking without being thirsty, striking fire, and making love in all seasons, whereby we are very much more distinguished from brutes than by the custom of reading newspapers and framing constitutions.

We live in an open society. We pride ourselves on it, and so we should. An open society is distinguished by the fact that government may not keep information from its citizens, must allow the circulation of ideas. But what we have, we take for granted. What we are used to, we cease to value. Generations of our forebears fought for the freedom of ideas, so that we may have what we do have.

Every man whose business it is to think knows that he must for part of the day create about himself a pool of silence. But in that helter-skelter which we flatter by the name of civilization, the citizen performs the perilous business of government under the worst possible conditions. A faint recognition of this truth inspires the movement for a shorter work day, for longer vacations, for light, air, order, sunlight and dignity in factories and offices. But if the intellectual quality of our life is to be improved that is only the merest beginning. So long as so many jobs are an endless and, for the worker, an aimless routine, a kind of automatism using one set of muscles in one monotonous pattern, his whole life will tend towards an automatism using one set of muscles in one monotonous pattern, his whole life will tend towards an automatism in which nothing is particularly to be distinguished from anything else unless it is announced with a thunderclap. So long as he is physically imprisoned in crowds by day and even by night his attention will flicker and relax. It will not hold fast and define clearly where he is the victim of all sorts of pother, in a home which needs to be ventilated of its welter of drudgery, shrieking children, raucous assertions, indigestible food, bad air, and suffocating ornament. Occasionally perhaps we enter a building which is composed and spacious; we go to a theatre where modern stagecraft has cut away distraction, or go to sea, or into a quiet place, and we remember how cluttered, how capricious, how superfluous and clamorous is the ordinary urban life of our time. We learn to understand why our addled minds seize so little with precision, why they are caught up and tossed about in a kind of tarantella by headlines and catch-words, why so often they cannot tell things apart or discern identity in apparent differences.

Act Well the Part That Is Given to You We are like actors in a play. The divine will has assigned us our roles in life without consulting us. Some of us will act in a short drama, others in a long one. We might be assigned the part of a poor person, a cripple, a distinguished celebrity or public leader, or an ordinary private citizen. Although we can’t control which roles are assigned to us, it must be our business to act our given role as best as we possibly can and to refrain from complaining about it. Wherever you find yourself and in whatever circumstances, give an impeccable performance. If you are supposed to be a reader, read; if you are supposed to be a writer, write.

There are also, without their towns, places appointed near some running water for killing their beasts and for washing away their filth, which is done by their slaves; for they suffer none of their citizens to kill their cattle, because they think that pity and good-nature, which are among the best of those affections that are born with us, are much impaired by the butchering of animals; nor do they suffer anything that is foul or unclean to be brought within their towns, lest the air should be infected by ill-smells, which might prejudice their health.  In every street there are great halls, that lie at an equal distance from each other, distinguished by particular names. 

Some thirty-six years after the death of Leonidas, King Agesilaus of Sparta, as Plutarch recounts, showed that the essential Spartan spirit, which distinguished her citizens from all others in Greece, still had not changed. At that time there was a war between a coalition led by Athens against Sparta and her allies. The latter had been complaining to Agesilaus that it was they who provided the bulk of the army. Agesilaus, accordingly, called a council meeting at which all the Spartan allies sat down on one side and the Spartans on the other. The king then told a herald to proclaim that all the potters among the allies and the Spartans should stand up. After this the herald called on the blacksmiths, the masons, and the carpenters to do likewise; and so he went on through all the crafts and trades. By the end of the herald’s recital almost every single man among the allies had risen to his feet. But not a Spartan had moved. The laws of Lycurgus still obtained. The king laughed and turned to his allies, remarking: ‘You see, my friends, how many more soldiers we send out than you do.’ The whole Spartan attitude is contained in those words.

The ancient Letter to Diognetus records these observations about the early church: “The Christians are distinguished from other men neither by country, nor by language, nor by the customs that they observe; for they neither inhabit cities of their own, nor employ a peculiar form of speech. They dwell in their own countries, but simply as sojourners. They marry, as do all others; they beget children; but they do not destroy their offspring. They have a common table, but not a common bed. They are in the flesh, but they do not live after the flesh. They pass their days on earth, but they are citizens of heaven. They obey the prescribed laws, and at the same time surpass the laws by their lives. They love all men, and are persecuted by all. They are unknown and condemned; they are put to death, and restored to life. They are poor, yet they make many rich; they are lacking all things, and yet abound in all; they are dishonored, and yet in their very dishonor are glorified. They are spoken of as evil, and yet are justified; they are reviled, and bless; they are insulted and repay the insult with honor; they do good, yet are punished as evildoers.

Democracy provides the institutional framework for the reform of political institutions (other than this framework). It makes possible the reform of institutions without using violence, and thereby the use of reason in the designing of new institutions and the adjusting of old ones. It cannot provide reason. The question of the intellectual and moral standard of its citizens is to a large degree a personal problem. (The idea that this problem can be tackled, in turn, by an institutional eugenic and educational control is, I believe, mistaken ; some reasons for my belief will be given below.) It is quite wrong to blame democracy for the political shortcomings of a democratic state. We should rather blame ourselves. In a non-democratic state, the only way to achieve reasonable reforms is by the violent overthrow of the government, and the introduction of a democratic framework. Those who criticize democracy on any ' moral ' grounds fail to distinguish between personal and institutional problems. It rests with us to improve matters. The democratic institutions cannot improve themselves. The problem of improving them is always a problem of persons rather than of institutions.

O Fabricius! What would your great soul have thought, if to your own misfortune you had been called back to life and had seen the pompous face of this Rome saved by your efforts and which your honourable name had distinguished more than all its conquests? 'Gods,' you would have said, 'what has happened to those thatched roofs and those rustic dwelling places where, back then, moderation and virtue lived? What fatal splendour has succeeded Roman simplicity? What is this strange language? What are these effeminate customs? What do these statues signify, these paintings, these buildings? You mad people, what have you done? You, masters of nations, have you turned yourself into the slaves of the frivolous men you conquered? Are you now governed by rhetoricians? Was it to enrich architects, painters, sculptors, and comic actors that you soaked Greece and Asia with your blood? Are the spoils of Carthage trophies for a flute player? Romans, hurry up and tear down these amphitheatres, break up these marbles, burn these paintings, chase out these slaves who are subjugating you, whose fatal arts are corrupting you. Let other hands distinguish themselves with vain talents. The only talent worthy of Rome is that of conquering the world and making virtue reign there. When Cineas took our Senate for an assembly of kings, he was not dazzled by vain pomp or by affected elegance. He did not hear there this frivolous eloquence, the study and charm of futile men. What then did Cineas see that was so majestic? O citizens! He saw a spectacle which your riches or your arts could never produce, the most beautiful sight which has ever appeared under heaven, an assembly of two hundred virtuous men, worthy of commanding in Rome and governing the earth.

The second discipline, that of action, relates to our relationship with other people. Human beings, for Marcus as for the Stoics generally, are social animals, a point he makes often (e.g., 5.16, 8.59, 9.1). All human beings possess not only a share of the logos but also the ability to use it (that is what makes us human and distinguishes us from other animals). But it would perhaps be more accurate to say that we are participants in the logos, which is as much a process as a substance. Marcus himself more than once compares the world ruled by logos to a city in which all human beings are citizens, with all the duties inherent in citizenship. As human beings we are part of nature, and our duty is to accommodate ourselves to its demands and requirements—“to live as nature requires,” as Marcus often puts it. To do this we must make proper use of the logos we have been allotted, and perform as best we can the functions assigned us in the master plan of the larger, cosmic logos, of which it is a part. This requires not merely passive acquiescence in what happens, but active cooperation with the world, with fate and, above all, with other human beings. We were made, Marcus tells us over and over, not for ourselves but for others, and our nature is fundamentally unselfish. In our relationships with others we must work for their collective good, while treating them justly and fairly as individuals.

Equal laws are not suitable for unequal positions. Citizens cannot be subject to the obligations of subjects, nor subjects to the duties of citizens. It is therefore necessary to distinguish carefully and always the laws which concern the citizens alone, then the laws which bind only the subjects, then finally the laws which are applicable to both. Inborn rights are equal for all, whereas acquired rights are unequal: these two kinds of rights therefore require specific laws for their maintenance.

Tyranny is a habit which may be developed until at last it becomes a disease. I declare that the noblest nature can become so hardened and bestial that nothing distinguishes it from that of a wild animal. Blood and power intoxicate; they help to develop callousness and debauchery. The mind then becomes capable of the most abnormal cruelty, which it regards as pleasure; the man and the citizen are swallowed up in the tyrant; and the return to human dignity, repentance, moral resurrection, becomes almost impossible.

This new notion of freedom, resting upon liberation from poverty, changed both the course and goal of revolution. Liberty now had come to mean first of all “dress and food and the reproduction of the species,” as the sans-culottes consciously distinguished their own rights from the lofty and, to them, meaningless language of the proclamation of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen. Compared to the urgency of their demands, all deliberations about the best form of government suddenly appeared irrelevant and futile. “La République? La Monarchie? Je ne connais que la question sociale,” said Robespierre.

At the first World Fantasy Convention, in 1975, the mayor of Providence gave me a key to the city. I appreciated the gesture, but it wasn’t necessary. My welcome to Providence had come almost half a century earlier, in 1927, from the hand of its distinguished citizen, Howard Phillips Lovecraft. His was the hand penning the stories which enthralled me when I first encountered them in the pages of Weird Tales magazine. And early in 1933 it was through that same hand I was ushered into Lovecraft’s private world as we began a personal correspondence. Thus he opened the gates of his cherished Providence to me long before I ever actually arrived there.

(Pericles Funeral Oration) But before I praise the dead, I should like to point out by what principles of action we rose to power, and under what institutions and through what manner of life our empire became great. Our form of government does not enter into rivalry with the institutions of others. Our government does not copy our neighbors', but is an example to them. It is true that we are called a democracy, for the administration is in the hands of the many and not of the few. But while there exists equal justice to all and alike in their private disputes, the claim of excellence is also recognized; and when a citizen is in any way distinguished, he is preferred to the public service, not as a matter of privilege, but as the reward of merit. Neither is poverty an obstacle, but a man may benefit his country whatever the obscurity of his condition. There is no exclusiveness in our public life, and in our private business we are not suspicious of one another, nor angry with our neighbor if he does what he likes; we do not put on sour looks at him which, though harmless, are not pleasant. While we are thus unconstrained in our private business, a spirit of reverence pervades our public acts; we are prevented from doing wrong by respect for the authorities and for the laws, having a particular regard to those which are ordained for the protection of the injured as well as those unwritten laws which bring upon the transgressor of them the reprobation of the general sentiment. Because of the greatness of our city the fruits of the whole earth flow in upon us; so that we enjoy the goods of other countries as freely as our own. Then, again, our military training is in many respects superior to that of our adversaries; Our enemies have never yet felt our united strength, the care of a navy divides our attention, and on land we are obliged to send our own citizens everywhere. But they, if they meet and defeat a part of our army, are as proud as if they had routed us all, and when defeated they pretend to have been vanquished by us all. None of these men were enervated by wealth or hesitated to resign the pleasures of life; none of them put off the evil day in the hope, natural to poverty, that a man, though poor, may one day become rich. But, deeming that the punishment of their enemies was sweeter than any of these things, and that they could fall in no nobler cause, they determined at the hazard of their lives to be honorably avenged, and to leave the rest. They resigned to hope their unknown chance of happiness; but in the face of death they resolved to rely upon themselves alone. And when the moment came they were minded to resist and suffer, rather than to fly and save their lives; they ran away from the word of dishonor, but on the battlefield their feet stood fast, and in an instant, at the height of their fortune, they passed away from the scene, not of their fear, but of their glory. I speak not of that in which their remains are laid, but of that in which their glory survives, and is proclaimed always and on every fitting occasion both in word and deed. For the whole earth is the tomb of famous men.

Now, who, according to Rousseau, is the bourgeois? Most simply, following Hegel's formula, he is the man motivated by fear of violent death, the man whose primary concern is preservation or comfortable preservation. Or, to de scribe the inner workings of his soul, he is the man who, when dealing with others, thinks only of himself, and, in his understanding of himself, thinks only of others. He is a role-player. The bourgeois is contrasted by Rousseau, on the one hand, with the natural man, who is whole and simply concerned with himself, and with the citizen, on the other, whose very being consists in his relation to his city, who understands his good to be identical with the common good. The bourgeois distinguishes his own good from the common good, but his good requires society, and hence he exploits others while depending on them. He must define himself in relation to them. The bourgeois comes to be when men no longer believe that there is a common good, when the notion of the father land decays. Rousseau hints that he follows Machiavelli in attributing this decay to Christianity, which promised the heavenly fatherland and thereby took away the supports from the earthly fatherland, leaving social men who have no reason to sacrifice private desire to public duty.

The pathbreaker who disdains the applause he may get from the crowd of his contemporaries does not depend on his own age's ideas. He is free to say with Schillers Marquis Posa: "This century is not ripe for my ideas; I live as a citizen of centuries to come." The genius' work too is embedded in the sequence of historical events, is conditioned by the achievements of preceding generations, and is merely a chapter in the evolution of ideas. But it adds something new and unheard of to the treasure of thoughts and may in this sense be called creative. The genuine history of mankind is the history of ideas. It is ideas that distinguish man from ali other beings. Ideas engender social institutions, political changes, technological methods of production, and ali that is called economic conditions. And in searching for their origin we inevitably come to a point at which ali that can be asserted is that a man had an idea. Whether the name of this man is known or not is of secondary importance. This is the meaning that history attaches to the notion of individuality. Ideas are the ultimate given of historical inquiry. Ali that can be said about ideas is that they carne to pass. The historian may point out how a new idea fitted into the ideas developed by earlier generations and how it may be considered a continuation of these ideas and their logical sequei.

When Tocqueville accepted the language of his age and adopted the term individualisme for volume 2 of Democracy, he distinguished that sentiment from selfishness. Selfishness evinced an exaggerated self-love or narcissism- a misdirected instinct. In contrast, individualism represented a deliberate, openly professed conviction that society required nothing more from the individual than an assertion of private rights, and that it worked well enough by an appropriate interplay of private interests. Individualism, as distinct from either ego or individuality, reflected a wholly debased orientation to "self" that reflected an extreme sense of superiority and self-sufficiency.[...] Public institutions were designed to draw public engagement from what were essentially private concerns, but these arrangements were always vulnerable to a corrupting myopic view of individual right. Individualism embodied a philosophical orientation that not only influenced citizen's perceptions of self and society but also governed the sense of what constitutes a rational course of action. Under the ethos of individualism, dominance was portrayed as a matter of survival- thus, self-interest was only rational choice in many situations. In this way, individualism undermined the ideal uncoerced public virtue that underlay federal institutions. Federal arenas of contestation had required some sense of equity and conception of the common good for even the most minimal accomodations; a public philosophy that exalted individualism threatened the essence of liberty." (Barbara Allen, Tocqueville, Covenant, and the Democratic Revolution. pag.120)

(Pericles:) 'Our form of government does not enter into rivalry with the institutions of others. We do not copy our neighbours, but are an example to them.It is true that we are called a democracy, for the administration is in the hands of the many and not of the few. But while the law secures equal justice to all alike in their private disputes,the claim of excellence is also recognized; and when a citizen is in any way distinguished, he is preferred to the public service, not as a matter of privilege, but as the reward of merit. Neither is poverty a bar, but a man may benefit his country whatever be the obscurity of his condition. There is no exclusiveness in our public life,and in our private intercourse we are not suspicious of one another, nor angry with our neighbour if he does what he likes; we do not put on sour looks at him which, though harmless, are not pleasant. While we are thus unconstrained in our private intercourse, a spirit of reverence pervades our public acts; we are prevented from doing wrong by respect for the authorities and for the laws, having an especial regard to those which are ordained for the protection of the injured as well as to those unwritten laws which bring upon the transgressor of them the reprobation of the general sentiment. 'And we have not forgotten to provide for our weary spirits many relaxations from toil; we have regular games and sacrifices throughout the year; our homes are beautiful and elegant; and the delight which we daily feel in all these things helps to banish melancholy. Because of the greatness of our city the fruits of the whole earth flow in upon us; so that we enjoy the goods of other countries as freely as of our own. (Book 2 Chapter 37-38)

For the Christians are distinguished from other men neither by country, nor language, nor the customs which they observe. For they neither inhabit cities of their own, nor employ a peculiar form of speech, nor lead a life which is marked out by any singularity. The course of conduct which they follow has not been devised by any speculation or deliberation of inquisitive men; nor do they, like some, proclaim themselves the advocates of any merely human doctrines. But, inhabiting Greek as well as barbarian cities, according as the lot of each of them has determined, and following the customs of the natives in respect to clothing, food, and the rest of their ordinary conduct, they display to us their wonderful and confessedly striking [281] method of life. They dwell in their own countries, but simply as sojourners. As citizens, they share in all things with others, and yet endure all things as if foreigners. Every foreign land is to them as their native country, and every land of their birth as a land of strangers. They marry, as do all [others]; they beget children; but they do not destroy their offspring. [282] They have a common table, but not a common bed. [283] They are in the flesh, but they do not live after the flesh. [284] They pass their days on earth, but they are citizens of heaven. [285] They obey the prescribed laws, and at the same time surpass the laws by their lives. They love all men, and are persecuted by all. They are unknown and condemned; they are put to death, and restored to life. [286] They are poor, yet make many rich; [287] they are in lack of all things, and yet abound in all; they are dishonoured, and yet in their very dishonour are glorified. They are evil spoken of, and yet are justified; they are reviled, and bless; [288] they are insulted, and repay the insult with honour; they do good, yet are punished as evil-doers. When punished, they rejoice as if quickened into life; they are assailed by the Jews as foreigners, and are persecuted by the Greeks; yet those who hate them are unable to assign any reason for their hatred.

The textbooks of history prepared for the public schools are marked by a rather naive parochialism and chauvinism. There is no need to dwell on such futilities. But it must be admitted that even for the most conscientious historian abstention from judgments of value may offer certain difficulties. As a man and as a citizen the historian takes sides in many feuds and controversies of his age. It is not easy to combine scientific aloofness in historical studies with partisanship in mundane interests. But that can and has been achieved by outstanding historians. The historian's world view may color his work. His representation of events may be interlarded with remarks that betray his feelings and wishes and divulge his party affiliation. However, the postulate of scientific history's abstention from value judgments is not infringed by occasional remarks expressing the preferences of the historian if the general purport of the study is not affected. If the writer, speaking of an inept commander of the forces of his own nation or party, says "unfortunately" the general was not equal to his task, he has not failed in his duty as a historian. The historian is free to lament the destruction of the masterpieces of Greek art provided his regret does not influence his report of the events that brought about this destruction. The problem of Wertfreíheit must also be clearly distinguished from that of the choice of theories resorted to for the interpretation of facts. In dealing with the data available, the historian needs ali the knowledge provided by the other disciplines, by logic, mathematics, praxeology, and the natural sciences. If what these disciplines teach is insufficient or if the historian chooses an erroneous theory out of several conflicting theories held by the specialists, his effort is misled and his performance is abortive. It may be that he chose an untenable theory because he was biased and this theory best suited his party spirit. But the acceptance of a faulty doctrine may often be merely the outcome of ignorance or of the fact that it enjoys greater popularity than more correct doctrines. The main source of dissent among historians is divergence in regard to the teachings of ali the other branches of knowledge upon which they base their presentation. To a historian of earlier days who believed in witchcraft, magic, and the devil's interference with human affairs, things hàd a different aspect than they have for an agnostic historian. The neomercantilist doctrines of the balance of payments and of the dollar shortage give an image of presentday world conditions very different from that provided by an examination of the situation from the point of view of modern subjectivist economics.

The citizens of Ancient Greece distinguished between work and labour, where labour was the boring, repetitive stuff that kept you alive and was only fit for slaves to carry out, and work, which was the activity of citizens, the creation of art, philosophy and politics that endured beyond a single lifespan. While the slaves were labouring, the citizens of Ancient Greece were busy working, inventing Western civilisation.

He was also a more astute politician than even his admirers realized. During his rise to power, he constructed his own base as an independent candidate not beholden to the oil interests in Southern California. For party loyalty, he substituted personal connections to the state’s two most important (and quite conservative) publishers—Joe Knowland in Oakland, and Harry Chandler in Los Angeles. At the very least, these friendships helped neutralize papers that might otherwise have rejected his increasingly liberal agenda. He was a distinguished governor of California. The state was growing by as many as ten thousand new residents a week, and the pressures on the state’s schools, roads, and its water resources were enormous. Facing that challenge had made him tough-minded and pragmatic about government, its limits, and how best it could benefit ordinary people. He was both an optimist and an activist: If he did not exactly bring an ideology to the Court, then he brought the faith of someone who had seen personally what government could and should do to ameliorate the lives of ordinary people. That the great figures on the bench had so much more judicial experience—Black with sixteen years of service on the Court, Frankfurter and Douglas with fourteen each, and Jackson with twelve—did not daunt him. As he saw it, they knew more about the law, but he knew more about the consequences of the law and its effect on ordinary citizens. His law clerk, Earl Pollock, said years later that there were three things that mattered to Earl Warren: The first was the concept of equality; the second was education; and the third was the right of young people to a decent life. He had spent a lifetime refining his view of the role of government, and he came to the Court ready to implement it.

He was also a more astute politician than even his admirers realized. During his rise to power, he constructed his own base as an independent candidate not beholden to the oil interests in Southern California. For party loyalty, he substituted personal connections to the state’s two most important (and quite conservative) publishers—Joe Knowland in Oakland, and Harry Chandler in Los Angeles. At the very least, these friendships helped neutralize papers that might otherwise have rejected his increasingly liberal agenda. He was a distinguished governor of California. The state was growing by as many as ten thousand new residents a week, and the pressures on the state’s schools, roads, and its water resources were enormous. Facing that challenge had made him tough-minded and pragmatic about government, its limits, and how best it could benefit ordinary people. He was both an optimist and an activist: If he did not exactly bring an ideology to the Court, then he brought the faith of someone who had seen personally what government could and should do to ameliorate the lives of ordinary people. That the great figures on the bench had so much more judicial experience—Black with sixteen years of service on the Court, Frankfurter and Douglas with fourteen each, and Jackson with twelve—did not daunt him. As he saw it, they knew more about the law, but he knew more about the consequences of the law and its effect on ordinary citizens. His law clerk, Earl Pollock, said years later that there were three things that mattered to Earl Warren: The first was the concept of equality; the second was education; and the third was the right of young people to a decent life. He had spent a lifetime refining his view of the role of government, and

Hofstede argued, for example, that cultures can be usefully distinguished according to how much they expect individuals to look after themselves. He called that measurement the “individualism-collectivism scale.” The country that scores highest on the individualism end of that scale is the United States. Not surprisingly, the United States is also the only industrialized country in the world that does not provide its citizens with universal health care. At the opposite end of the scale is Guatemala. Another of Hofstede’s dimensions is “uncertainty avoidance.” How well does a culture tolerate ambiguity? Here are the top five “uncertainty avoidance” countries, according to Hofstede’s database—that is, the countries most reliant on rules and plans and most likely to stick to procedure regardless of circumstances: Greece Portugal Guatemala Uruguay Belgium The bottom five—that is, the cultures best able to tolerate ambiguity—are: 49. Hong Kong 50. Sweden 51. Denmark 52. Jamaica 53. Singapore

A powerful sense of national pride built on a belief in historical humiliation, combined with an inability to distinguish between the nation and its government, goes a long way towards explaining why many in the Chinese diaspora, including Chinese-Australian citizens, remain loyal to the PRC and defend its actions even when they conflict with Australia’s values and interests.

Under this lies a fact never mentioned aloud, but tacitly understood and acted upon: namely, that the conditions of life in all three super-states are very much the same. In Oceania the prevailing philosophy is called Ingsoc, in Eurasia it is called Neo-Bolshevism, and in Eastasia it is called by a Chinese name usually translated as Death-Worship, but perhaps better rendered as Obliteration of the Self. The citizen of Oceania is not allowed to know anything of the tenets of the other two philosophies, but he is taught to execrate them as barbarous outrages upon morality and common sense. Actually the three philosophies are barely distinguishable, and the social systems which they support are not distinguishable at all.

Each of these facts reflects an ongoing failure of the Obama administration: They have a hard time distinguishing good guys from bad guys. That failure impacts their foreign policy—where we’ve been ineffective going after terrorists, while at the same time not respecting the privacy rights of American citizens—and it impacts domestic policy, where they’ve been far more concerned with stripping the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens than with targeting enforcement efforts at violent criminals.

You've done a lot of work on the revolution, obviously. And you tend to focus on women's rights and free speech. What other issues are you drawn to? Eladl: All the issues that concern Egyptian citizen. I deal a lot with women's issues, gender rights, but I think I focus a lot of my work on Egyptian citizens and, because I think any reform should start with the Egyptian citizen, trying to get them to participate in this process. The purpose of editorial cartooning is to awaken people. Some media outlets, whether in the United States or Egypt, distort the facts. And normally the media is controlled either by government, by investors, by the people who have the money. So cartoons, they should look into issues and make it clear whether it is black or white, or whether there is a grey area. People can look and distinguish between sincere and honest cartoonists and from other kinds that are not. Even an historian can be under pressure and to fake the writing of history. But cartoonists, we have the freedom to say what we want. (2011 interview with Cartoon Movement)

The combination of qualities required in a police dog – the nose, the biddability, the controllable aggression, the bravery, the talent for distinguishing the toe-rag from the good citizen, the fear-inspiring bark and looking the part – these do not necessarily come with any pedigree, nor do the genes predictably pass on.

It was always true for capitalism that it needed citizens who were believers at home but agnostics in the marketplace The hard-boiled who believe in nothing turn out to be the kind of fantasists who will believe in anything Feeding the hungry is too close to filling in one's tax return for those in reach of an escape from the mundane It was passion ,not belief that governed the greatest minds There are also reluctant atheists - thinkers who can sometimes be distinguished from the Archibishop of Canterbury only by the fact that they don't believe in God

Considering the long-shot nature of its petition against Fahrenheit 9/11, it is worthwhile to consider whether Citizens United was mainly interested in hectoring the marketing strategy for that film, or whether it had ulterior motives in mind. One possibility is that Citizens United had recognized an opportunity to test whether the FEC would grant a “media exception” from the electioneering rules to companies producing documentary films. The BCRA allowed such exemptions for material that appeared “in a news story, commentary, or editorial distributed through the facilities of a broadcast, cable, or satellite television or radio station.” Though it was banned from traditional “electioneering” due to its corporate structure, Citizens United might have believed in 2004 that the FEC would distinguish between documentary films and campaign advertising, allowing corporate producers of the former to air ads with candidate images. Such a decision would have allowed it to create and market similar movies advocating conservative ideas.

Abrams—as Olson before him had been—was careful to distinguish between limits on contributions and limits on expenditures. Indeed, throughout the argument of both advocates for Citizens United, the questions from the liberal bloc of Justices—Breyer, Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and Stevens—focused on whether there was in fact a practical distinction between the corrupting potential of corporate contributions to candidates—which had been illegal since 1907 and were not being challenged—and the purchase of advertising that a candidate would surely notice and appreciate. If there was in fact no difference, precedent would seem to suggest that corporate spending could be restricted to advance the government’s interest in preventing corruption, as the Court had held in Buckley. However, Abrams pointed out that the precedents in Austin and McConnell were not all that old (at 19 and 6 years, respectively), so if the Court held that expenditure was a different act than contribution, a ruling for Citizens United did not necessarily have to overturn well-established precedents.

Of all the countries benefiting from European civilization, only South Africa and Israel have racial laws that distinguish between rights of different groups of citizens. The Jews were against Hitler's racism, but theirs goes one step further. They determine Jewishness by mother alone. I opposed Zionism initially because I was against any form of nationalism, but I never expected the Zionists to become racists. It makes me feel ashamed in my origin: I feel responsible for the deeds of Israeli nationalists.

At birth, your baby can distinguish between the sounds of every language that has ever been invented. Professor Patricia Kuhl, co-director of the Institute for Learning and Brain Sciences at the University of Washington, discovered this phenomenon. She calls kids at this age “citizens of the world.” Chomsky puts it this way: We are not born with the capacity to speak a specific language. We are born with the capacity to speak any language.

From the perspective of what became the Second Amendment, the most important essay was The Federalist No. 46, written by Madison and first published in the New York Packet on January 29, 1788. It clearly distinguished between the people and the two governments: “The Federal and State governments are in fact but different agents and trustees of the people, constituted with different powers, and designed for different purposes.” Further, “the ultimate authority ... resides in the people alone,” not in “the different governments.”69 As for the argument that the federal government would raise a standing army to oppress the people, Madison replied: To these would be opposed a militia amounting to near half a million of citizens with arms in their hands, officered by men chosen from among themselves, fighting for their common liberties, and united and conducted by governments possessing their affections and confidence. It may well be doubted, whether a militia thus circumstanced could ever be conquered by such a proportion of regular troops. Those who are best acquainted with the last successful resistance of this country against the British arms, will be most inclined to deny the possibility of it. Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.70 A militia of “half a million of citizens with arms in their hands” would have been virtually all able-bodied male citizens out of the American population of three million. The “citizens” constituted the militia, and they had “arms in their hands.” The success of this armed citizenry had been demonstrated in the American Revolution. Unlike other peoples, the Americans were armed, and the resistance of the state governments would bar a federal tyranny. By contrast, the European monarchies were “afraid to trust the people with arms.” In short, the keeping and bearing of arms by the citizens would preserve the republic and protect liberty.

This is aretē; this is the best human prize and the fairest for a young man to win.” The man who fights without pause among the promachoi “is a common good (xynon esthlon) for the polis and all the people (demos).” … “If he falls among the promachoi and loses his dear life, he brings honor to his town (asty) and his people (laoi) and his father.” Young and old alike lament him / and his entire polis mourns with painful regret. / His tomb and his children are notable among men, / and his children’s children, and his genos hereafter … / but if he escapes the doom of death … having prevailed [in battle], … / all men give place to him alike, the youth and the elders…. / Growing old he is distinguished among his citizens. Never does his name or his excellent glory (kleos) perish, but even though he is beneath the earth he is immortal.

The Tantric view is that there is already a complete Buddha dormant within each of us, but we’ve individually and collectively become addicted to horror movies that we mistake for documentaries. From this perspective, our whole society is caught up in a kind of shared horror story, imagining ourselves as zombie consumers rather than empowered citizens: afraid, insecure, incapable beings who have no choice but to wander through life grasping after fleeting pleasures, needlessly competing with each other instead of collaborating, isolating ourselves from the plight of those whose stories we don’t understand. Because our whole society is both constructing and watching this shared screenplay simultaneously, the physical world begins to take on the qualities of this horror movie, and it becomes more and more difficult to distinguish the theater of our experience from the screen of our own projections.

Our laws’, said Pericles, ‘afford equal justice to all alike in their private disputes, but we do not ignore the claims of excellence. When a citizen distinguishes himself, then he is preferred to the public service, not as a matter of privilege, but as a reward for merit; and poverty is not a bar …‘These

Whatever else they do, governmental commissions give reasons. In the Anglo-American political tradition, royal commissions and their nonroyal counterparts regularly form by executive order during national crises. Like reports from the National Research Council, they broadcast consensus among authorities, and thus aim to still controversy. Composed of distinguished citizens whose reputations shield them from charges of partisanship and self-interest, commissions usually call witnesses and issue reports. But at the end, they offer their own considered collective judgment on the matter at hand— their reasons.

Economists sometimes distinguish between three types of goods: private goods, which can be purchased by individuals through the market; club goods, which can only be purchased by a group through some organization like a corporation; and public goods, which can only be purchased by whole communities through the state. This is a very helpful terminological distinction, but it should not be allowed to obscure one very important point. As the example of security guards shows, in many cases the good that is purchased is identical; it’s just that the way it is purchased differs. Rich people pay their security guards personally. Condo owners pay fees to a condo association, which then pays security guards. Citizens pay taxes to the state, which then pays the police. Exactly the same economic transaction is taking place, but it is organized in a different way. So if you ask whether security should be a private good, a club good, or a public good, the answer will be—it depends. Sometimes it is more efficient to deliver security services through the market; sometimes it will be more efficient to deliver them through the state. From the standpoint of society, the goal should be to choose the delivery system that works best in each case.

After the French town of Beziers fell during the bloody Albigensian Crusade in 1209, the victorious Church-sanctioned army was faced with the problem of how to distinguish the town’s heretics from Christians. One of their leaders reportedly said, “Kill them all, for the Lord will know his own,” and thousands of citizens were slaughtered. And you thought the Marines came up with that saying.

But what kind of speech is attributed to the citizen in such a view, and how does such an account draw the line between the performativity that is hate speech and the performativity that is the linguistic condition of citizenship? If hate speech is a kind of speech that no citizen ought to exercise, then how might its power be specified, if it can be? And how are both the proper speech of citizens and the improper hate speech of citizens to be distinguished from yet a third level of performative power, that which belongs to the state? This last seems crucial to interrogate if only because hate speech is itself described through the sovereign trope derived from state discourse (and discourse on the state). Figuring hate speech as an exercise of sovereign power implicitly performs a catachresis by which the one who is charged with breaking the law (the one who utters hate speech) is nevertheless invested with the sovereign power of law. What the law says, it does, but so, too, the speaker of hate. The performative power of hate speech is figured as the performative power of state-sanctioned legal language, and the contest between hate speech and the law becomes staged, paradoxically, as a battle between two sovereign powers.

In the summer of 2014, then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV), Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY), and other members of the Democratic brain trust introduced a measure to amend the First Amendment as follows: Authorizes Congress and the states to regulate and set reasonable limits on the raising and spending of money by candidates and others to influence elections. Grants Congress and the states the power to implement and enforce this amendment by appropriate legislation, and to distinguish between natural persons and corporations or other artificial entities created by law, including by prohibiting such entities from spending money to influence elections. Declares that nothing in this amendment shall be construed to grant Congress or the states the power to abridge the freedom of the press.8 So, let me get this straight: The amendment would allow politicians in Washington, D.C., and state capitals to regulate speech that directly relates to the business of government and their jobs—the type of speech that should be most protected! This con job was nothing but a power grab to control how citizens—including corporations and conservative interest groups—can express their political views, a grab to help keep corrupt incumbents in office. After all, it’s tough to be voted out of office when you help control what your opponents and constituents can say about you. And it’s awfully hard to express one’s individual right to a fair vote when the outcome of an election is effectively rigged. Note the special carveout for the media. Reid and company were trying to make it so corporations and conservative interest groups would be muzzled, but unions and the Democrats’ tame press would be free to spew any kind of biased crap they like. If they can’t win elections fair and square, Democrats are more than willing to silence huge portions of the citizenry to stay in power. Had the amendment somehow passed, it would have been the first time one of the Constitution’s core individual rights would have been infringed through the amendment process itself.9 The attempt itself is disgraceful.

Civil-military relations in modern America are characterized more by paradox than by consistency: ordinary Americans support the military more than ever but know less about it than ever. In Washington, senior government policymakers simultaneously overestimate the military’s capabilities and mistrust the military leadership. The US military is widely viewed as the strongest military in the history of the world, but military leaders view conventional military tools as less and less useful for dealing with the complex security threats we face today. Meanwhile, although the military itself is more professional than ever, its internal structures—from recruiting, training, and education to personnel policies—lag badly behind those in most civilian workplaces, making it difficult for the military to change from within. These paradoxes both reflect and contribute to an underlying conundrum. In today’s world, where security challenges increasingly stem from nonstate actors, the cyber domain, the diffuse effects of climate change, and similar nontraditional sources, it is growing ever more difficult to clearly define the US military’s role and mission. We no longer have a coherent basis for distinguishing between war and “not war,” or between military force and other forms of coercion and manipulation. In such a context, we no longer know what kind of military we need, or how to draw sensible lines between civilian and military tasks and roles.

Though I still liked America and enjoyed living there much of the time, I felt more like a world citizen. The distinguishing marks of a passport didn't determine my identity; my experiences and values did. The more you experience something outside of what you've known, the more open-minded you become... but this worldview can also be somewhat alienating, especially to people at home.

In the wake of the 2015 protest, the government formed a commission to stamp out racism; it was led by Emi Palmor, the director general of the Justice Ministry. Its conclusions, submitted in the summer of 2016, were quite damning, finding discriminatory policies and practices that distinguished Ethiopian Israelis from other citizens in fields including education, medical treatment, employment, and army enlistment, as well as policing. In 2015, it said, the percentage of indictments against Ethiopian Israelis was twice as high as that for the general population and four times as high among minors, while the percentage of Ethiopian Israeli minors in detention was almost ten times that of the rest of the population.

Even after California became part of Mexico upon the country’s independence from Spain, the region’s inhabitants thought of themselves differently from their fellow Mexican citizens—they were gente de razón (people of reason), a term that distinguished them from the Indians or those of mixed blood, frequently called cholos.

In fact, it is by no means certain that the purpose of Plato or of Aristotle, as Fārābī understood it, required the actualization of the best political order or of the virtuous city. Fārābī adumbrates the problem by making a distinction between Socrates’ investigations and Plato’s investigations, as well as between “the way of Socrates” and the way adopted eventually by Plato. “The science and the art of Socrates” which is to be found in Plato’s Laws, is only a part of Plato’s, the other part being “the science and the art of Timaeus” which is to be found in the Timaeus. “The way of Socrates” is characterized by the emphasis on “the scientific investigation of justice and the virtues,” whereas the art of Plato is meant to supply “the science of the essence of every being” and hence especially the science of the divine and on the natural things. The difference between the way of Socrates and the way of Plato points back to the difference between the attitude of the two men toward the actual cities. The crucial difficulty was created by the political or social status of philosophy: in the nations and cities of Plato’s time, there was no freedom of teaching and of investigation. Socrates was therefore confronted with the alternative, whether he should choose security and life, and thus conform with the false opinions and the wrong way of life of his fellow-citizens, or else non-conformity and death. Socrates chose non-conformity and death. Plato found a solution to the problem posed by the fate of Socrates, in founding the virtuous city in speech: only in that “other city” can man reach his perfection. Yet, according to Fārābī, Plato “repeated” his account of the way of Socrates and he “repeated” the mention of the vulgar of the cities and nations which existed in his time. The repetition amounts to a considerable modification of the first statement, or to a correction of the Socratic way. The Platonic way, as distinguished from the Socratic way, is a combination of the way of Socrates with the way of Thrasymachus; for the intransigent way of Socrates is appropriate only for the philosopher’s dealing with the elite, whereas the way of Thrasymachus, which is both more and less exacting than the former, is appropriate for his dealing with the vulgar. What Fārābī suggests is that by combining the way of Socrates with the way of Thrasymachus, Plato avoided the conflict with the vulgar and thus the fate of Socrates. Accordingly, the revolutionary quest for the other city ceased to be necessary: Plato substituted it for a more constructive way of action, namely, the gradual replacement of the accepted opinions by the truth or an approximation of the truth. The replacement of the accepted opinions could not be gradual, if it were not accompanied by a provisional acceptance of the accepted opinions: as Fārābī elsewhere declares, conformity with the opinions of the religious community in which one is brought up, is a necessary qualification for the future philosopher. The replacement of the accepted opinions could not be gradual if it were not accompanied by the suggestion of opinions which, while pointing toward the truth, do not too flagrantly contradict the accepted opinions. We may say that Fārābī’s Plato eventually replaces the philosopher-king who rules openly in the virtuous city, by the secret kingship of the philosopher who, being “a perfect man” precisely because he is an “investigator,” lives privately as a member of an imperfect society which he tries to humanize within the limits of the possible.

Christians are not distinguished from the rest of humanity by country, language, or custom. For nowhere do they live in cities of their own, nor do they speak some unusual dialect, nor do they practice an eccentric way of life. . . . They live in their own countries, but only as sojourners; they participate in everything as citizens, and endure everything as foreigners. Every foreign country is their fatherland, and every fatherland is foreign. They marry like everyone else, and have children, but they do not destroy their offspring. They share their food but not their wives. They are in the flesh, but they do not live according to the flesh. They pass their days on earth, but they are citizens of heaven. They obey the established laws; indeed in their private lives they transcend the laws. They love everyone, and by everyone they are persecuted. They are poor, yet they make many rich; they are in need of everything, yet they abound in everything. They are dishonored, yet they are glorified in their dishonor; they are slandered, yet they are vindicated. They are cursed, yet they bless; they are insulted yet they offer respect. When they do good, they are punished as evildoers; when they are punished, they rejoice as though brought to life.48

If you will take a map of West Virginia , you will see that it is much like the map of any other State. Deep ridges of hills cut across its eastern and southwestern por tions, but aside from these there is little to distinguish it from other maps; the same winding lines indicate rivers, the same dots show where its towns are, the same network of railways connects these dots. One can easily imagine the life that goes on in these towns as being the same that goes on in small towns everywhere. He can imagine people owning their own homes, following a variety of occupations, attending to their own little affairs, and sharing in the town's common activities. He can imagine them acting like the independent citizens of other communities. But he will be mistaken . Nothing of the sort goes on there. In the coal mining fields of West Virginia, comprising parts or all of thirty -six counties, the dots on the map do not stand for towns in the ordinary sense. They do not indicate places where people lead an interrelated, many-sided, and mutually dependent existence. They stand for clusters of houses around a coal mine. They indicate points at which seams of coal have been opened , tipples erected, and coal has been brought forth as fuel. True, people live here, but they live here to work . The communities exist for the coal mines . They are the adjuncts and necessary conveniences of an industry.

A lack of moral clarity is why an Israeli journalist compared a kipa to a prison. It is why people in free societies cannot distinguish between religious fundamentalists in democratic states and religious terrorists in fundamentalist states. It is why people in free societies can come to see their fellow citizens as their enemies and foreign dictators as their friends.

he fell victim to that increasingly prevalent psychological disorder in which the boundary between truth and lies became smudged and indistinct, so that at times he found himself incapable of distinguishing one from the other, reality from “reality,” and began to think of himself as a natural citizen (and potential inhabitant) of that imaginary world beyond the screen to which he was so devoted, and which, he believed, provided him, and therefore everyone, with the moral, social, and practical guidelines by which all men and women should live.

The condition and manners of the Christians in this age are most beautifully described by the unknown author of the "Epistola ad Diognetum" in the early part of the second century.3 "The Christians," he says, "are not distinguished from other men by country, by language, nor by civil institutions. For they neither dwell in cities by themselves, nor use a peculiar tongue, nor lead a singular mode of life. They dwell in the Grecian or barbarian cities, as the case may be; they follow the usage of the country in dress, food, and the other affairs of life. Yet they present a wonderful and confessedly paradoxical conduct. They dwell in their own native lands, but as strangers. They take part in all things as citizens; and they suffer all things, as foreigners. Every foreign country is a fatherland to them, and every native land is a foreign. They marry, like all others; they have children; but they do not cast away their offspring. They have the table in common, but not wives. They are in the flesh, but do not live after the flesh. They live upon the earth, but are citizens of heaven. They obey the existing laws, and excel the laws by their lives. They love all, and are persecuted by all. They are unknown, and yet they are condemned. They are killed and are made alive. They are poor and make many rich. They lack all things, and in all things abound. They are reproached, and glory in their reproaches. They are calumniated, and are justified. They are cursed, and they bless. They receive scorn, and they give honor. They do good, and are punished as evil-doers. When punished, they rejoice, as being made alive. By the Jews they are attacked as aliens, and by the Greeks persecuted; and the cause of the enmity their enemies cannot tell. In short, what the soul is in the body, the Christians are in the world. The soul is diffused through all the members of the body, and the Christians are spread through the cities of the world. The soul dwells in the body, but it is not of the body; so the Christians dwell in the world, but are not of the world.

Owing to the isolation in which the agriculturist lives, and to his limited education, he is but little capable of adding anything to general civilisation or learning to estimate the value of political institutions, and much less still to take an active part in the administration of public affairs and of justice, or to defend his liberty and rights. Hence he is mostly in a state of dependence on the landed proprietor. Everywhere merely agricultural nations have lived in slavery, or oppressed by despotism, feudalism, or priestcraft. The mere exclusive possession of the soil gave the despot, the oligarchy, or the priestly caste a power over the mass of the agricultural population, of which the latter could not rid themselves of their own accord. Under the powerful influence of habit, everywhere among merely agricultural nations has the yoke which brute force or superstition and priestcraft imposed upon them so grown into their very flesh that they come to regard it as a necessary constituent of their own body, as a condition of their very existence. On the other hand, the separation and variety of the operations of business, and the confederation of the productive powers, press with irresistible force the various manufacturers towards one another. Friction produces sparks of the mind, as well as those of natural fire. Mental friction, however, only exists where people live together closely, where frequent contact in commercial, scientific, social, civil, and political matters exists, where there is large interchange both of goods and ideas. The more men live together in one and the same place, the more every one of these men depends in his business on the co-operation of all others, the more the business of every one of these individuals requires knowledge, circumspection, education, and the less that obstinacy, lawlessness, oppression and arrogant opposition to justice interfere with the exertions of all these individuals and with the objects at which they aim, so much the more perfect will the civil institutions be found, so much larger will be the degree of liberty enjoyed, so much more opportunity will be given for self-improvement and for co-operation in the improvement of others. Therefore liberty and civilisation have everywhere and at all times emanated from towns, in ancient times in Greece and Italy, in the Middle Ages in Italy, Germany, Belgium, and Holland; later on in England, and still more recently in North America and France. But there are two kinds of towns, one of which we may term the productive, the other the consuming kind. There are towns which work up raw materials, and pay the country districts for these, as well as for the means of subsistence which they require, by means of manufactured goods. These are the manufacturing towns, the productive ones. The more that these prosper, the more the agriculture of the country prospers, and the more powers that agriculture unfolds, so much the greater do those manufacturing towns become. But there are also towns where those live who simply consume the rents of the land. In all countries which are civilised to some extent, a large portion of the national income is consumed as rent in the towns. It would be false, however, were we to maintain as a general principle that this consumption is injurious to production, or does not tend to promote it. For the possibility of securing to oneself an independent life by the acquisition of rents is a powertul stimulus to economy and to the utilisation of savings in agriculture and in agricultural improvements. Moreover, the man who lives on rents, stimulated by the inclination to distinguish himself before his fellow-citizens, supported by his education and his independent position, will promote, civilisation, the efficiency of public institutions, of State administration, science and art.

Russian authorities distinguished between steppe Islam, suffused, they believed, with Shamanism, and the Islam of the Uzbek cities, which they considered hotbeds of fanaticism. Catherine viewed Islam as a "civilizing" tool that would first make Kazakhs good Muslims, then good citizens, eventually good Christians. She used Tatar teachers, her subjects, who could travel among the nomads and speak their language, to preach a more "correct" Islam. The Tatars became an important factor in implanting in the steppe an Islam that adhered more closely to traditional Muslim practices.

The radical rhetoric of the early fascist movements led many observers, then and since, to suppose that once in power the fascist regimes would make sweeping and fundamental changes in the very bases of national life. In practice, although fascist regimes did indeed make some breathtaking changes, they left the distribution of property and the economic and social hierarchy largely intact (differing fundamentally from what the word revolution had usually meant since 1789). The reach of the fascist “revolution” was restricted by two factors. For one thing, even at their most radical, early fascist programs and rhetoric had never attacked wealth and capitalism as directly as a hasty reading might suggest. As for social hierarchy, fascism’s leadership principle effectively reinforced it, though fascists posed some threat to inherited position by advocating the replacement of the tired bourgeois elite by fascist “new men.” The handful of real fascist outsiders, however, went mostly into the parallel organizations. The scope of fascist change was further limited by the disappearance of many radicals during the period of taking root and coming to power. As fascist movements passed from protest and the harnessing of disparate resentments to the conquest of power, with its attendant alliances and compromises, their priorities changed, along with their functions. They became far less interested in assembling the discontented than in mobilizing and unifying national energies for national revival and aggrandizement. This obliged them to break many promises made to the socially and economically discontented during the first years of fascist recruitment. The Nazis in particular broke promises to the small peasants and artisans who had been the mainstay of their electoral following, and to favor urbanization and industrial production. Despite their frequent talk about “revolution,” fascists did not want a socioeconomic revolution. They wanted a “revolution of the soul,” and a revolution in the world power position of their people. They meant to unify and invigorate and empower their decadent nation—to reassert the prestige of Romanità or the German Volk or Hungarism or other group destiny. For that purpose they believed they needed armies, productive capacity, order, and property. Force their country’s traditional productive elements into subjection, perhaps; transform them, no doubt; but not abolish them. The fascists needed the muscle of these bastions of established power to express their people’s renewed unity and vitality at home and on the world stage. Fascists wanted to revolutionize their national institutions in the sense that they wanted to pervade them with energy, unity, and willpower, but they never dreamed of abolishing property or social hierarchy. The fascist mission of national aggrandizement and purification required the most fundamental changes in the nature of citizenship and in the relation of citizens to the state since the democratic revolutions of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. The first giant step was to subordinate the individual to the community. Whereas the liberal state rested on a compact among its citizens to protect individual rights and freedoms, the fascist state embodied the national destiny, in service to which all the members of the national group found their highest fulfillment. We have seen that both regimes found some distinguished nonfascist intellectuals ready to support this position. In fascist states, individual rights had no autonomous existence. The State of Law—the Rechtsstaat, the état de droit—vanished, along with the principles of due process by which citizens were guaranteed equitable treatment by courts and state agencies. A suspect acquitted in a German court of law could be rearrested by agents of the regime at the courthouse door and put in a concentration camp without any further legal procedure.

Brendan McMahan HomeMy Books Browse ▾ Community ▾ Find Quotes Results for "J.R.Nyquist" Showing 161-167 of 167 (0.02 seconds) “This brief overview of our situation does not lend itself to an optimistic forecast. Too many of our fellow citizens, year after year, have hidden themselves in the “riskless private sphere,” resting on the safe possession of their “private property,” staying out of political controversies, yielding political ground to increasingly pathological narratives and persons. At long last this “riskless private sphere” is no longer safe. The exits have been blocked. A confrontation is now unavoidable.” ― J.R. Nyquist tags: ayn-rand, libertarianism 0 likes in my quotes “There is a silver lining to all this, according to Jean Bodin. If an insurrection fails, its poison is purged from the body politic. A deluded mob can be cured once its ringleaders are apprehended. And who are these ringleaders, in truth? At beginning of Bodin’s book, On Sovereignty, there is a listing of principles necessary to a well-ordered commonwealth. The cornerstone of these principles might surprise you. In the first place, wrote Bodin, right ordering involves distinguishing “a commonwealth from a band of thieves or pirates. With them one should have neither intercourse, commerce, nor alliance.” ― J.R. Nyquist tags: ayn-rand, libertarianism 0 likes in my quotes “Since most whites are ashamed of America’s past treatment of blacks, they are susceptible to “white guilt.” This guilt is now being exploited to advance a communist agenda, as opposed to the color-blind agenda envisioned by conservatives. The political significance of this cannot be underestimated. According to Trevor Loudon, the organizations behind today’s revolutionary unrest are Maoist; that is, they are ideologically allied with the Chinese Communists in Beijing.

An important means of fostering virtue is through the art of explanation and persuasion—the “science of distinguishing the true from the false [and] the art of understanding the consequences and opposites of every statement.” The mind “must employ not merely the customary subtle method of debate but also the more copious continuous style, considering, for example, how to rule nations, establish laws, punish the wicked, protect the good, honor those who excel [and] publish to fellow citizens precepts conducive to their well-being and credit, so designed as to win their acceptance.” This is necessary, for it is abundantly clear to Cicero that the actual legislation of states is not necessarily consistent with natural law. “The most foolish notion of all is the belief that everything is just which is found in the customs or laws of nations.

Infants track these characteristics of language at an astonishingly early age. At birth, your baby can distinguish between the sounds of every language that has ever been invented. Professor Patricia Kuhl, co-director of the Institute for Learning and Brain Sciences at the University of Washington, discovered this phenomenon. She calls kids at this age “citizens of the world.” Chomsky puts it this way: We are not born with the capacity to speak a specific language. We are born with the capacity to speak any language.

Americans’ love affair with television and tabloid journalism, along with their constant immersion in the vast offerings of the media and the Internet’s dynamic communication mechanism operates to distinguish the American psyche from that of other nationalities. The onslaught of visual information available to Americans operates to deaden their innate curiosity of the natural world and to numb their interior world. Instead of exploring nature and ideas, Americans demonstrate a proclivity to scan headlines, watch television and films, and surf the Webb in order passively to partake in cultural events. The immense amount of social and political news that the average citizen takes in is bound to reduce the attention span of Americans, especially citizens devoted to celebrity watching, the distinctive American obsession of ogling the film, television, music, and sport stars whom draw media attention and captivate the public of each generation.

At birth, your baby can distinguish between the sounds of every language that has ever been invented. Professor Patricia Kuhl, co-director of the Institute for Learning and Brain Sciences at the University of Washington, discovered this phenomenon. She calls kids at this age “citizens of the world”. Chomsky puts it this way: We are not born with the capacity to speak a specific language. We are born with the capacity to speak any language. Unfortunately, things don’t stay that way. By their first birthday, Kuhl found, babies can no longer distinguish between the sounds of every language on the planet. They can distinguish only between those to which they have been exposed in the past six months. A Japanese baby not exposed to “rake” and “lake” during her second six months of life cannot distinguish between those two sounds by the time she is 1 year old.

One, whose name is unknown, writing in the second century to an inquirer named Diognetus,[14] sets himself to answer the questions asked as to the mode of worshipping God among the Christians, the reason of their faith and devotion towards God and love to one another, why they neither worshipped the gods of the Greeks nor followed the Jewish religion, and why this new practice of piety had only so late entered into the world. He writes “Christians are distinguished from other men neither by country, nor language”, living in such places “as the lot of each of them has determined, and following the customs of the natives in respect to clothing, food, and the rest of their ordinary conduct, they display to us their wonderful and confessedly striking method of life. They dwell in their own countries, but simply as sojourners. As citizens, they share in all things with others, and yet endure all things as if foreigners. Every foreign land is to them as their native country, and every land of their birth as a land of strangers…. They pass their days on earth, but they are citizens of heaven. They obey the prescribed laws, and at the same time surpass the laws by their lives… they are reviled and bless”.

Failing to distinguish between the state’s permitting private citizens to procure abortions and practice euthanasia on the one hand and its acting to put innocents to death against their will on the other, the theocons began to describe the United States in terms usually reserved for totalitarian states.

Freedom depends upon citizens who are able to make a distinction between what is true and what they want to hear. Authoritarianism arrives not because people say that they want it, but because they lose the ability to distinguish between facts and desires.

The citizen of Oceania is not allowed to know anything of the tenants of the other two philosophies, but he is taught to execrate them as barbarous, outrageous upon morality and common sense. Actually, the three philosophies are barely distinguishable, and the social systems which they support are not distinguishable at all. Everywhere there is the same pyramidal structure, the same worship or the semi-divine leader, the same economy existing by and for continuous warfare. It follows that three super states not only cannot conquer one another but would gain no advantage by doing so. On the contrary, so long as they remain in conflict they prop one another up like three sheaves of corn, and as usual, the ruling groups of all three powers are simultaneously aware and unaware of what they are doing. Their lives are dedicated to world conquest but they also know that it is necessary that the war should continue everlastingly and without victory.

Freedom of speech is a fallacy, it is not absolute. It can be hailed absolute only if the person possessing it, has the conscience to distinguish the right from the wrong, justice from injustice, acceptance from discrimination.

Several features distinguished the most successful fascisms from previous parties. Unlike the middle-class parties led by “notables” who condescended to contact their publics only at election time, the fascist parties swept their members up into an intense fraternity of emotion and effort. Unlike the class parties—socialist or bourgeois—fascist parties managed to realize their claim to bring together citizens from all social classes. These were attractive features for many. Early fascist parties did not recruit from all classes in the same proportions, however. It was soon noticed that fascist parties were largely middle class, to the point where fascism was perceived as the very embodiment of lower-middle-class resentments. But, after all, all political parties are largely middle class. On closer inspection, fascism turned out to appeal to upper-class members and voters as well. Early fascism also won more working-class followers than used to be thought, though these were always proportionally fewer than their share in the population. The relative scarcity of working-class fascists was not due to some proletarian immunity to appeals of nationalism and ethnic cleansing. It is better explained by “immunization” and “confessionalism”: those already deeply engaged, from generation to generation, in the rich subculture of socialism, with its clubs, newspapers, unions, and rallies, were simply not available for another loyalty

Hitler and Mussolini, by contrast, not only felt destined to rule but shared none of the purists’ qualms about competing in bourgeois elections. Both set out—with impressive tactical skill and by rather different routes, which they discovered by trial and error—to make themselves indispensable participants in the competition for political power within their nations. Becoming a successful political player inevitably involved losing followers as well as gaining them. Even the simple step of becoming a party could seem a betrayal to some purists of the first hour. When Mussolini decided to change his movement into a party late in 1921, some of his idealistic early followers saw this as a descent into the soiled arena of bourgeois parliamentarism. Being a party ranked talk above action, deals above principle, and competing interests above a united nation. Idealistic early fascists saw themselves as offering a new form of public life—an “antiparty”—capable of gathering the entire nation, in opposition to both parliamentary liberalism, with its encouragement of faction, and socialism, with its class struggle. José Antonio described the Falange Española as “a movement and not a party—indeed you could almost call it an anti-party . . . neither of the Right nor of the Left." Hitler’s NSDAP, to be sure, had called itself a party from the beginning, but its members, who knew it was not like the other parties, called it “the movement” (die Bewegung). Mostly fascists called their organizations movements or camps or bands or rassemblements or fasci: brotherhoods that did not pit one interest against others, but claimed to unite and energize the nation. Conflicts over what fascist movements should call themselves were relatively trivial. Far graver compromises and transformations were involved in the process of becoming a significant actor in a political arena. For that process involved teaming up with some of the very capitalist speculators and bourgeois party leaders whose rejection had been part of the early movements’ appeal. How the fascists managed to retain some of their antibourgeois rhetoric and a measure of “revolutionary” aura while forming practical political alliances with parts of the establishment constitutes one of the mysteries of their success. Becoming a successful contender in the political arena required more than clarifying priorities and knitting alliances. It meant offering a new political style that would attract voters who had concluded that “politics” had become dirty and futile. Posing as an “antipolitics” was often effective with people whose main political motivation was scorn for politics. In situations where existing parties were confined within class or confessional boundaries, like Marxist, smallholders’, or Christian parties, the fascists could appeal by promising to unite a people rather than divide it. Where existing parties were run by parliamentarians who thought mainly of their own careers, fascist parties could appeal to idealists by being “parties of engagement,” in which committed militants rather than careerist politicians set the tone. In situations where a single political clan had monopolized power for years, fascism could pose as the only nonsocialist path to renewal and fresh leadership. In such ways, fascists pioneered in the 1920s by creating the first European “catch-all” parties of “engagement,”17 readily distinguished from their tired, narrow rivals as much by the breadth of their social base as by the intense activism of their militants. Comparison acquires some bite at this point: only some societies experienced so severe a breakdown of existing systems that citizens began to look to outsiders for salvation. In many cases fascist establishment failed; in others it was never really attempted.

The European states resembled each other rather closely in their luxuriant growth of antiliberal criticism as the twentieth century opened. Where they differed was in those political, social, and economic preconditions that seem to distinguish the states where fascism, exceptionally, was able to become established. One of the most important preconditions was a faltering liberal order. Fascisms grew from back rooms to the public arena most easily where the existing government functioned badly, or not at all. One of the commonplaces of discussions of fascism is that it thrived upon the crisis of liberalism. I hope here to make that vague formulation somewhat more concrete. On the eve of World War I the major states of Europe were either governed by liberal regimes or seemed headed that way. Liberal regimes guaranteed freedoms both for individuals and for contending political parties, and allowed citizens to influence the composition of governments, more or less directly, through elections. Liberal government also accorded a large measure of freedom to citizens and to enterprises. Government intervention was expected to be limited to the few functions individuals could not perform for themselves, such as the maintenance of order and the conduct of war and diplomacy. Economic and social matters were supposed to be left to the free play of individual choices in the market, though liberal regimes did not hesitate to protect property from worker protests and from foreign competition. This kind of liberal state ceased to exist during World War I, for total war could be conducted only by massive government coordination and regulation. After the war was over, liberals expected governments to return to liberal policies. The strains of war making, however, had created new conflicts, tensions, and malfunctions that required sustained state intervention. At the war’s end, some of the belligerent states had collapsed...What had gone wrong with the liberal recipe for government? What was at stake was a technique of government: rule by notables, where the wellborn and well-educated could rely on social prestige and deference to keep them elected. Notable rule, however, came under severe pressure from the “nationalization of the masses." Fascists quickly profited from the inability of centrists and conservatives to keep control of a mass electorate. Whereas the notable dinosaurs disdained mass politics, fascists showed how to use it for nationalism and against the Left. They promised access to the crowd through exciting political spectacle and clever publicity techniques; ways to discipline that crowd through paramilitary organization and charismatic leadership; and the replacement of chancy elections by yes-no plebiscites. Whereas citizens in a parliamentary democracy voted to choose a few fellow citizens to serve as their representatives, fascists expressed their citizenship directly by participating in ceremonies of mass assent. The propagandistic manipulation of public opinion replaced debate about complicated issues among a small group of legislators who (according to liberal ideals) were supposed to be better informed than the mass of the citizenry. Fascism could well seem to offer to the opponents of the Left efficacious new techniques for controlling, managing, and channeling the “nationalization of the masses,” at a moment when the Left threatened to enlist a majority of the population around two non-national poles: class and international pacifism. One may also perceive the crisis of liberalism after 1918 in a second way, as a “crisis of transition,” a rough passage along the journey into industrialization and modernity. A third way of looking at the crisis of the liberal state envisions the same problem of late industrialization in social terms.

In many traditional societies, the political head is also a spiritual leader, and in others the secular leader is limited by ancient religious teachings. We Americans pride ourselves on separating church and state, rightly worried that citizens may lose freedoms if politicians mix their religious beliefs with their political agendas. But as a result we have created a wholly secular state that can't truly govern a people, because its activities ignore the needs of the soul and play out as if a human community were a mere aggregate of inanimate bodies. How could we run a country according to the most recent reckoning of pollsters unless we considered citizens as mere numbers?...If we could distinguish between a basic religious attitude and a system of beliefs, we might bring to our civic lives a spirit of reverence, an acknowledgement of mystery, and an appreciation for ritual, all in an atmosphere of tolerance.

That dual vision, as much as my skin color, distinguished me from previous presidents. For my supporters, it was a defining foreign policy strength, enabling me to amplify America’s influence around the world and anticipate problems that might arise from ill-considered policies. For my detractors, it was evidence of weakness, raising the possibility that I might hesitate to advance American interests because of a lack of conviction, or even divided loyalties. For some of my fellow citizens, it was far worse than that. Having the son of a black African with a Muslim name and socialist ideas ensconced in the White House with the full force of the U.S. government under his command was precisely the thing they wanted to be defended against. —

We are members of families, employees of businesses, and citizens of countries whose goals and aspirations are frequently sub-Christian. When those differences are unjust or evil, we need to distinguish ourselves from them. But where possible, we should gather near, identify common ground, and draw lines as sparingly as possible. Salt should not remain in the saltshaker. A lamp should not be placed under a bushel. Christians should not fail to affirm the good, true, and beautiful wherever we see it, even if it emerges from sources with whom we would otherwise disagree. We need to travel together, even in our differences. Living in the world means seeking common ground with people and pursuits that are not always gospel-centered. For the adventurer, this is welcome news, because it allows us to ask different questions. What might God be doing in this situation? With what struggles can I empathize? What bridges can be built? Where might the kingdom of God be manifesting?

Under this lies a fact never mentioned aloud, but tacitly understood and acted upon: namely, that the conditions of life in all three superstates are very much the same. In Oceania the prevailing philosophy is called Ingsoc, in Eurasia it is called Neo-Bolshevism, and in Eastasia it is called by a Chinese name usually translated as Death-worship, but perhaps better rendered as Obliteration of the Self. The citizen of Oceania is not allowed to know anything of the tenets of the other two philosophies, but he is taught to execrate them as barbarous outrages upon morality and common sense. Actually the three philosophies are barely distinguishable, and the social systems which they support are not distinguishable at all. Everywhere there is the same pyramidal structure, the same worship of semi-divine leader, the same economy existing by and for continuous warfare. It follows that the three superstates not only cannot conquer one another, but would gain no advantage by doing so. On the contrary, so long as they remain in conflict they prop one another up, like three sheaves of corn. And, as usual, the ruling groups of all three powers are simultaneously aware and unaware of what they are doing. Their lives are dedicated to world conquest, but they also know that it is necessary that

Why do authoritarian governments engage in propaganda that does not induce belief and persuasion? The common understanding of political propaganda is that it is a means to indoctrinate the masses with pro-regime values and attitudes. But for indoctrination to be effective, one has to be convinced by the content of propaganda. Pretentious propaganda that does not induce persuasion is at odds with this goal. In this paper I propose that propaganda is often not used for indoctrination, but rather to signal the government’s strength in maintaining social control and political order. More specifically, by being able to afford significant resources to present a unified propaganda message and impose it on citizens, a government that has a strong capacity in maintaining social control and political order can send a credible signal about this capacity and distinguish itself from a weak government, hence implicitly intimidating the masses who may otherwise contemplate about challenging the regime. In other words, such propaganda is not meant to “brainwash” people with its specific content about how good the government is, but to forewarn the society about how strong it is via the act of the propaganda itself.

Before concluding the discussion on Partridge’s connection to the Stoic tradition, I present what is probably the greatest proof Partridge was a Stoic: he suffered the public doom of one. Ironically, Partridge may have missed a powerful warning about his own fate within one of the key texts he used in his academies. A footnote within William Duncan’s translation of Cicero’s orations recalls the ill fortune of Quintus Aelius Tubero in the eyes of the people of Rome caused by his Stoic behavior at the funeral of Scipio Africanus: "[It was the same from the study of Tubero] Cicero here ridicules the doctrine of the Stoics, shows the absurdities into which it may betray a man and paints the ill consequences that often arise from it. [Quintus Aelius] Tubero, of whom he speaks here had professed himself a Stoic and resolved to regulate his conduct by the tenets of that sect. Accordingly, in an entertainment he gave the Roman people on occasion of the death of the great Scipio Africanus he made use of plain wooden beds, goat skin covers, and earthen dishes. But this ill-timed parsimony was so displeasing to the Roman people that when he afterwards stood for the prætorship they refused him their suffrages though a man of illustrious birth and the most distinguished virtue." Is there a passage more fitting for the legacy of Partridge and his Stoic behavior? Even when Partridge had built an ideal model for educating a complete virtue-driven citizen worthy of the Republic, few would find the lifestyle required appealing. Being a virtuous man with a sufficient plan for American education was not enough to guarantee his acceptance among the masses.

Equality lay at the heart of republicanism; it was, said David Ramsay, “the life and soul of Commonwealth.” Republican citizenship implied equality. “Citizen” (or sometimes “cit”) was a term that had been commonly used by the premodern monarchical society. It generally had meant the inhabitant of a city or town, who had been thus distinguished from a member of the landed nobility or gentry. Dr. Johnson, in fact, had defined a citizen as “a man of trade, not a gentleman.” In 1762 an English comedy by Edward Ravenscroft was entitled The Citizen Turn’d Gentleman.10 By adopting the title of citizens for members of their new republics, the revolutionaries thereby threatened the distinctive status of “gentleman” and put more egalitarian pressure on their society than they meant to.

early forties. Courtesy of the Library of Congress. The “Colored Men of Philadelphia” responded in anger and in love. They began by denying that color distinguished them as much as slavery did, forcing ignorance and poverty on them. Religion did not show that the Creator judged His creatures by their color. Stressing their status as property holders in Pennsylvania, owning houses and other property worth millions in the aggregate, they asked, “Shall we sacrifice this, leave our homes, forsake our birth-place, and flee to a strange land, to appease the anger and prejudice of the traitors now in arms against the Government, or their aiders and abettors in this or in foreign lands?” They also asked whether the strangers who would take their places would “make better citizens, prove as loyal, love the country better, and be as obedient to its laws as we have been?

Popular accounts portray Europe as either an economic phoenix or a basket case. The phoenix view observes that output per hour worked has risen from barely 50 percent of U.S. levels after World War II and two-thirds of those levels in 1970 to nearly 95 percent today and that labor productivity so measured is actually running above U.S. levels in a substantial number of Western European countries. Since the turn of the twenty-first century, the euro zone has created more new jobs than either the United States or the United Kingdom. Its exports have grown faster than those of the United States. It provides more of its citizens with health insurance, efficient public transportation, and protection from violent crime. The basket-case view observes that the growth of aggregate output and output per hour have slowed relative to the United States since the mid-1990s. Between 1999, when EMU began, and 2005, euro-zone growth averaged just 1.8 percent, less than two-thirds the 3.1 percent recorded by the United States. Productivity growth has trended downward since the early 1990s, owing to labor-, product-, and capital-market rigidities, inadequate R&D spending, and high tax rates - in contrast to the United States, where productivity growth has been rising. The growth of the working-age population has fallen to zero and is projected to turn significantly negative in coming years. High old-age dependency ratios imply large increases in the share of national income devoted to health care, lower savings rates, potentially heavier fiscal burdens, and an aversion to risk taking. All these are reasons to worry about Europe's competitiveness and economic performance. One way of reconciling these views is to distinguish the distant from the recent past and the past from the future. Comparing the European economy at the midpoint and the end of the twentieth century, there is no disputing the phoenix view. Economic performance over this half century was a shining success both absolutely and relative to the United States. More recently, however, Europe has tended to lag. Although this does nothing to put the past in a less positive light, it creates doubts about the future. One way of understanding these changing fortunes is in terms of the transition from extensive to intensive growth. Europe could grow quickly for a quarter century after World War II and continue doing well relative to the United States for some additional years because the institutions it inherited and developed after World War II were well suited for importing technology, maintaining high levels of investment, and transferring large amounts of labor from agriculture to industry. Eventually, however, the scope for further growth on this basis was exhausted. Once the challenge was to develop new technologies, and once growth came to depend more on entrepreneurial initiative than on brute-force capital accumulation, the low rates of R&D spending, high taxes, conservative finance, and emphasis on vocational education delivered by those same institutions became more of a handicap than a spur to growth. Consistent with this view is the fact that Europe's economic difficulties seem to have coincided with the ICT revolution and the opportunities it affords to economies with a comparative advantage in pioneering innovation, as well as with globalization and growing competition from developing countries such as China that are moving into the production of the quality manufacturing goods that have been a traditional European stronghold. The question is what to do about it. Is it necessary for Europe to remake its institutions along American lines? Or is there still a future for the European model?

Buy Social Security Number (SSN) When it comes to securing a legitimate Social Security Number, Egsmm.com stands out as the premier destination for those looking to buy SSN number with confidence. This trusted platform not only guarantees real and valid USA personal social security numbers but also prioritizes customer satisfaction and privacy. Navigating through the complexities of obtaining an SSN can be daunting, but Egsmm.com simplifies the process by providing a seamless experience backed by exceptional support. Whether you need an SSN for employment verification or other essential purposes, their extensive database is designed to meet your needs efficiently and securely. With user-friendly access, transparent transactions, and a commitment to authenticity, buying an SSN number has never been easier than at Egsmm.com—your go-to source for reliable identity solutions in today’s digital age. Contact Us for more Information’s: Skype: EGSMM Telegram: @Egsmmofficial WhatsApp: +1 (747) 315-9408 Email: egsmm24@gmail.com Best Place to Buy SSN Number Buy SSN Number is the easy way to get real valid details from whole country. Social Security Numbers (SSNs) are unique identifiers issued by the United States government. They play a crucial role in various aspects of life, such as employment, taxation, and accessing government services. Obtaining an SSN legally involves a straightforward application process through the Social Security Administration (SSA). Attempting to buy SSN, however, is not only unlawful but also poses significant risks, including identity theft and fraud. Individuals must always follow legal procedures to acquire an SSN. Protecting personal information and adhering to legal standards is essential for maintaining security and integrity. Always consult official channels for accurate guidance on obtaining an SSN. Contact Us for more Information’s: Skype: EGSMM Telegram: @Egsmmofficial WhatsApp: +1 (747) 315-9408 Email: egsmm24@gmail.com Introduction To Ssn Numbers And Their Importance A Social Security Number (SSN) is essential for U. S. citizens and residents. It is crucial for accessing various services and benefits. Secure an SSN to streamline financial and legal processes. Social Security Numbers (SSNs) are vital in the United States. These nine-digit numbers have a significant impact on a person’s life. Understanding their importance can help you navigate various aspects of personal and financial activities. What Is An Ssn Number? An SSN is a unique identifier assigned to U. S. Citizens and residents. Here’s why it’s essential: • Unique Identifier: It distinguishes individuals for social security and tax purposes.

Buy Social Security Number (SSN) When it comes to securing a legitimate Social Security Number, Egsmm.com stands out as the premier destination for those looking to buy SSN number with confidence. This trusted platform not only guarantees real and valid USA personal social security numbers but also prioritizes customer satisfaction and privacy. Navigating through the complexities of obtaining an SSN can be daunting, but Egsmm.com simplifies the process by providing a seamless experience backed by exceptional support. Whether you need an SSN for employment verification or other essential purposes, their extensive database is designed to meet your needs efficiently and securely. With user-friendly access, transparent transactions, and a commitment to authenticity, buying an SSN number has never been easier than at Egsmm.com—your go-to source for reliable identity solutions in today’s digital age. Contact Us for more Information’s: Skype: EGSMM Telegram: @Egsmmofficial WhatsApp: +1 (747) 315-9408 Email: egsmm24@gmail.com Best Place to Buy SSN Number Buy SSN Number is the easy way to get real valid details from whole country. Social Security Numbers (SSNs) are unique identifiers issued by the United States government. They play a crucial role in various aspects of life, such as employment, taxation, and accessing government services. Obtaining an SSN legally involves a straightforward application process through the Social Security Administration (SSA). Attempting to buy SSN, however, is not only unlawful but also poses significant risks, including identity theft and fraud. Individuals must always follow legal procedures to acquire an SSN. Protecting personal information and adhering to legal standards is essential for maintaining security and integrity. Always consult official channels for accurate guidance on obtaining an SSN. Contact Us for more Information’s: Skype: EGSMM Telegram: @Egsmmofficial WhatsApp: +1 (747) 315-9408 Email: egsmm24@gmail.com Introduction To Ssn Numbers And Their Importance A Social Security Number (SSN) is essential for U. S. citizens and residents. It is crucial for accessing various services and benefits. Secure an SSN to streamline financial and legal processes. Social Security Numbers (SSNs) are vital in the United States. These nine-digit numbers have a significant impact on a person’s life. Understanding their importance can help you navigate various aspects of personal and financial activities. What Is An Ssn Number? An SSN is a unique identifier assigned to U. S. Citizens and residents. Here’s why it’s essential: • Unique Identifier: It distinguishes individuals for social security and tax purposes. • Required for Employment: Employers use it for payroll and tax reporting. • Financial Transactions: Banks and financial institutions need it to open accounts or approve loans. • Government Services: Used to access social security benefits and other government programs. History Of Ssn Numbers The concept of SSNs dates back to the 1930s. Initially, it was created for a very specific purpose. • Origin: Introduced in 1936 for tracking earnings and benefits.

Buy Social Security Number (SSN) When it comes to securing a legitimate Social Security Number, Egsmm.com stands out as the premier destination for those looking to buy SSN number with confidence. This trusted platform not only guarantees real and valid USA personal social security numbers but also prioritizes customer satisfaction and privacy. Navigating through the complexities of obtaining an SSN can be daunting, but Egsmm.com simplifies the process by providing a seamless experience backed by exceptional support. Whether you need an SSN for employment verification or other essential purposes, their extensive database is designed to meet your needs efficiently and securely. With user-friendly access, transparent transactions, and a commitment to authenticity, buying an SSN number has never been easier than at Egsmm.com—your go-to source for reliable identity solutions in today’s digital age. Contact Us for more Information’s: Skype: EGSMM Telegram: @Egsmmofficial WhatsApp: +1 (747) 315-9408 Email: egsmm24@gmail.com Best Place to Buy SSN Number Buy SSN Number is the easy way to get real valid details from whole country. Social Security Numbers (SSNs) are unique identifiers issued by the United States government. They play a crucial role in various aspects of life, such as employment, taxation, and accessing government services. Obtaining an SSN legally involves a straightforward application process through the Social Security Administration (SSA). Attempting to buy SSN, however, is not only unlawful but also poses significant risks, including identity theft and fraud. Individuals must always follow legal procedures to acquire an SSN. Protecting personal information and adhering to legal standards is essential for maintaining security and integrity. Always consult official channels for accurate guidance on obtaining an SSN. Contact Us for more Information’s: Skype: EGSMM Telegram: @Egsmmofficial WhatsApp: +1 (747) 315-9408 Email: egsmm24@gmail.com Introduction To Ssn Numbers And Their Importance A Social Security Number (SSN) is essential for U. S. citizens and residents. It is crucial for accessing various services and benefits. Secure an SSN to streamline financial and legal processes. Social Security Numbers (SSNs) are vital in the United States. These nine-digit numbers have a significant impact on a person’s life. Understanding their importance can help you navigate various aspects of personal and financial activities. What Is An Ssn Number? An SSN is a unique identifier assigned to U. S. Citizens and residents. Here’s why it’s essential: • Unique Identifier: It distinguishes individuals for social security and tax purposes. • Required for Employment: Employers use it for payroll and tax reporting. • Financial Transactions: Banks and financial institutions need it to open accounts or approve loans. • Government Services: Used to access social security benefits and other government programs. History Of Ssn Numbers The concept of SSNs dates back to the 1930s. Initially, it was created for a very specific purpose. • Origin: Introduced in 1936 for tracking earnings and benefits. • Expansion: Over time, it evolved to serve broader identification purposes. • Modern Use: Now, it’s essential for nearly all financial and legal activities. How Ssn Numbers Are Assigned Understanding the assignment process helps demystify the significance of these numbers. SSNs are assigned based on specific criteria:

The pyramid in Germany was eventually some six stories high, and only a fraction of the original investment found its way into the securities it was meant to buy. The rest went into all those commissions. One would have difficulty imagining a fiscally more improbable enterprise for the investor. IOS was forbidden by the Securities and Exchange Commission to sell securities in the United States and in later times to American citizens wherever they lived. Thus its offshore designation. It was extruded from Brazil, normally considered a financially tolerant venue. It had recurrent problems with the Swiss and, in the end, was forced to move many of its operations to a closely adjacent site in France. Nonetheless, IOS extracted some billions of dollars from bemused investors, not excluding the salesmen of the firm itself, who were extensively captured by their own sales oratory. James Roosevelt, a son of F.D.R., formerly a distinguished member of Congress and an ambassador to the United Nations; Sir Eric Wyndham White, a highly regarded international civil servant and longtime secretary-general of GATT (the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade); and Dr. Erich Mende, a former vice-chancellor of the German Federal Republic, all lent their names in evident good faith to the enterprise. They and thousands of others responded happily to the compelling Cornfeld appeal, “Do you sincerely want to be rich?

Buy Social Security Number (SSN) When it comes to securing a legitimate Social Security Number, Egsmm.com stands out as the premier destination for those looking to buy SSN number with confidence. This trusted platform not only guarantees real and valid USA personal social security numbers but also prioritizes customer satisfaction and privacy. Navigating through the complexities of obtaining an SSN can be daunting, but Egsmm.com simplifies the process by providing a seamless experience backed by exceptional support. Whether you need an SSN for employment verification or other essential purposes, their extensive database is designed to meet your needs efficiently and securely. With user-friendly access, transparent transactions, and a commitment to authenticity, buying an SSN number has never been easier than at Egsmm.com—your go-to source for reliable identity solutions in today’s digital age. Contact Us for more Information’s: Skype: EGSMM Telegram: @Egsmmofficial WhatsApp: +1 (747) 315-9408 Email: egsmm24@gmail.com Best Place to Buy SSN Number Buy SSN Number is the easy way to get real valid details from whole country. Social Security Numbers (SSNs) are unique identifiers issued by the United States government. They play a crucial role in various aspects of life, such as employment, taxation, and accessing government services. Obtaining an SSN legally involves a straightforward application process through the Social Security Administration (SSA). Attempting to buy SSN, however, is not only unlawful but also poses significant risks, including identity theft and fraud. Individuals must always follow legal procedures to acquire an SSN. Protecting personal information and adhering to legal standards is essential for maintaining security and integrity. Always consult official channels for accurate guidance on obtaining an SSN. Contact Us for more Information’s: Skype: EGSMM Telegram: @Egsmmofficial WhatsApp: +1 (747) 315-9408 Email: egsmm24@gmail.com Introduction To Ssn Numbers And Their Importance A Social Security Number (SSN) is essential for U. S. citizens and residents. It is crucial for accessing various services and benefits. Secure an SSN to streamline financial and legal processes. Social Security Numbers (SSNs) are vital in the United States. These nine-digit numbers have a significant impact on a person’s life. Understanding their importance can help you navigate various aspects of personal and financial activities. What Is An Ssn Number? An SSN is a unique identifier assigned to U. S. Citizens and residents. Here’s why it’s essential: • Unique Identifier: It distinguishes individuals for social security and tax purposes. • Required for Employment: Employers use it for payroll and tax reporting. • Financial Transactions: Banks and financial institutions need it to open accounts or approve loans. • Government Services: Used to access social security benefits and other government programs. History Of Ssn Numbers The concept of SSNs dates back to the 1930s. Initially, it was created for a very specific purpose. • Origin: Introduced in 1936 for tracking earnings and benefits. • Expansion: Over time, it evolved to serve broader identification purposes. • Modern Use: Now, it’s essential for nearly all financial and legal activities. How Ssn Numbers Are Assigned

Buy Social Security Number (SSN) When it comes to securing a legitimate Social Security Number, Egsmm.com stands out as the premier destination for those looking to buy SSN number with confidence. This trusted platform not only guarantees real and valid USA personal social security numbers but also prioritizes customer satisfaction and privacy. Navigating through the complexities of obtaining an SSN can be daunting, but Egsmm.com simplifies the process by providing a seamless experience backed by exceptional support. Whether you need an SSN for employment verification or other essential purposes, their extensive database is designed to meet your needs efficiently and securely. With user-friendly access, transparent transactions, and a commitment to authenticity, buying an SSN number has never been easier than at Egsmm.com—your go-to source for reliable identity solutions in today’s digital age. Contact Us for more Information’s: Skype: EGSMM Telegram: @Egsmmofficial WhatsApp: +1 (747) 315-9408 Email: egsmm24@gmail.com Best Place to Buy SSN Number Buy SSN Number is the easy way to get real valid details from whole country. Social Security Numbers (SSNs) are unique identifiers issued by the United States government. They play a crucial role in various aspects of life, such as employment, taxation, and accessing government services. Obtaining an SSN legally involves a straightforward application process through the Social Security Administration (SSA). Attempting to buy SSN, however, is not only unlawful but also poses significant risks, including identity theft and fraud. Individuals must always follow legal procedures to acquire an SSN. Protecting personal information and adhering to legal standards is essential for maintaining security and integrity. Always consult official channels for accurate guidance on obtaining an SSN. Contact Us for more Information’s: Skype: EGSMM Telegram: @Egsmmofficial WhatsApp: +1 (747) 315-9408 Email: egsmm24@gmail.com Introduction To Ssn Numbers And Their Importance A Social Security Number (SSN) is essential for U. S. citizens and residents. It is crucial for accessing various services and benefits. Secure an SSN to streamline financial and legal processes. Social Security Numbers (SSNs) are vital in the United States. These nine-digit numbers have a significant impact on a person’s life. Understanding their importance can help you navigate various aspects of personal and financial activities. What Is An Ssn Number? An SSN is a unique identifier assigned to U. S. Citizens and residents. Here’s why it’s essential: • Unique Identifier: It distinguishes individuals for social security and tax purposes. • Required for Employment: Employers use it for payroll and tax reporting. • Financial Transactions: Banks and financial institutions need it to open accounts or approve loans. • Government Services: Used to access social security benefits and other government programs. History Of Ssn Numbers The concept of SSNs dates back to the 1930s. Initially, it was created for a very specific purpose.

Buy Social Security Number (SSN) When it comes to securing a legitimate Social Security Number, Egsmm.com stands out as the premier destination for those looking to buy SSN number with confidence. This trusted platform not only guarantees real and valid USA personal social security numbers but also prioritizes customer satisfaction and privacy. Navigating through the complexities of obtaining an SSN can be daunting, but Egsmm.com simplifies the process by providing a seamless experience backed by exceptional support. Whether you need an SSN for employment verification or other essential purposes, their extensive database is designed to meet your needs efficiently and securely. With user-friendly access, transparent transactions, and a commitment to authenticity, buying an SSN number has never been easier than at Egsmm.com—your go-to source for reliable identity solutions in today’s digital age. Contact Us for more Information’s: Skype: EGSMM Telegram: @Egsmmofficial WhatsApp: +1 (747) 315-9408 Email: egsmm24@gmail.com Best Place to Buy SSN Number Buy SSN Number is the easy way to get real valid details from whole country. Social Security Numbers (SSNs) are unique identifiers issued by the United States government. They play a crucial role in various aspects of life, such as employment, taxation, and accessing government services. Obtaining an SSN legally involves a straightforward application process through the Social Security Administration (SSA). Attempting to buy SSN, however, is not only unlawful but also poses significant risks, including identity theft and fraud. Individuals must always follow legal procedures to acquire an SSN. Protecting personal information and adhering to legal standards is essential for maintaining security and integrity. Always consult official channels for accurate guidance on obtaining an SSN. Contact Us for more Information’s: Skype: EGSMM Telegram: @Egsmmofficial WhatsApp: +1 (747) 315-9408 Email: egsmm24@gmail.com Introduction To Ssn Numbers And Their Importance A Social Security Number (SSN) is essential for U. S. citizens and residents. It is crucial for accessing various services and benefits. Secure an SSN to streamline financial and legal processes. Social Security Numbers (SSNs) are vital in the United States. These nine-digit numbers have a significant impact on a person’s life. Understanding their importance can help you navigate various aspects of personal and financial activities. What Is An Ssn Number? An SSN is a unique identifier assigned to U. S. Citizens and residents. Here’s why it’s essential: • Unique Identifier: It distinguishes individuals for social security and tax purposes. • Required for Employment: Employers use it for payroll and tax reporting. • Financial Transactions: Banks and financial institutions need it to open accounts or approve loans. • Government Services: Used to access social security benefits and other government programs. History Of Ssn Numbers The concept of SSNs dates back to the 1930s. Initially, it was created for a very specific purpose. • Origin: Introduced in 1936 for tracking earnings and benefits.

Buy Social Security Number (SSN) When it comes to securing a legitimate Social Security Number, Egsmm.com stands out as the premier destination for those looking to buy SSN number with confidence. This trusted platform not only guarantees real and valid USA personal social security numbers but also prioritizes customer satisfaction and privacy. Navigating through the complexities of obtaining an SSN can be daunting, but Egsmm.com simplifies the process by providing a seamless experience backed by exceptional support. Whether you need an SSN for employment verification or other essential purposes, their extensive database is designed to meet your needs efficiently and securely. With user-friendly access, transparent transactions, and a commitment to authenticity, buying an SSN number has never been easier than at Egsmm.com—your go-to source for reliable identity solutions in today’s digital age. Contact Us for more Information’s: Skype: EGSMM Telegram: @Egsmmofficial WhatsApp: +1 (747) 315-9408 Email: egsmm24@gmail.com Best Place to Buy SSN Number Buy SSN Number is the easy way to get real valid details from whole country. Social Security Numbers (SSNs) are unique identifiers issued by the United States government. They play a crucial role in various aspects of life, such as employment, taxation, and accessing government services. Obtaining an SSN legally involves a straightforward application process through the Social Security Administration (SSA). Attempting to buy SSN, however, is not only unlawful but also poses significant risks, including identity theft and fraud. Individuals must always follow legal procedures to acquire an SSN. Protecting personal information and adhering to legal standards is essential for maintaining security and integrity. Always consult official channels for accurate guidance on obtaining an SSN. Contact Us for more Information’s: Skype: EGSMM Telegram: @Egsmmofficial WhatsApp: +1 (747) 315-9408 Email: egsmm24@gmail.com Introduction To Ssn Numbers And Their Importance A Social Security Number (SSN) is essential for U. S. citizens and residents. It is crucial for accessing various services and benefits. Secure an SSN to streamline financial and legal processes. Social Security Numbers (SSNs) are vital in the United States. These nine-digit numbers have a significant impact on a person’s life. Understanding their importance can help you navigate various aspects of personal and financial activities. What Is An Ssn Number? An SSN is a unique identifier assigned to U. S. Citizens and residents. Here’s why it’s essential: • Unique Identifier: It distinguishes individuals for social security and tax purposes.

Buy Social Security Number (SSN) When it comes to securing a legitimate Social Security Number, Egsmm.com stands out as the premier destination for those looking to buy SSN number with confidence. This trusted platform not only guarantees real and valid USA personal social security numbers but also prioritizes customer satisfaction and privacy. Navigating through the complexities of obtaining an SSN can be daunting, but Egsmm.com simplifies the process by providing a seamless experience backed by exceptional support. Whether you need an SSN for employment verification or other essential purposes, their extensive database is designed to meet your needs efficiently and securely. With user-friendly access, transparent transactions, and a commitment to authenticity, buying an SSN number has never been easier than at Egsmm.com—your go-to source for reliable identity solutions in today’s digital age. Contact Us for more Information’s: Skype: EGSMM Telegram: @Egsmmofficial WhatsApp: +1 (747) 315-9408 Email: egsmm24@gmail.com Best Place to Buy SSN Number Buy SSN Number is the easy way to get real valid details from whole country. Social Security Numbers (SSNs) are unique identifiers issued by the United States government. They play a crucial role in various aspects of life, such as employment, taxation, and accessing government services. Obtaining an SSN legally involves a straightforward application process through the Social Security Administration (SSA). Attempting to buy SSN, however, is not only unlawful but also poses significant risks, including identity theft and fraud. Individuals must always follow legal procedures to acquire an SSN. Protecting personal information and adhering to legal standards is essential for maintaining security and integrity. Always consult official channels for accurate guidance on obtaining an SSN. Contact Us for more Information’s: Skype: EGSMM Telegram: @Egsmmofficial WhatsApp: +1 (747) 315-9408 Email: egsmm24@gmail.com Introduction To Ssn Numbers And Their Importance A Social Security Number (SSN) is essential for U. S. citizens and residents. It is crucial for accessing various services and benefits. Secure an SSN to streamline financial and legal processes. Social Security Numbers (SSNs) are vital in the United States. These nine-digit numbers have a significant impact on a person’s life. Understanding their importance can help you navigate various aspects of personal and financial activities. What Is An Ssn Number? An SSN is a unique identifier assigned to U. S. Citizens and residents. Here’s why it’s essential: • Unique Identifier: It distinguishes individuals for social security and tax purposes. • Required for Employment: Employers use it for payroll and tax reporting. • Financial Transactions: Banks and financial institutions need it to open accounts or approve loans. • Government Services: Used to access social security benefits and other government programs. History Of Ssn Numbers The concept of SSNs dates back to the 1930s. Initially, it was created for a very specific purpose. • Origin: Introduced in 1936 for tracking earnings and benefits. • Expansion: Over time, it evolved to serve broader identification purposes.

Buy Social Security Number (SSN) When it comes to securing a legitimate Social Security Number, Egsmm.com stands out as the premier destination for those looking to buy SSN number with confidence. This trusted platform not only guarantees real and valid USA personal social security numbers but also prioritizes customer satisfaction and privacy. Navigating through the complexities of obtaining an SSN can be daunting, but Egsmm.com simplifies the process by providing a seamless experience backed by exceptional support. Whether you need an SSN for employment verification or other essential purposes, their extensive database is designed to meet your needs efficiently and securely. With user-friendly access, transparent transactions, and a commitment to authenticity, buying an SSN number has never been easier than at Egsmm.com—your go-to source for reliable identity solutions in today’s digital age. Contact Us for more Information’s: Skype: EGSMM Telegram: @Egsmmofficial WhatsApp: +1 (747) 315-9408 Email: egsmm24@gmail.com Best Place to Buy SSN Number Buy SSN Number is the easy way to get real valid details from whole country. Social Security Numbers (SSNs) are unique identifiers issued by the United States government. They play a crucial role in various aspects of life, such as employment, taxation, and accessing government services. Obtaining an SSN legally involves a straightforward application process through the Social Security Administration (SSA). Attempting to buy SSN, however, is not only unlawful but also poses significant risks, including identity theft and fraud. Individuals must always follow legal procedures to acquire an SSN. Protecting personal information and adhering to legal standards is essential for maintaining security and integrity. Always consult official channels for accurate guidance on obtaining an SSN. Contact Us for more Information’s: Skype: EGSMM Telegram: @Egsmmofficial WhatsApp: +1 (747) 315-9408 Email: egsmm24@gmail.com Introduction To Ssn Numbers And Their Importance A Social Security Number (SSN) is essential for U. S. citizens and residents. It is crucial for accessing various services and benefits. Secure an SSN to streamline financial and legal processes. Social Security Numbers (SSNs) are vital in the United States. These nine-digit numbers have a significant impact on a person’s life. Understanding their importance can help you navigate various aspects of personal and financial activities. What Is An Ssn Number? An SSN is a unique identifier assigned to U. S. Citizens and residents. Here’s why it’s essential: • Unique Identifier: It distinguishes individuals for social security and tax purposes. • Required for Employment: Employers use it for payroll and tax reporting. • Financial Transactions: Banks and financial institutions need it to open accounts or approve loans. • Government Services: Used to access social security benefits and other government programs. History Of Ssn Numbers The concept of SSNs dates back to the 1930s. Initially, it was created for a very specific purpose. • Origin: Introduced in 1936 for tracking earnings and benefits. • Expansion: Over time, it evolved to serve broader identification purposes. • Modern Use: Now, it’s essential for nearly all financial and legal activities. How Ssn Numbers Are Assigned Understanding the assignment process helps demystify the significance of these numbers. SSNs are assigned based on specific criteria: • Area Numbers: The first three digits represent the geographical region. • Group Numbers: The middle two digits serve as a secondary identifier.

Buy Social Security Number (SSN) When it comes to securing a legitimate Social Security Number, Egsmm.com stands out as the premier destination for those looking to buy SSN number with confidence. This trusted platform not only guarantees real and valid USA personal social security numbers but also prioritizes customer satisfaction and privacy. Navigating through the complexities of obtaining an SSN can be daunting, but Egsmm.com simplifies the process by providing a seamless experience backed by exceptional support. Whether you need an SSN for employment verification or other essential purposes, their extensive database is designed to meet your needs efficiently and securely. With user-friendly access, transparent transactions, and a commitment to authenticity, buying an SSN number has never been easier than at Egsmm.com—your go-to source for reliable identity solutions in today’s digital age. Contact Us for more Information’s: Skype: EGSMM Telegram: @Egsmmofficial WhatsApp: +1 (747) 315-9408 Email: egsmm24@gmail.com Best Place to Buy SSN Number Buy SSN Number is the easy way to get real valid details from whole country. Social Security Numbers (SSNs) are unique identifiers issued by the United States government. They play a crucial role in various aspects of life, such as employment, taxation, and accessing government services. Obtaining an SSN legally involves a straightforward application process through the Social Security Administration (SSA). Attempting to buy SSN, however, is not only unlawful but also poses significant risks, including identity theft and fraud. Individuals must always follow legal procedures to acquire an SSN. Protecting personal information and adhering to legal standards is essential for maintaining security and integrity. Always consult official channels for accurate guidance on obtaining an SSN. Contact Us for more Information’s: Skype: EGSMM Telegram: @Egsmmofficial WhatsApp: +1 (747) 315-9408 Email: egsmm24@gmail.com Introduction To Ssn Numbers And Their Importance A Social Security Number (SSN) is essential for U. S. citizens and residents. It is crucial for accessing various services and benefits. Secure an SSN to streamline financial and legal processes. Social Security Numbers (SSNs) are vital in the United States. These nine-digit numbers have a significant impact on a person’s life. Understanding their importance can help you navigate various aspects of personal and financial activities. What Is An Ssn Number? An SSN is a unique identifier assigned to U. S. Citizens and residents. Here’s why it’s essential: • Unique Identifier: It distinguishes individuals for social security and tax purposes. • Required for Employment: Employers use it for payroll and tax reporting. • Financial Transactions: Banks and financial institutions need it to open accounts or approve loans.