Hence the Department of Education... the results speak for themselves — indoctrination not education.

Ignorance is bliss, eh, Fred? ;-)  'Denial' is not a river in Egypt..

Awesome, Mike!  My children first attended Montessori school which was excellent.  Classroom materials were easily made by parents and teachers.  The alphabet was taught in cursive from day 1 — with a little sandbox-like tablet for drawing letters with your finger.  Classes were of mixed ages with older students helping the younger ones.  Older students helped the little ones with hanging up their coats and taking off their winter boots and gloves. 

The grading system was more individualized identifying specific subjects as being "introduced" with several levels up to "mastery" where the student could pass on the knowledge to another.  Students were empowered not regimented. 

When we moved abroad, we began home-schooling our children and later formed a small school of other home-schooled children.  My daughter was accepted to university easily, graduating a year earlier than her peers.  Socialization was never an issue as, guess what, we live in a world of other people always interacting with them, making friends with the neighbors, participating in community events, church, etc..

My own experience with public schooling was a dismal affair.  Today it is quite disheartening to see how badly children are 'educated' barely able to read, write or compute.  I highly recommend Montessori school if there is one nearby and does not take funding from government (which soon requires the school to adopt the same standards as public schools in order to keep that funding).

Why attend college after learning so much that isn't even taught in college?  FYI I did attend college, but I took the courses I wanted since I was paying for it myself.  I did not want to waste time and money on filler courses.  So I never got a degree — thus I am unlettered.  But I far surpassed my peers in my field of study, and while many of them were still finishing up their degrees, I was making more money than any of them would ever achieve, because my skills were in demand, none of which were part of my college curriculum.

I can certainly relate to this quote — it has been my personal experience.  But that was a LONG time ago, and what the Dept of Education has done to education since then has been pure corruption.  Not only has the DOE failed in its mission, it has indoctrinated half our country into blithering liberal dolts, who can barely read — forget about actually learning about the principles of American (i.e. republican) government which was the gold standard for all the world until the people were effectively neutered by secular progressive liberalism.  We have come a long way, baby!

Sorry, but that is a really twisted definition of liberty and an accurate description of subservience to the state — i.e., oppression.

NO!  Absolutely not, except in a tyrannical state.  Sheesh.

Fred, you have an amazing talent for saying absolutely nothing.  Your comment is incomprehensible...

Everywhere socialism has been 'given a try' has resulted in the culling of millions of people and the subjugation of the rest — that's why socialists usually say 'true socialism hasn't been tried before.'  In fact it has been tried over and over, and it has failed in its promises every time.  Give Liberty a try!

Unfortunately, nothing could be further from the truth.  Policeman MUST enforce the edicts of the state.  Just look at what is happening in Europe these days — people are arrested for expressing their political views and for running for elected office in opposition to the ruling party.  Fascists need police to keep the public in line, it's the only way to retain power.

Are you delusional?  World government is the goal of the greatest power-seekers of all.  It would be nothing short of servitude for every nation.  SELF-government, starting with the individual, would be the best government, if indeed people would be respectful of each other's rights.  Indeed, it would take the highest order of humans, so I am not sure if it will ever be possible on a global scale.  Better if each nation could secure the rights of its citizens. 

The UN and its globalist institutions (World Bank, WHO, ICC, IMF to name a few) are already trying to supersede the rights and powers of the nations that have become its members.  No nation that issued their own currency backed by gold could join initially — they were called 'neutral' countries.  One by one they have fallen to the central banks.  World government would be fascistic at best and communistic at worse — it would be the government of a world central bank.  

Remember that the stated goal of globalists is to reduce the world's population to 500 million people — and you can bet you ain't one of them.

Same as it ever was, apparently ...  Vigilance has always been key — watch the watchers!

I wish; however, it seems more prefer the illusion of security to the animating contest of freedom.

"Liberty is Slavery", eh, Fred?

A lot of folks exposing the truth are literally risking their lives — it's a good chance they are over the target.

The real question is what will you do once you see the ugly side...

I think Mazzini is saying that while 'materialists' define liberty as the right to do or not do anything that is not directly injurious to others, he understands liberty as the faculty of choosing according to conscience.  Makes sense to me.

Hey, RBE!  Long time no hear!  I'm inclined to agree, although the intent of the Founders was independence and staying out of 'entanglements' with foreign wars.  I think you can blame the deep state and the central banks that foment war for fun and profit.  The CIA has been up to no good since its inception and is in bed with organized crime to accomplish their goals.  But I refuse to accept that America is hopelessly lost to these scoundrels.  The truth crushed to earth will rise again.

I get it, but unfortunately, those that do not believe in liberty and in fact do not believe in MY liberty are enemies of liberty.  We will have to deal with them eventually...

I suppose it means that liberty is central to all, and that equal rights cannot be ever taken away — like an emperor's decree, it is 'law.'

America used to be a nation in which the common man could own land free and clear from any claim by government to tax it or confiscate it; it made the USA unique in nearly all the world. 

Land patents were issued granting title in allodium — like what the King would give his generals that conquered foreign lands.  Land patents are no longer paid any attention to since the introduction of fiat currency because we do not actually pay for anything with it, merely transfer the obligation of the note to another. 

But there are those that still have their land patents, and they know who they are.  Their land cannot be taxed.  Look it up.  The Bureau of Land Management used to issue land patents and update them when property ownership was transferred.  Now we have duplicated the British system yet again, in which the people are serfs on their own land — don't pay the tax, and the government can seize your property.  Why? Because you don't have the land patent.  Who does?  Good question, but every square inch of land in the USA was patented when each state joined the Union.  Somebody has the land patent, and the US government was prohibited from owning the land, only individual persons could own land, AND it was what made them  'electors' and the only ones whose votes were to be counted for Governor or President.

Remember, the Bill of Rights does not confer rights to the People — the People already have their rights which cannot be taken away.  The Bill of Rights spells out explicitly what the government may NOT do.  We have no First Amendment "right" — we have a First Amendment "prohibition" of government's power to regulate speech in any way.

I've always appreciated Mike's distinction between 'law' and 'rules' or statutes (i.e. colorable law).  The laws of nature in fact cannot be 'broken' without inevitable consequences.  We abide by rules or a code of conduct to avoid the inevitable 'punishment' of breaking the laws of nature.  That is why Liberty is to be defended and its limits defined by the rights of all — we are not free to do anything without consequence. 

A republican form of government formed on the basis of the inalienable rights of humankind is the best and highest form of government — and also requires an honorable citizenry with mutual respect for all.  It is no accident that the teachings of Christ form the basis of American common law — as you sow so shall you reap.

You have to remember the times and context of the quote.  Paine was a significant 'influencer' in the days preceding the war for independence.  Is he not wishing independence for all, not just the American colonies?  Had he not seen the hypocritical wars between different religious factions?  Sounds to me like a cry for freedom of religion years before the Bill of Rights protected it. 

I have no problem with the quote, and it has nothing to do with statist/socialist government.  It's about 'independence' and the desire to 'do good' not to make others do good.

J6 prisoners come to mind.  Can you imagine if Trump had not won?  They would still be in there and under horrendous conditions.  Classic communist/fascist/socialist tactics — imprison the dissenters. 

I sure would like to see some politicos put behind bars for their deceitful actions over the last 10 years.  Biden issued pre-emptive pardons on some of the worst offenders — is that even lawful?  If you don't hang a few treasonous politicians from time to time, they will never stop.