I love these 'either or, this or that quotes' Churchill was 50% wrong all of the time and 50% right none of the time.

"what we decide they ought to have" is long hand speak for what people need to and not necessarily want to know. Who is making those decisions and who is setting the agenda is the important thing. Revelations, Wikileaks, most recently the Paradise Papers leak in the UK are sheading some light on the corruption associated with the 'great and the good' and are a step towards breaking the 'truth' monopoly.

Dear Mr A, " you do not understand accident of birth or structural disadvantage"?!! That's because your reductive, parochial, and limited philosophy blinds you to broader societal 'facts' such as racism and probably discrimination of other types. I suppose you would also deny that sexism exists which would allow you to justify the outrageous behaviour of your current president Mr Trump. It's the old 'nature V nurture' debate Mr A and your DENIAL that nurture plays any role in shaping behaviour and life chances both undermines any arguments you put forward and detracts from political movements and arguments designed to address unfairness and discrimination in society.

Dear Mr A, you paint a very bleak, paranoid, loveless and untrusting picture of society. Do you not see that we need more peace, love and understanding in the world today - not more guns and bullets? Guns are unique in that their purpose is death, usually of fellow humans. I own many knives and some hammers - even some cricket bats but they are potential not actual weapons and their impact (excuse the pun) is very limited. Again, open your eyes to the fact that death by gunshot has been monetized in America.
Seriously, racism crap is propaganda!!? You personally may not judge people by the colour of their skin but for you to deny that racism is woven deeply into the pattern of the American tapestry is beyond naïve; as is your belief that poverty is a result of personal failing rather than accident of birth and structural disadvantage.
Personal responsibility is encouraged, not replaced by policies that create greater fairness in society - which is truly the only way out.

Creativity is an expression of the human spirit but even those with the most jaundiced view of collectivism have to admit that creativity is socially mediated. The most stultifying influence over scientific and artistic endeavour has been and continues to be the quest for profit and wealth. The commodification of art and the exploitation of science for profit rather than human advancement are great sins of capitalism.

Guns are tools specifically designed to kill and injure. It's a question of capacity and potential. Quite obviously a significant number of people never 'grow up' despite being allowed to and they own guns.

That more deaths are caused by car accident I suppose makes it ok then? that tens of thousands are shot and thousands killed every year in the USA. That "unfortunately" a disproportionate number of these people are black is not due to an inadequate welfare state Mr Archer, but overt and covert racism and associated poverty. Gun use and ownership is an industry that makes a few people very rich and they must constantly seek legitimation in the face of damming statistics and the occasional massacre.

Death by gunshot has been monetised in the USA and this quote and the above posts are pathetic attempts at theoretical justifications.

Would have to agree with E Archer - it's when that distinction is plainly obvious and skewed to benefit the powerful then society is in trouble.

Mike, I'm not going to gainsay your experiences or attempt to redefine them through an effort of reason. You have faith in and believe in what you believe. You certainly sound blessed with or by something. The 'truth' of what that something 'is', we will all find out in the end.

I know that this blog concerns liberty and its American and associated Eurocentric concepts but apply this quote globally and appreciate its limitations. People demand food and clean water when they have no power. Natural Law - Darwinist survival of the fittest - is an everyday experience for billions.

By venturing into the political world does Donald Trump realise that he has become a populist "Yes Man"?

No Mike, in this instance God is a term of Christian, Biblical reference and deference - not a 'term of art'. Ireland is staunchly Roman Catholic and this infects it's politics and constitution. (Interesting referendum coming up in Ireland regarding the secular rights of women to abortion and the Christian majority pro birth lobby). Would be very interested to hear your 'personal first hand knowledge/testimony that God lives' although describing God as 'living' I always find a bit strange and inadequate. Was this some personal encounter with the almighty? Was this pre medication Mike and if so I hope that you're feeling much better. And you're right, I have not done the research into it but anecdotally, I have met some very happy deluded people.

Man created God(s) in his own image in a futile attempt to make sense of existence and as a route to individual salvation after death. Legitimate authority comes from the experience of having to develop sustainable structures and relationships that allow us to exist together in the present while evaluating the mistakes and successes of the past in the hope of sustaining an acceptable future for all. Deference to some mythical being will end in disaster. There is no saviour. There is no master plan. I was in Ireland at the weekend. It's a beautiful country but there is too much rain and too much religion.

The policies of Margaret Thatcher in the UK were also greatly influenced by Friedman economics. This led to the UK becoming a monetarist not a mixed capitalist economy with 80% of GDP now dependent on the banking, finance and services sector which is wholly based in London and the S.E. All major manufacturing and mining has all but disappeared. Real jobs have been replaced by part time and zero hours contracts and the structures of wealth re distribution and fairness in society have been systematically dismantled. Friedman's fantastic belief in the trickle down theory has resulted in stagnation not the energising movement of money for the benefit of all that was predicted. It has led to aquisitionism not consumerism and rapidly expanding gaps between the super rich and poorest in society. This is because Friedman and his political followers failed to recognise that humans are essentially greedy and selfish and the increasing trend towards globalisation in the 80's and 90's.
The 'use of force' i.e. force of argument to achieve greater equality and fairness in society will create freedom in society not destroy it.

Conveniently Mr A you ignore the reference to humanity in my post. It is only through the acceptance of sameness - SAMA - that we guarantee each individual's freedom. That includes freedom from. Freedom from fear and persecution because of superficial differences - skin colour, race, sexuality, religious belief. Emphasising difference breeds fear, suspicion, hate and violence. Sticks bound together are still individual sticks but are made strong by their unity leading to acceptance, respect and even love.

True freedom comes from unity not difference - the recognition and acceptance of the commonalities that bind us together as human regardless of our apparent superficial differences.

Appropriately as this stems from the land of free enterprise this quotation has given me a business idea. It's probably been thought of already and may even exist, but for the market created by the disenfranchised and disillusioned what about toilet paper depicting the national flag. People can then be subversive in the comfort of their own bathroom and subject the national banner to arguably a worse fate than setting fire to it. I'm sure there would be an international market for this product also.

"Few alternatives in this world of Jealous nations" does this explain why so few Americans have passports?

This relates to the question of a ruling class and the notion that is still prevalent in some areas that there is a 'natural hierarchy' as a Baron, Lord Acton would have been well acquainted with this point of view. In general I would agree that there is no ruling class - fitness to govern or lead should be based on other criteria.

Thanks for the 'Little House on the Prairie' imagery Mr A but I think things have moved on a little since then in terms of the legal requirements to ensure that a child is adequately educated in a safe and appropriate environment and that includes home schooling, certainly in the UK I am aware that home schooling has to be adequately provisioned to not only educate but also promote the safety of the child.
But of course you are correct in terms of the central importance relating to the question of responsibility. I would argue that this is a shared responsibility between society and parent and in some cases necessarily has to be as the state takes on the direct role of parent in child protection cases for instance - or rather the local authority or council as education is a devolved responsibility in the UK. The responsibility of society relates to infrastructure and adequate funding, the responsibility of the parent is to ensure that their child takes full advantage of what is on offer. But even the home schooled child in their education depends on state infrastructure in a more general sense, even if you don't care to acknowledge it.

This quotation demonstrates the age old difficulty of moving or negotiating between the general and specific in philosophy, politics and social science in addressing the aggregated needs of groups of individuals in different circumstances and subject to the impact of different power structures. If individuality is a universal truism then how does my choice to own a mobile phone or drive a Tesla electric car impact on the individuality of a 6 year old living in the DRC who has to dig up the cobalt used to make batteries, in a highly toxic environment using hand tools? The quotation posits an extreme philosophical point of view that in many senses is socially and politically meaningless as it ignores the fact that individuals need to interact socially and often globally - individuality is not subsumed but it's impact on others has to be acknowledged. I think this the point that Waffler is making - if it is then I would tend agree with him.

The conformity not seemingly recognised in this quotation is that we all need shoes. Or for the pedants among us (Mike) lets call it footwear. Even Jesus wore sandals.

"Education is business" says it all really. What about those is society who cannot afford to pay for private education. My Grandmother won a place at Grammar School but her parents could not afford the uniform and not to have her contribute so she went to work in factory at aged 14. Education as a private business maintains the privilege of those who can afford to pay for it. Those countries who sit atop the literacy and numeracy tables, e.g. Japan and Scandinavian countries, have excellent well funded and universally provisioned accepted and utilised state education systems. State education accepts that there is difference in ability but also accepts that everyone should start from the same place irrespective of ability to pay.

Interesting in the light of Mr Trump's outburst in relation to the perceived threat of N Korea. Perhaps he had a bad round of golf.