Author: OwenPitts

According to Wikipedia, “Mercantilism is an economic policy that is designed to maximize the exports and minimize the imports for an economy. It promotes imperialism, colonialism, tariffs and subsidies on traded goods to achieve that goal.” Mercantilism is pretty much just an economic practice used to augment state power at the expense of other countries. A historic example of this would be the Sugar Act of 1764. This was a time where the colonists were made to pay higher tariffs and duties on the imports of foreign-made sugar brought to them by  other countries.

The War of the Spanish Succession lasted from 1701 to 1750. The death of childless King Charles II of Spain triggered the war. In Charles’ will, he left the throne to Philip, Duke of Anjou, grandson of King Louis XIV of France. However, England, Holland, Prussia and Austria saw this as jeopardizing the balance of power in Europe. They formed a group called the Grand Alliance and tried to put Habsburg Archduke Charles of Austria on the throne instead of Philip. Eventually war broke out, but it eventually stopped with a negotiated end with Philip on the throne.

According to Wikipedia, “The Edict of Nantes was signed in April 1598 by King Henry IV and granted the Calvinist Protestants of France, also known as Huguenots, substantial rights in the nation, which was in essence completely Catholic. In the edict, Henry aimed primarily to promote civil unity.” The Edict of Nantes put a temporary stop to the religious wars between Roman Catholics and Protestants which had torn France apart ever since the 1560s.

The theme that is in the title is basically selling your soul to the devil, featured in the play Dr. Faustus. This play features an accomplished scholar who sells his soul to the devil, and in return he gets ‘magical powers’. According to Wikipedia, “Doctor Faustus (play) The Tragical History of the Life and Death of Doctor Faustus, commonly referred to simply as Doctor Faustus, is an Elizabethan tragedy by Christopher Marlowe, based on German stories about the title character Faust. It was probably written in 1592 or 1593, shortly before Marlowe’s death.”

In this play, Lucifer (Satan), using a demon named Mephistophilis as a messenger, Lucifer and Faustus strike a deal. Faustus says that if Lucifer grants him twenty-four years on earth and Mephistophilis as Faustus’ servant, then Faustus, at the end of the twenty-four years, will give his soul to Lucifer and become one of those trapped in hell. This will explain it better: “Using Mephistophilis as a messenger, Faustus strikes a deal with Lucifer: that he is to be allotted twenty-four years of life on Earth, during which time he will have Mephistophilis as his personal servant, and, at the end of which, he will give his soul over to Lucifer as payment and spend the rest of time as one of the damned in hell. This deal is supposed to be cemented in the form of Faustus’ own blood. Interestingly, at first his blood congeals, leading to second thoughts by Faustus. Mephistophilis brings coals to break the wound open again, and thus Mephistophilis begins his servitude and Faustus his oath.”, taken from Faust.com. After he took this oath, he did crazy stuff for years. He became a rich dude, and lived in a big house. He lived off of whatever the demon stole, food, clothes, whatever the demon could get. When the twenty-four years was almost over, he had a big party with his friends. Then, when he went into his room to sleep, he never came out. Some people investigated, and they found blood and body parts scattered across the room. Faustus had a very tragic death.

This play also has a moral to it. This is to tell people not to go down the wrong path that Dr. Faustus took. It will only lead to death and destruction. I for one, agree completely with this.

According to Enotes.com, “The primary themes of Doctor Faustus are the relationship between knowledge and power and the consequences of attempting to attain knowledge beyond a certain extent.” Why has this theme remained popular since 1587? Well, we as humans are attracted by interest and curiosity to these kinds of things. The sound of selling your soul to the devil makes people feel scared, frightened, thrilled, and we as humans are attracted by this kind of thing. Therefore, this theme has remained popular all the way through the sixteenth century (well, maybe not popular all the way through the sixteenth century, but it was well-known). It is probably still even well-known today.

What is a state subsidy? According to Wikipedia, “A subsidy or government incentive is a form of financial aid or support extended to an economic sector (business, or individual) generally with the aim of promoting economic and social policy. Although commonly extended from the government, the term subsidy can relate to any type of support – for example from NGOs or as implicit subsidies. Subsidies come in various forms including: direct (cash grants, interest-free loans) and indirect (tax breaks, insurance, low-interest loans, accelerated depreciation, rent rebates).” So a state subsidy is basically when the government gives some form of financial aid (money) to a person or business.

What is state control? According to GEMET, state control is “The power or authority of a government to regulate or command industry, organizations, programs, initiatives and individuals.” So state control is literally just the power or authority of the state to control what GEMET said. According to Wikipedia, “State media or government media are media outlets that are under financial and/or editorial control of the state or government, directly or indirectly. There are different types of state and government media. State-controlled or state-run media are under editorial control or influence by the state or government.” The state controls what it is meant to control weather you like it, or you do not like it. According to Collins Dictionary, state control literally means “control by the government”.

Is it possible to have state subsidies without state control? Pretty much, no. You see, in order for the government to give you free money, the government must take some money away from other people, and since nobody wants the government to take their money, then the government takes their money by force. They do this through coercion. Therefore, there can be no state subsidies without state control.

Do you know what it is called when you give money away to those who really need it? That is called charity. But that is not the way the government does it. The government takes your money and gives it to a business that the government deems worthy to have the money. This is NOT the same thing as giving money away on your own. The government takes away your money and gives it to someone else. I think they do this through taxes, and taxes and charity are definitely not the same thing. According to Philanthropy, “Some of the wealthiest Americans have started to contend that paying taxes and making charitable gifts are just about the same thing. Their failure to grasp the profound difference between the two presents a very real problem for nonprofit organizations and our democracy.” I can not believe that people think that taxes and charity are the same thing! They are so different! Taxation is money being taken away from you, and charity is freely giving away money.

So, the overall answer to the question “Is it possible to have state subsidies without state control?”, is no, it pretty much impossible for that to ever happen.

What is a state subsidy? According to Wikipedia, “A subsidy or government incentive is a form of financial aid or support extended to an economic sector (business, or individual) generally with the aim of promoting economic and social policy. Although commonly extended from the government, the term subsidy can relate to any type of support – for example from NGOs or as implicit subsidies. Subsidies come in various forms including: direct (cash grants, interest-free loans) and indirect (tax breaks, insurance, low-interest loans, accelerated depreciation, rent rebates).” So a state subsidy is basically when the government gives some form of financial aid (money) to a person or business.

What is state control? According to GEMET, state control is “The power or authority of a government to regulate or command industry, organizations, programs, initiatives and individuals.” So state control is literally just the power or authority of the state to control what GEMET said. According to Wikipedia, “State media or government media are media outlets that are under financial and/or editorial control of the state or government, directly or indirectly. There are different types of state and government media. State-controlled or state-run media are under editorial control or influence by the state or government.” The state controls what it is meant to control weather you like it, or you do not like it. According to Collins Dictionary, state control literally means “control by the government”.

Is it possible to have state subsidies without state control? Pretty much, no. You see, in order for the government to give you free money, the government must take some money away from other people, and since nobody wants the government to take their money, then the government takes their money by force. They do this through coercion. Therefore, there can be no state subsidies without state control.

Do you know what it is called when you give money away to those who really need it? That is called charity. But that is not the way the government does it. The government takes your money and gives it to a business that the government deems worthy to have the money. This is NOT the same thing as giving money away on your own. The government takes away your money and gives it to someone else. I think they do this through taxes, and taxes and charity are definitely not the same thing. According to Philanthropy, “Some of the wealthiest Americans have started to contend that paying taxes and making charitable gifts are just about the same thing. Their failure to grasp the profound difference between the two presents a very real problem for nonprofit organizations and our democracy.” I can not believe that people think that taxes and charity are the same thing! They are so different! Taxation is money being taken away from you, and charity is freely giving away money.

So, the overall answer to the question “Is it possible to have state subsidies without state control?”, is no, it pretty much impossible for that to ever happen.

(1) What were Cardinal Richelieu’s primary aims? According to Wikipedia, “Armand Jean du Plessis, Duke of Richelieu, known as Cardinal Richelieu, was a French clergyman and statesman. He was also known as l’Éminence rouge, or “the Red Eminence”, a term derived from the title “Eminence” applied to cardinals and the red robes that they customarily wear.” Cardinal Richelieu had two primary goals. The first was the centralization of power in France, and the second was opposition to the Habsburg dynasty.

(2) What factors contributed to the decline of Spain? Some of the main factors that lead to the decline of Spain were expensive warfare, rebellions and revolts, and much of the economic activity was controlled by monopolies and state favorites.

(3) What is constitutionalism? According to Wikipedia, “Constitutionalism is ‘a compound of ideas, attitudes, and patterns of behavior elaborating the principle that the authority of government derives from and is limited by a body of fundamental law’.”

(4) What do you think Hobbes’ main arguments are in the excerpts you read from his Leviathan? According to StudyMode Research, “The central thesis of Leviathan is the idea that in order for human society to function without widespread conflict there is a need for totalitarian rule in the form of a Leviathan, necessitated by man’s continual state of fear in a state of nature caused by limited knowledge of the outside world and therefore the intentions of other humans.”

If the state is strong enough to do something good for you, it can also do something bad to you. This statement is true in many ways. For example, the state passes both good and bad laws. Some good ones are making it illegal to steal, they pass traffic laws which makes driving safe for people, and lots more. However, I feel like there are more bad laws than good laws. For example, the U.S.A. has just gone through, and is still going through, what I call the U.S.A. crisis of 2019. There was a huge breakout of a virus called coronavirus, or covid-19, and the U.S.A. literally shut down. New laws were passed that made the U.S.A. go crazy. Now, I live in the state of Illinois, and I hate it. The Illinois governor of my time has made new laws which made businesses shut down, you can not go someplace without having on a mask, the six-foot rule, all of these stupid laws. I mean, masks do not even help slow the spread of this virus, and where did they get the six foot rule? Out of thin air! These new laws are really hurting the state of Illinois, and three years after the outbreak (the year I wrote this essay), some of these laws are still in motion! Like some places still require the ‘if you do not wear a mask you are not allowed in’ rule. These laws have went down a bit, but they are not gone. The state is strong enough to do good.

According to Wikipedia, “Michel Eyquem, Sieur de Montaigne, also known as the Lord of Montaigne, was one of the most significant philosophers of the French Renaissance. He is known for popularizing the essay as a literary genre. His work is noted for its merging of casual anecdotes and autobiography with intellectual insight.” He was born February 28, 1533, and he died September 13, 1592. He had a French nationality. Over time he wrote several different essays in his life. According to Wikipedia, “The Essays of Michel de Montaigne are contained in three books and 107 chapters of varying length. They were originally written in Middle French and were originally published in the Kingdom of France. Montaigne’s stated design in writing, publishing and revising the Essays over the period from approximately 1570 to 1592 was to record ‘some traits of my character and of my humours.’ The Essays were first published in 1580 and cover a wide range of topics.” The essays were originally published in March 1580 and were originally written in Middle French. The book was originally titled Essais and wrote it in the literary genre essay. According to Wikipedia, “Montaigne wrote in a rather crafted rhetoric designed to intrigue and involve the reader, sometimes appearing to move in a stream-of-thought from topic to topic and at other times employing a structured style that gives more emphasis to the didactic nature of his work.” According to Britannica, “Montaigne’s Essays thus incorporate a profound skepticism concerning the human being’s dangerously inflated claims to knowledge and certainty but also assert that there is no greater achievement than the ability to accept one’s being without either contempt or illusion, in the full realization of its limitations and its richness.”

Why did Montaigne write these essays though? According to The Conversation, “Some scholars argued that Montaigne began writing his essays as a want-to-be Stoic, hardening himself against the horrors of the French civil and religious wars, and his grief at the loss of his best friend Étienne de La Boétie through dysentery.“

I am a student of the Ron Paul Curriculum, and I have had the chance to read many of Montaigne’s essays. I found many of them quite fascinating, but others I just was not into. Nevertheless, I really liked them all, and if I had the chance to read them again, I probably would, but it all depends on the essay that I would be reading. Tons of other people enjoyed the essays too, just like I did.

Some of Montaigne’s greatest essays are “Of Profit and Honesty”, “Of Repentance”, “Of Three Commerces”, “Of Diversion”, “Upon Some Verses of Virgil”, “Of Coaches”, “Of the Inconvenience of Greatness”, “Of the Art of Conference”, and many many more. There are three books to hold the one hundred and seven essays. Montaigne also edited his essays at various different points in his life. Sometimes it would be one to a few words, and other times he would edit whole passages! These essays were very influential back then and probably still are today.

What was English life like under Oliver Cromwell? Cromwell was a Puritan, so he was very strict with his laws. In fact, anyone who was seen playing a specific game on Sunday would be whipped and punished. His laws were very strict. He even banned Christmas as we would have known it today. Over time, Cromwell became a hated man. Cromwell eventually died in 1658. Later, his body was put on trial, found guilty, and “executed” it.

What was the Glorious Revolution? The Glorious Revolution involved replacing King James II with his daughter Mary and her husband William of Orange. The reasons for this revolution were mainly religious oppositions. Why is the Glorious Revolution significant in English history? According to History, “Many historians believe the Glorious Revolution was one of the most important events leading to Britain’s transformation from an absolute monarchy to a constitutional monarchy. After this event, the monarchy in England would never hold absolute power again.”

On what grounds does Locke believe people can establish a claim to property ownership over a previously unowned good? According to Libertarianism, “…Locke held that individuals could come to acquire property rights in previously unowned goods by ‘mixing their labour’ with it, ‘for this labour being the unquestionable property of the labourer, no man but he can have a right to what that is once joined to'”

Fredric Bastiat was a French economist, writer, and he was a prominent member of the French Liberal School. He was born on June 30, 1801 in Bayonne, France, and died on December 24, 1850 in Rome, Italy. According to Wikipedia, “He was described as “the most brilliant economic journalist who ever lived” by economic theorist Joseph Schumpeter. As an advocate of classical economics and the economics of Adam Smith, his views favored a free market and influenced the Australian School. He is best known for his book The Law where he argued that law must protect rights such as private property, not “plunder” others’ property.”

While he was a member of the French National Assembly, he developed the economic concept of opportunity cost, and he also introduced to everyone the parable of the broken window. According to Wikipedia, “The parable of the broken window was introduced by French economist Frédéric Bastiat in his 1850 essay “That Which We See and That Which We Do Not See” (“Ce qu’on voit et ce qu’on ne voit pas”) to illustrate why destruction, and the money spent to recover from destruction, is not actually a net benefit to society.” Bastiat also wrote many other essays such as The Law, Taxes, and several others, most of which are located in his book That Which is Seen and That Which is Not Seen. He is best known for his book The Law. According to Academy of Ideas, ” The Law, a work written by the French political philosopher and economist Frederic Bastiat in 1850, investigates what happens in a society when the law becomes a weapon used by those in power to control and enslave the population.”

Describe Bastiat’s concept of the politics of plunder. According to OLL, “The basis for Bastiat’s theory of class was the notion of plunder which he defined as the taking of another person’s property without their consent by force or fraud. Those who lived by plunder constituted “les spoliateurs” (the plunderers) or “la classe spoliatrice” (the plundering class).” Plunder is when someone forcibly takes the property of another person. According to OLL, “The French economist Fredric Bastiat (1801-1850) developed a theory of plunder in the late 1840s which he defined in the following way: When a portion of wealth passes from the person who has acquired it, without his consent and without compensation, to someone who has not created it, whether this is by force or fraud, I say that there has been a violation of property rights and that there has been an act of plunder.” So this is an example of plunder. According to AP News, “Bastiat observed that ‘when plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men in a society, over the course of time they create for themselves a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it.'” So Bastiat observed that basically when a group in a society practices plundering, over time they eventually create for themselves a system that makes plundering legal and a moral code that glorifies the system.

According to Wikipedia, “John Foxe, an English historian and martyrologist, was the author of Acts and Monuments, telling of Christian martyrs throughout Western history, but particularly the sufferings of English Protestants and proto-Protestants from the 14th century and in the reign of Mary I.” According to Got Questions, “John Foxe (also spelled Fox, 1516—1587) was an English Puritan preacher and church historian. As a youth, Foxe’s brilliance was recognized, and at Oxford University he earned a master’s degree and a fellowship (similar to a modern scholarship) at Magdalen College. His first literary endeavors were in poetry and Latin comedies. Foxe began researching church history to help him better understand the controversies regarding the Catholic Church and the Reformation. Foxe studied the Scriptures as well as the writings of the early church fathers.” According to Britannica, “John Foxe, (born 1516, Boston, Lincolnshire, Eng.—died April 18, 1587, Cripplegate, London), English Puritan preacher and author of The Book of Martyrs, a graphic and polemic account of those who suffered for the cause of Protestantism. Widely read, often the most valued book beside the Bible in the households of English Puritans, it helped shape popular opinion about Roman Catholicism for at least a century.”

Foxe’s greatest work, his book Acts and Monuments (popularly known as Foxe’s Book of Martyrs), is a work of Protestant history and martyrology. It was first published in the year 1563. According to Wikipedia, “After his death, Foxe’s Acts and Monuments continued to be published and appreciatively read. John Burrow refers to it as, after the Bible, ‘the greatest single influence on English Protestant thinking of the late Tudor and early Stuart period.'” According to Digital Commons, “We assert that Foxe’s Book of Martyrs was published for these purposes: personal reasons, a tribute to Queen Elizabeth, and to gain support for the Protestant faith and belief.” This book was probably one of the most influential books of its time. According to Wikipedia, Acts and Monuments “includes a polemical account of the sufferings of Protestants under the Catholic Church, with particular emphasis on England and Scotland. The book was highly influential in those countries and helped shape lasting popular notions of Catholicism there. The book went through four editions in Foxe’s lifetime and a number of later editions and abridgements, including some that specifically reduced the text to a Book of Martyrs.” According to Christian Today, “The works of church historians rarely influence history itself, but John Foxe’s Acts and Monuments of Matters Happening to the Church—commonly known as Foxe’s Book of Martyrs—is the exception that proves the rule.”

Is the language of Foxe still compelling today? The language of Foxe spoke to a lot of its readers. He also put several memorable images into his book. The language that Foxe used to speak to his readers was very compelling to the sixteenth and seventeenth century people, but due to the type of society and world that we live in today, it might not be as compelling as it was three hundred years ago. So, I think that the language of Foxe can be compelling to some people, but not all people.