The way that was followed by the celestials may be followed by all.
If the abstract entity (the "state," "society," or the "collective") has the moral priority, then the even permanent abridgment of any amount of freedom is no moral wrong.
We have been crowned with success...", translated by Chakravarthi V.
Also, the rescue helicopter, of book and movie fame, that had to ditch on 30 October 1991 was an Air National Guard rescue helicopter -- under the doctrine that the Air National Guard handles air rescues at sea beyond the range of Coast Guard helicopters.
If they had the armed body of their own citizens behind them, in the reasonably organized and official form of the County Militia, they might have had more leverage and more courage.
We must credit Caiaphas with avoiding, for a time, such evils .
[, II:2, p.275]Machiavelli is not sophisticated enough to know how can corrupt even republics to the service of private interest, but his point can be well taken that the many will be better served in a government that is accountable to the many.
Walker translation, Penguin Books, p.
We find the "rational anarchist," libertarian purist Professor Bernardo de la Paz asking our narrator, Manuel:
"...under what circumstances may the State justly place its welfare above that of a citizen?" ....
However, he was no disciple of Machiavelli just .
We have a starting point." [p.82]Later, while the revolution is being prepared, Manuel is worried about how they are getting the money for it:
"Still doesn't say how to pay for what we are doing now.""'How,' Manuel?
He did not admire tyranny; he did not admire, but despised, Caesar.
303-304]To Professor de la Paz, stealing money for the Revolution is "the means we have" to avoid food riots and cannibalism (because, by the way, limited lunar water was being steadily shipped to earth as grain).
I'm neither proud of it nor ashamed; it's the means we have.
In these terms, the question would not be whether the state has the right to tax, but whether taxation is necessary to the means effecting the purpose of the state in protecting and preserving the lives of the citizens.
Has not this violated the Professor's principles?
The discussion in is not about sacrificing individuals against their will, but with his poetic license Heinlein has spared the Professor the travail of facing a case of that.
We see the rationale next:He chuckled.
The essence of the dilemma for Caiaphas was simply the existence of one in comparison to the existence of many, the "whole nation." In the , again, Machiavelli says:
...and it is beyond question that it is only in republics that the common good is looked to properly in that all that promotes it is carried out; and, however much this or that private person may be the loser on this account, there are so many who benefit thereby that the common good can be realized in spite of those few who suffer in consequence.