“In a much quoted passage in his inaugural address, President Kennedy said, “Ask not what your country can do for you – ask what you can do for your country.” Neither half of the statement expresses a relation between the citizen and his government that is worthy of the ideals of free men in a free society. The paternalistic “what your country can do for you” implies that government is the patron, the citizen the ward, a view that is at odds with the free man’s belief in his own responsibility for his own destiny. The organismic, “what you can do for your ‘country” implies the government is the master or the deity, the citizen, the servant or the votary.

“The free man will ask neither what his country can do for him nor what he can do for his country. He will ask rather “What can I and my compatriots do through government” to help us discharge our individual responsibilities, to achieve our several goals and purposes, and above all, to protect our freedom?

“To the free man, the country is the collection of individuals who compose it, not something over and above them. He is proud of a common heritage and loyal to common traditions. But he regards government as a means, an instrumentality, neither a grantor of favors and gifts, nor a master or god to be blindly worshipped and served. He recognizes no national goal except as it is the consensus of the goals that the citizens severally serve. He recognizes no national purpose except as it is the consensus of the purposes for which the citizens severally strive.”

There’s really not much more I can add to that.

The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution by Prof. Bernard Bailyn is an incredibly engaging work of history arguing that the American Revolution was primarily an intellectual, politically oriented struggle that began in the early 1760s. The work encourages students of history (and everyone else for that matter) to view colonial America’s struggle with the British leviathan in an entirely new light and not merely as a war. Although the subject matter can be a tad boring, Bailyn readily engages his readers with question after question, ponderance after ponderance. I would recommend it to anyone interested in the Revolutionary Age of American History.

To read my full review click here.

I heartily recommend the movie to everyone of all ages, shapes, colors, sizes, etc.

The term “Easter” is an anglicized derivative of “Inanna” (also called Ishtar), the Akkadian goddess of love, fertility and war. Supposedly, rabbits were sacrificed in her name and eggs (symbolizing fertility) were painted/decorated in the dead animal’s blood. In light of this, however, we use the term “Easter” to symbolize (what should be) the single most cherished day in all of human history, particularly the history of the Christian Church: the day that Jesus rose from the dead! It seems to me a more appropriate term for such a revered day would be “Resurrection Sunday” or “Resurrection Day” or, simply, the day Jesus rose from the dead. Also, in light of the above information, how should we view encouraging children to participate in Easter egg hunts or their childish considerations of the Easter bunny? Just some things to ponder as we begin to celebrate this important day.