Some say that aiming the arrow higher than the target is a good way to hit where you intended.

Anyhow, the thing I’m actually trying to point out is that Nick’s description of “a bill of economic rights essentially for property holders” does not accurately portray the foundation of the RRB which is more correctly linked via the modern “Tea Party” movement back to American Revolutionary ideas of Liberty, small government and free trade (approx 200 years ago). You can no doubt find mutations along that lineage (and probably links back to the French Revolution as well) but it tends to go as an overall package.

From a practical sense, I would judge the RRB as a bill trying to do the work of a Constitution, whereas the “Tea Party” movement are attempting to make a Constitution do the work of a Constitution. But people will tend to use the tools they can reach for at the time, and the USA has a whole lot more work that needs doing.

The quotes you give are perfectly apposite, but I was focussing on Point 7 – “In the free market as the basis of all business conducted within our borders.”. ALL business?? The Washington quote is about foreign commerce, and the others about the virtues of small government. It’s also worth noting that the course of conduct by these people did not always – in some areas ever – match their rhetoric, and they were prepared to be pragmatic about means (eg conscription and massive debt financing if that was what it took to win the war with Britain).

Of course you are asking for more quotes :-)

Harmony, liberal intercourse with all nations are recommended by policy, humanity, and interest. But even our commercial policy should hold an equal and impartial hand, neither seeking nor granting exclusive favors or preferences; consulting the natural course of things; diffusing and diversifying by gentle means the streams of commerce, but forcing nothing; establishing with powers so disposed, in order to give trade a stable course, to define the rights of our merchants, and to enable the Government to support them, conventional rules of intercourse, the best that present circumstances and mutual opinion will permit, but temporary and liable to be from time to time abandoned or varied as experience and circumstances shall dictate;

George Washington‘s Farewell Address September 17, 1796.

I’ve cut him short a bit but George was a man of long sentences. Can’t be having such things in this day and age.

A wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government.

Thomas Jefferson, 1801

It will be of little avail to the people, that the laws are made by men of their own choice, if the laws be so voluminous that they cannot be read, or so incoherent that they cannot be understood; if they be repealed or revised before they are promulgated, or undergo such incessant changes that no man, who knows what the law is to-day, can guess what it will be to-morrow.

James Madison, couldn’t find a date for this one, but after Thomas Jefferson.

I’m sure there are more quotes around. These are enough to at least demonstrate that the ideas contained in the RRB were broadly popular 200 years ago and at least in the case of the early United States they were broadly successful ideas too (not terribly supportive of the native population, but progress inevitably has its casualties).

Such ideas were not by any means restricted to America.

I have declared that the port of Singapore is a free port and the trade thereof open to ships and vessels of every nation, free of duty, equally and alike to all.

Sir Stamford Raffles, also couldn’t find a date for this one, probably around 1800.

I think it’s also fair to point out that the US Constitution defines Liberty by saying that anything not explicitly stated as regulated by the Constitution is automatically a matter for either the states, or individuals and their local communities to deal with. It never bothered making a long list of the matters that were not supposed to be regulated by the federal government. Maybe this was not the best approach, but it’s the design they went with at the time.

In addition, 200 years ago there was not the same careful segregation into fine-tuned categories: economic freedom, religious freedom, personal freedom, free speech, freedom of travel/migration, etc. Liberty was more of a holistic concept, and trade was just presumed to be an emergent result of general liberty.

Today we isolate economic rights from other rights, as if there was a fundamental difference.

http://www.nhteapartycoalition.org/tea/aboutjoin/

The principles set forth in this document echo the First Principles that were drafted by our Founding Fathers. We believe that tinkering with this wisdom by successive generations has brought about our present calamity. It is our firm intent to restore those principles.

In seeking this goal, we call upon your assistance to join us in our demand that our Constitutional republic be rightfully restored to us.

We Believe;

1] That all powers not expressly delegated to the Federal government are the sole domain of the states, as set forth by the Founding Fathers in Article 10 of the U. S. Constitution.

2] In fiscal responsibility and the prudent use of public funds.

3] In limited government as envisioned by the Founding Fathers and for the reasons that they stated.

4] In the rule of law and its uniform application at all levels of government and society.

5] In the national sovereignty of the United States, its proper defense and security, to include her borders.

6] In the personal rights and responsibilities of every U.S. citizen, as expressed by the Founding Fathers.

7] In the free market as the basis of all business conducted within our borders.

It is the duty of every U.S. citizen to hold every candidate of every political party to these standards and to vote accordingly.

Or if that’s too complicated:

http://teapartypatriots.ning.com/

Core Values
Fiscal Responsibility
Constitutionally Limited Government
Free Markets

http://commonsensecitizens.dallasteaparty.org/

If you believe, as we do, in limited government, fiscal responsibility, personal responsibility, the rule of law and national sovereignty are encouraged to SIGN UP so that we can help you find like-minded citizens in your same area.

There’s many more quotes out there, no doubt everyone gets the point by now.

Is this a “throwback” to primitive idealistic thinking? Probably yes.

Then again, a whole lot of Americans are sitting solidly disappointed by both parties, and steadily getting solidly stone faced about their disappointment watching yet another month of job losses, blank closures and home repossessions. They know something has gone wrong, they just aren’t completely sure when and where it did go wrong so the logical course of action is backtrack to the last point where the system did work.

Don’t be quick to write these people off. Large numbers of out-of-work idle hands who feel disenfranchised are what revolutions are made of, and make no bones about it, the “founding fathers” of the USA had very revolutionary ideas.

Are there precedents for this kind of legislation? Is it a variation on the theme that there should be a kind of socio-economic “impact statement” attached to legislation, like the impact statement for developments on the natural environment?