outback to jungle

Musings on experiences of volunteering in Papua New Guinea with some gratuitous domestic social and public comment

Tuesday, July 04, 2006

what came first - the citizen or the state

The argument is as old as civil society itself but now the great irony is that the champion of anti-socialism, John the Great is treating the rights of individual citizen Mr David Hicks of Guantamo Gaol as if the State were the Champion. The State exists because of the Citizens or the Citizens exist because there is a State for citizens to belong to? The citizens form the State and we elect representatives to run the State. Citizen Howard is as much a citizen as Citizen Hicks. So why has the State abandonned one of its citizens? Because the State can? So Marx was right after all? Where do you stand now John Citizen Howard? You are a Marxist? Well shut about about your championing of the individual then and start to nationalise back the Commonwealth Bank and the half of Telstra we still own and anything else you've sold off that we don't know about. Who'd a thought it? John Howard is exposed as a Communist!

1 Comments:

At 8:19 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

You are wrong. The dualism you were trying to contrast should have been Individual V State. Citizen and State are predicative of each other - ie, a citizen exists because of the State. Without a State, the Citizen is only an Individual. Go and check Aristotle. Nevertheless, your point about Howard is well taken.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home