> "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety" -- Benjamin Franklin

The key phrase is "a little temporary safety". 250 years ago people understood that the "security" gains were small and fleeting, but the loss of liberty was massive and permanent.

▲

Terr_ 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Aside, the original meaning of Franklin's words are less-inspiring but perhaps more-interesting.

He's saying the local democratic legislature must not give up its "freedom" to pass laws taxing the powerful Penn dynasty which almost owns Pennsylvania.

He wants to reject a deal offered by the Penns: A big lump of money for temporary military security now, in exchange for an agreement that they can never be taxed ever again.

▲

mathgradthrow 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

That's not an aside. The quote is pernicious because of its attribution to Ben. People invoke it without ever asking themselves if its true because they think of it as the hard won wisdom of a great man.

	▲	bigbadfeline 2 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		> The quote is pernicious because of its attribution to Ben. It's not pernicious for any reason because it's absolutely true in general, Franklin was simply using a general piece of wisdom to justify particular government actions. Yes, using it that way was an improvisation and a bit of a stretch, but the real issue here is why he needed to resort to it - that's a rabbit hole that pretty much goes to the bottom of today's problems which we're handling in a much worse manner than him back then.
	▲	2 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		[deleted]

▲

superb_dev 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I don’t find that to be less inspiring

▲

js2 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

FWIW, the context of the Franklin quote is him defending the ability of the legislature to tax a family that was trying to bribe/lobby the governor to do otherwise.

The quote is in defense of the government: WITTES: It is a quotation that defends the authority of a legislature to govern in the interests of collective security. It means, in context, not quite the opposite of what it's almost always quoted as saying but much closer to the opposite than to the thing that people think it means.

https://www.npr.org/2015/03/02/390245038/ben-franklins-famou...

▲

roywiggins 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Well, quite. And in an American Revolution context it's not like the colonies were notably less secure places to live after they gained independence.

▲

weaksauce 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

basically the patriot act was a big piece of temporary safety that never produced any.