Can luxury ruin a free state?

1. WHAT HE SAID (the record)

Record ledger

• BELIEF (1733): Thomas Gordon believed that the Church's accumulation of wealth through 'Robbery and Fraud' led to excess and luxury, which he portrayed as morally and socially corrupting. He argued that such wealth, once obtained, was considered 'sacred and unalienable,' and any criticism of it was labeled as 'profane' or 'atheistical.' This suggests his view that unchecked luxury and wealth accumulation can undermine moral and social order. In 1733, Thomas Gordon argued that whatever had been acquired by the Church during "these Days of Usurpation and Darkness," regardless of how it was obtained, was considered sacred and unalienable, and to strip the Church of such possessions was seen as sacrilege, even if they had been gained through robbery and fraud [1]. He argued that such ambitions, if not in line with Christ or the Constitution, should be disturbed and defeated. "In short, whoever doubts, whether they ... have not been the Authors of Changes in the World, of great and calamitous Changes; whether they have not themselves changed and degenerated from their Patterns and Original, need only read History, and compare them with Christ and his Apostles, compare their Pretensions, Pomp, Luxury, and Possessions, with the Simplicity, Humility, Labour, and Disinterestedness of the Primitive Christians." [2]
• BELIEF (undated): Thomas Gordon believed that luxury can ruin a free state. He argued that as Rome became wealthier and adopted luxury, it lost its virtue and eventually became abandoned, showing that the introduction of luxury leads to moral decay and the downfall of a free state. [3]
• BELIEF (undated): Thomas Gordon believed that luxury can ruin a free state, as evidenced by his argument that lavishness and indulgence lead to public discontent and the downfall of rulers who neglect the public good for personal gratification and the favor of worthless favorites. "A profuse Administration is always loose, disrespected and tottering... could his Favourites, whom he had so dearly purchased, protect him? No: The poor man... was left helpless and forlorn, and butchered in his house." [4]
• BELIEF (undated): Thomas Gordon believed that luxury and indulgence can lead to the downfall of a state, as they contribute to the moral decay and miseries of the people, and he expressed concern about the consequences of such behavior by those in power. "It is melancholy to consider, but too true, that generally they who sway the State, are its greatest Enemies" [5]
• BELIEF (undated): Thomas Gordon believed that luxury can ruin a free state, as it leads to corruption, baseness, and the extinction of virtue, which in turn results in usurpation and tyranny. Readings differ on how the earlier and later dated statements relate; the record above gives each with its date. (key quote above) [6]
• BELIEF (undated): Thomas Gordon believed that luxury can ruin a free state, as he argues that foreign luxury debauched Rome and led to its downfall. (key quote above) [7]
• BELIEF (undated): Thomas Gordon believed that luxury can ruin a free state, as it leads to idleness, venality, vice, and a loss of private virtue and public glory, making people indifferent to public evils and susceptible to servitude. (key quote above) [8]
• BELIEF (undated): Thomas Gordon believes that luxury and oftentation have a significant influence, though he argues that despite this, there were still sufficient dangers in the natural state to justify forming societies. His grounds are that ambition and malice, which may be linked to luxury, were enough to necessitate governance. "If Luxury and Oftentation have greater Sway than heretofore, which if we give any Credit to the most ancient Writers they have not, yet Villainy is obliged at least to put on a Mask, Rapine is unknown, and Murders and Assassinations are less frequent;" [9]
• BELIEF (1750): Thomas Gordon believed that luxury could ruin a free state, as he argued that the corruption of the great, unchecked public profusion, and the indulgence in luxury and sensuality led to a general dissolution of manners and undermined the moral and legal foundations of society. "the illicit Gains have been as profusely squandered by Individuals in Luxury, Sensuality, and every unmanly Gratification" [10]

What cuts against it

• ACTION (1722): Thomas Gordon argued against the use of public necessity to justify the establishment of standing armies, which could lead to tyranny. However, this passage does not directly address the impact of luxury on a free state. "We are, doubtless, under great Necessities in our present Circumstances; but to increase them, in order to cure them, would be a preposterous Remedy, worthy only of them who brought them upon us; and who, if they had common Shame in them, would conceal, as far as they could, under Silence, the heavy Evils, which, tho' they lie upon every Man's Shoulders, yet lie only at the Doors of a few." [11]

• ACTION (1733): Thomas Gordon criticized the clergy's pursuit of power and luxury, arguing that such ambitions should be disturbed and defeated. However, this passage does not directly address the impact of luxury on a free state. "It would be endless to deduce Particulars. But suppose any assuming Clergyman were so extravagant and daring, and had so little Regard to Conscience and public Tranquillity, as to attempt to establish an Ecclesiastical Tribunal in our Colonies abroad, to the Terror and Affliction of our Brethren there, who were many of them first driven thither by the Oppression and Barbarity of such Courts here, especially in Archbishop Laud's Reign; would not such an Attempt tend to a bold Innovation, and discover a busy, an arrogant and dangerous Spirit in such a Clergyman; and would he not be a good Subject and an honest Man, who set himself against such a lewd Attempt, and exposed its wicked Tendency?" [2]

2. HOW IT APPLIES (reasoning; inference is marked)

1. Thomas Gordon believed that luxury can ruin a free state, as it leads to moral decay and the downfall of virtuous societies. This is supported by his analysis of Rome's decline due to luxury. (key quote above) [7]

2. He argued that luxury fosters corruption, baseness, and the extinction of virtue, which results in usurpation and tyranny. This is evident in his discussion of the Grecian Commonwealths. (key quote above) [6]

3. Gordon also noted that luxury leads to idleness, venality, and a loss of private virtue and public glory, making people indifferent to public evils and susceptible to servitude. (key quote above) [8]

4. He believed that the corruption of the great, unchecked public profusion, and indulgence in luxury and sensuality led to a general dissolution of manners and undermined the moral and legal foundations of society. "the illicit Gains have been as profusely squandered by Individuals in Luxury, Sensuality, and every unmanly Gratification" [10]

5. Gordon's views on the Church's accumulation of wealth through 'Robbery and Fraud' leading to excess and luxury, though focused on the Church, indirectly supports the idea that unchecked luxury can undermine moral and social order. "Whatever was once annexed to the Church, in these Days of Usurpation and Darkness (however knavishly or violently obtained) was forthwith sacred and unalienable; nay, it became no less than Sacrilege, to divest her of what she had gained by Robbery and Fraud." [1]

3. HIS TAKE

Record coverage: DIRECT

Extrapolation: Thomas Gordon believed that luxury can ruin a free state by leading to moral decay, corruption, and the eventual downfall of virtuous societies. He used historical examples, particularly the decline of Rome, to illustrate how luxury fosters idleness, venality, and a loss of private virtue and public glory, making people indifferent to public evils and susceptible to servitude.

Competing readings: The passages that focus on the Church's accumulation of wealth and the clergy's pursuit of power and luxury provide indirect support for the idea that unchecked luxury can undermine moral and social order, but they do not directly address the impact of luxury on a free state.

Confidence: High, as the record directly addresses the impact of luxury on a free state through multiple historical examples and clear arguments.