Previous 31 - 40 Next
Libertarian and conservative are poor substitutes for the word that they were forced to replace; liberalism. The term liberal captured both but was stolen by the Democrats after they had trashed the term progressive and at the time there were few real liberals left to complain. Now we're stuck with it. What we call liberals now are really a variety of fascists, Fabian socialists, or just squishy emptiness and feel good silliness of low information folks. Libertarians in contrast seem to miss the “under law” part and miss the most important core of a Hayekian view of the world, which by necessity must assign importance to tradition; “conservative” doesn't really mean anything until attached to Burke or the constitution, Burke was a liberal and the constitution was a liberal construction from top to bottom. Patriotism in the context of the old meaning of liberal meant that a diverse people, multiple nationalities adhered to the same basic ideas about freedom and the rule of law.
Even Aid that actually reaches foreigners has always done more harm than good. All development aid, whether from USAID, the World or Regional banks, European donors, is based on a top down central planning model of development where US and local technocrats and politicians spend other people’s money to do things they think will get them bigger budgets in the next year. No country in the history of the world has developed by central planners, from the top down, in the way development economists fashioned their theories. On the other hand, every dictator, charlatan, crook has asserted such a role for himself and will always welcome free money. The Millennial project was supposed to be different, but upon close inspection, even without the corruption the article touches on, it has done more harm than good. With time all government programs become corrupt because these programs are worth more to the corrupt than to the honest so the corrupt will spend more effort to capture them. But even without corruption, they cannot work because quite simply that is not the way development happens.
The financial system was not destroyed by GWB. The collapse has studied in great detail from all angles. So you prove you listened to the spin but don't read, or can't understand basic finance and markets. On the other hand the war was supported by Democrats without debate. So I think Bush was profoundly wrong to invade Iraq, but the Democrats were stampeded by their own cowardice, they couldn't even bring themselves to debate it. They are a cable of preening foolish cowards. If you are among those who think GWB was a disaster it should move you toward conservative and libertarian positions, not toward an inept fool who has doubled down on the same stuff but without purpose other than power.
It is frequently attributed to Churchill, and he's likely to have also said it, but it originated with GBShaw, in "Man and Super Man" Shaw was a socialist and totalitarian at least in theory. While he was apparently a gentle soul who could be friends with Chesterton, he was obviously deeply confused and valued youth's enthusiasm for extremist and totalitarian views. After the 20th century, none of us should have patience with them. They need to e put on the playing field, in hard labor and rigorous study until they grow up, and their brains catch up with their hormones.
Yes some Republicans have moved back toward constitutional conservatives which oth parties embraced prior to the progressive movement. The dominate wing of the Republican party kept moving left in the post war world, toward big government in a fruitless attempt to get the media on their side and because big corporations had even more influence with centralized big government than with competitive markets which constantly challenged them . Moreover after the 20th century some have learned a little about the innate totalitarianism of socialism in all its forms. There is a lot going on always. What is really new is the degree of hate among Democrats. and it is not an accident. You comment about Republicans chaning more than democrats tells me you have been influenced by what I'm talking about.
What we meant by freedom was freedom under the rule of law, fully accountable for our own decisions. That is no longer the case for most of us who work as employees in large impersonal organizations within which we must follow rules and if personal decisions lead us to ruin, the government is there to keep us from paying for bad decisions. In our personal lives we are still free to play and buy things. The old meaning of freedom doesn't mean much to any but small business, tradesmen, who live and die by their decisions and face meddlesome government every day. This part of the economy is not growing under Obama, and for good reason. They are the kulaks. The larger economy of creative destruction that drives growth, technology, human advancement, is still there but the powerful organizations we work for only embrace the creative part but not the destructive part, so they try to arrest the incessant change freedom gives rise to. The problem is that the only escape from creative destruction is stagnation that will be dominated by the largest organized interests. This is the dilemma. It has a solution, but the solution requires freedom.
He is among the very few who still shine a light on Castro. Castro has had a powerful influence in academia and our media since he took power and jailed the democratic wing of the movement (I started to say his movement, but it wasn’t his, it was broad, middle class and mostly democratic). Adolescents find orderly totalitarianism appealing and most of our left lives in advanced adolescents. It’s a strange phenomena, but it is as old as man. Athenian youth admired Sparta, the youthful mobs welcomed Caesar and the end of the Republic; European youth admired Hitler, Mussolini, and Lenin and Stalin and now American youth love Obama. And now it takes longer for kids to grow up, and some never do. suppose the apparent chaos of the real world is daunting to kids who have to face it. Totalitarianism appeals to such fears of having to grow up.
He said he'd have those nigras voting democrat for the next 100 years. He was referring to the results of the war on poverty and the dependency it would create. The civil rights legislation changed the tone and tune of the racist demagogues, who then went after the black vote successfully supported by second tier blacks who having won the civil rights battle had to find a new shtick. It was racial hucksterism, with their new allies the former white racist leaders. The thing about evil is that it changes form but never goes away.
While I agree with the article, there is more going on. The far left has always hated the US because the US fought against the socialists and promoted markets and freedom. Now what drives them, and how did they come to dominate the Democratic party and the mainstream media? Why do we see so much hate? A large minority must be made to hate the majority in order to advance their totalitarian agenda. Is this an extreme interpretation? Just listen to democrats who 20 to 30 years ago were normal people. Now they hate and hate deeply. How did that happen? Was it an accident? Have regular Republicans and conservatives suddenly become hateful, and bigoted, and dangerous. Have religious folks suddenly become theocrats, and supporters of a new inquisition? Or did something else change? What changed is the power they have accumulated over the years so that they no longer have to hide their agenda. They are going for the whole thing because they see it within reach
In response to:

A New Evangelizing Foreign Policy

johnm h Wrote: Jul 04, 2014 7:01 AM
Unfortunately the article is true. Can anyone tell me why they think this will advance US interests abroad? If there are more abortions in central America, more gays, more STDs , if all these countries allow gay marriage how does it advance US interests? Of course they are mostly appalled by the strange agenda. I suppose it's good advertising for those who want more potential sexual partners to come here legally and illegally or just for a sexual junket. And of course it’s good for the abortion industry. Since we are tying foreign aid to these things perhaps it will help end foreign aid, that would be good for everyone.
That the Democrats get the Democrat votes after the racist history of that party proves the power of the big lie. Democrats would have you believe that an entire culture changed overnight. What changed was obviously that the blacks got the vote so the demagogues who kept Blacks separated and disinfranchized used demagoguery to capture the black vote, and the second tier black leadership, with the civil rights battle won, found a way to survive and milk it. A new coaltion was born. Blacks, black hucksters and white racists. It works.
Previous 31 - 40 Next