Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: lentulusgracchus

That sounds pretty close to what he considered himself.


18 posted on 06/21/2009 2:00:57 AM PDT by GeronL (http://libertyfic.proboards.com <----go there now,----> tyrannysentinel.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]


To: GeronL
People never get it. They keep buying the Communist rhetoric, that the Nazis were a rightist party, not the half-brother of the Communist Party and the other socialist parties.

When you're talking about popular sovereignty or popular supremacy, the primacy of a people, you're talking about the Old Left, i.e. the 19th-century Left, of which our classical liberals, ordoliberals, Jeffersonians, Jacksonians, and so on (now including paleocons and neocons), were a part.

The more exotic weeds of the Left grew into cover stories for vanguard despotism. There were Communism, Nazism, Trotskyism, Maoism [someone tell me quick, the difference between Maoism and Trotskyism -- I can't think of one], and New World varieties like Mexican Communism, or PRIismo, and Peruvian Aprismo, from APRA, a Communist-nativist movement and political party rather like Nazism. Aprista political refugees in the 1930's cross-pollinated Mexican Communists with their nativism afresh: PRI had been a very mestizo and indio party in 1919, but it was gradually becoming Creolized, and so the Apristas reinvigorated the Mexican Communists' identification with indio problems and agenda.

The North American variety of classical liberalism and democratic republicanism (i.e. Jeffersonianism) grew into populism, Progressivism, nativism (the Know Nothings), and Kluxerism, together with Kluxerism's offshoots, white supremacy and segregationism, all of which were centered around the welfare of The People (however defined), and particularly the less well-off, since the well-off did fine on their own, thank you.

But there was never as much daylight between a classical American economic liberal practicing laissez-faire and busting his unions (and calling in the bulls to do it, and having the State lege write convenient gun-grabber laws like Chicago's to help him do it: which was what gun control was all about, after it stopped being about keeping black freemen and slaves disarmed), on the one hand, and the populist Grangers and small-business Mugwumps he affected to disdain, as there was between any of those representatives of popular sovereignty on the one hand and the exponents of Leviathan government and the authority of the State, the Church, and other self-ordering, self-seeking institutional Lords Ordainers and their votaries, whether they called themselves Falange, or Fascists, or royalists, on the other.

In fact, it was precisely this division that ranged Whiggish English businessmen and American business and political groups on one side, and the victorious powers of the Vienna Congress and their anti-liberty, anti-Masonic, anti-Protestant representatives of the old feudal order on the other, as the daughters of Spain fought it out with their mother country for liberty and independence, and Britain and America, with Spain finally defeated after a civil war of 44 years, interposed the Clayton-Bulwer Treaty and the Monroe Doctrine between Spain and her lost possessions, to deny authoritarianism a fresh foothold in the New World, a world that Americans and Englishmen agreed the Old Order had lost on merit.

19 posted on 06/21/2009 4:33:46 AM PDT by lentulusgracchus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson