Skip to comments.To Get Ron Paul's Insanity, You Have To Understand Libertarianism
Posted on 12/30/2011 8:49:57 AM PST by SeekAndFind
To "get" Ron Paul you have to understand libertarianism -- an ism every bit as delusional as Marxism. The National Libertarian Party, which first ran a presidential candidate in 1972, hasn't had many wins -- electing 4 state legislators in as many decades, as well as a planning commissioner here and an alderman there. Ron Paul is its greatest success.
The Texas congressman is far and away the most prominent proponent of what I like to call rightwing utopianism. Libertarianism is to authentic conservatism what Barack Obama is to 19th century liberalism.
Inspired by Ayn Rand (Ron named his son, the future senator, Rand Paul), Libertarianism was an outgrowth of 1960s campus conservatism. Like ideologues of the left, libertarians of the day were on a never-ending quest for ideological purity and the foolish consistency Emerson derided. (They still are.) Unlike traditional conservatives, libertarians came to oppose the Vietnam War and what they called "prohibitionist" drug policies. You must be consistent, libertarians lectured us. If you support economic liberty, then you must support "personal liberty" (legalized abortion, freedom to use soul-destroying drugs) and the libertarian principle applied to foreign policy -- isolationism.
During the Cold War, economist Murray Rothbard (one of the foremost libertarian theorists) once observed that if we lost the rest of the world and the Soviets invaded America, we could always take to the hills and launch a guerrilla war, a la "Red Dawn." Libertarians have never been hampered by reality.
Some libertarians drifted into anarchy, others organized the National Libertarian Party. Ron Paul was the party's 1988 standard-bearer.
I understand libertarians because I was one, from roughly 1968 (when I read "Atlas Shrugged") to 1982. I was a vice chairman of the New York Libertarian Party in the early '70s.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
...Of course it does.
Let’s outlaw alcohol. I mean seriously, the toll it’s taken on our society.
[ Libertarians (L and l) want to legalize dope so it can be taxed. And with more taxes comes more government.
Libertarians are the biggest hypocrites I know. ]
I want Dope to be like any other product, not disproportionally taxes and only taxed on a State or local municipality level. Also on it’s legality it should be up to the states not the fed, i think because of the augment of “interstate Commerce” the federal government has Gained WAY too much power.
Taxing ANY item more than another is most certainly government interfering in the free market.
We’re halfway there.
With all the restrictions and taxes. And then - if you are stupid enough to drive under the influence and get caught - you can expect some $9,500 or more in attorney fees, fines, court costs, probation expenses and more.
Like I said...”Libertarians are the biggest hypocrites I know.”
And unless you use dope yourself and advocate and encourage others to use it; YOU are a hypocrite as well.
What do you have to get to understand to get the globalists’ insanity? I’m really curious.
[ ...Of course it does.
Lets outlaw alcohol. I mean seriously, the toll its taken on our society. ]
Once you give government the responsibility of taking care of physical needs of the people, You give it the right to take away the freedoms of the people in the name of the common “good”...
I think we should treat people like adults and if someone wishes to be a drunkard the most you can do is keep them from harming others but there is nothing the government should be able to do to keep them from harming themselves.
The craziest man I personally have known in my life was a Libertarian. It was more than enough when he told me other believed the same things he did. If they believe as he did, then they are truly nuts.
Rats! The author focuses on foreign policy to the near exclusion of all else. I was hoping to read what Libertarians believe on taxes, government, education, gun control, transportation, tariffs and free trade, banking, offshoring, welfare, government support of the arts, etc.
The article let me down. Shame.
If you want to create a libertarian, just take a conservative and remove all common sense.
Is that not why we [BIG GOVERNMENT] currently take from our resources and waltz into foreign lands, trying to make them just like us? "Everyone wants freedom." No. Some people want the freedom to be slaves. Others don't. Which of those options fits the USA in principle?
Thank you. I have been trying to explain that point to people here for a while. You did it better.
There are 2 types of libertarians.... the capital L libertarian is a nut job like ron paul... the small l libertarian is very close to a fiscal conservative, and shares many similarities to social conservatives, therefore they must not be lumped into one category.... to say all libertarians are nut jobs is to say all republicans are conservatives... the conservatives are to the republican party what the small l libertarians are to the capital L libertarians....republicans don’t trust conservatives, and capital L libertarians don’t trust small l libertarians...
“Concerning foreign policy I really like the idea a foreign policy where we wait till we get attacked and then use the attack on us as an excuse to decimate the attacking country and annex it after turning it into a bombing range. Consider it a variation of MAD, only in this case it is AAD (Attacker Assured Destruction). There shouldnt really be preventative wars just total defensive wars that end with the other side not existing to even regret attacking us.”
Again reality is that you cant decimate a country full of civilians not morally,legally or even technically. Just because some dictator shoots a missile into your home,doesn’t give you a right to kill civilians who most likely hate that dictator but are powerless to do anything against him. This is not liberalism,this is reality,same goes for some terror organization:If AlQaida attacks who do you hit back, they not “based” anywhere in fact they could be “based” right here in US. And no nuking countries is not a solution,after a few nuclear explosions the fall-out will affect the whole world,including US. This is why to fight bad guys you do it preventively on their turf. Not after they commit mass murder in your cities. This is reality which Libertarians FAIL to understand. If we killed Hitler in 38,39 how many lives and treasure would have been saved?!
If we assisted undercover in Russia against the Bolshviks,how many lives in Vietnam,China,Russia would have saved Americans and other nationalities?
You make good points. We have to be realistic about national defense. The idea that we have enemies because we are active in our defense has the causality reversed.
However, I believe that our biggest enemies are within, as they attempt to undermine the very core of our society.
With all the billions we’ve sent to Israel you’d think we’d all at least get a free trip to the Holy Land. Alas, all we’ve gotten is a bl9/11k eye. The word “insanity” does come to mind.
To paraphrase Georges Clemenceau; not to be a Libertarian at age 19 shows a want of heart, to be a Libertarian at age 40 shows a want of brains.
My cats demand an apology.
It is the masters of those slaves that we have reason to fear.
The problem was that if we allowed the situation in the Middle east to continue on, we would almost certainly have been attacked again in a major way. We were already at war with Iraq, we were in a ceasefire that Saddam was exploiting. If we allowed him to rearm, the world would of become much more dangerous for us and western civilization generally.
The strategy was to change the equation in the middle east. It appeared to be working, but is now in danger from the ineptitude or hostility of the Obama administration.
The world today, in terms of transport and danger, is much smaller and closer to home than North America was from 1776 to 1850.
Ignoring the threat, which seemed possible when we pulled back from Afghanistan and basically ignored them (except for some aid to the Taliban) is what brought 911 to us.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.