Posted on 06/11/2014 6:23:54 AM PDT by Kaslin
Well, we issue a couple of statements “condemning the violence.”
That’s a good point. There’s big-L Libertarianism (dope smoking hippies) and then small-l libertarianism. Which is really Classical Liberalism (with the end point being Objectivism)
It illustrates just how corrupted the term “Liberal” has become, after being cynically appropriated by the Left when the term “Progressive” became politically unpalatable in the early 1900s ... and how those who fall into the Classical Liberal ideological sphere flail around trying to find a substitute term.
Exactly.
Those who claim to be Christians and still push Ayn Rand need to read what Whittaker Chambers wrote about her in National Review back in 1957 when it actually was a conservative publication.
The purpose of our Government is defense of our nation. So, I’d say at least 90% of our budget should go to Defense. Don’t misunderstand though, there should not be any other department, just the DOD, period. The states should take care of everything else, on a state by state basis.
I’d see Socialism as closer to Communism in that regard, because Socialism allows for the nationalization of at least some (indeed many) industries. I’d still submit that Fascism is a different animal from Socialism in that it is very much grounded in preserving private ownership, just under government (Statist) direction.
Rand Paul won’t get the nomination because too much of his Dad is now coming out as he further details his positions and philosophies.
I do think he brings an important voice and point of view to the national stage, and am glad that he’s a Republican Senator.
But I’m also glad that there’s only one of him.
Yes I have, but sooner or later you must question what you call yourself. Someone calling themselves 'libertarian' but are opposed to abortion, dangerous drugs, open borders, anarchy, is a confused person.
Condemning the “SENSELESS” violence, “and our sincere desire for peace”.
There, that’s proper diplospeak!!!
Hey... maybe I’LL get a Nobel Prize medallion too!!
(there’s cash with that, right?)
Yes, so again both being peers, even cousins, with a common Statist point of origin.
Remember that Hitler and the Nazis coopted “Socialism” as a PR move. Much in the samecway that the Left abandoned Progressive in favor of Liberal.
Mussolini, for instance, abandoned Socialism (he was kicked out, actually) in favor of Facism, and I don’t recall that he ever returned to using the term as a self-descriptor.
Liberals claim that immigrants are entering our southern border by the thousands monthly not just for jobs but also for safety and security.
If that be the case, then these thousands, now millions, who have broken our laws to enter our country would certainly not be traveling back and forth to visit and even live for a time to Mexico, so I wonder at those claims.
Come for a job do they, what about our own citizens who'd like a job, some job - any job at all, so this is not in our own best interest but even if we were at full employment (lower than 5% unemployment is considered "full employment") we still don't want to hand the country over to people from foreign lands who invade us, refuse to follow the rules, refuse to speak the language and worst of all - stick their fingers in our eyes and demand benefits that our out-of-control government take from our tax dollars and liberals in black robes, tell us must be done to comply with our Constitution!
We know that none of this is constitutional but even those we have sent to Washington to change and fight against this, have changed sides once gaining their congressional seats and show us their middle fingers!!!
So one can only be a libertarian if one subscribes 100 percent to your caricature? By that standard, the Pauls aren’t libertarians.
"I take her to be calling for an aristocracy of talents. We cannot labor here why, in the modern world, the pre-conditions for aristocracy, an organic growth, no longer exist, so that impulse toward aristocracy always emerges now in the form of dictatorship."
I don't call nor consider myself a libertarian - but I don't see why those who do must submit to the loons of the Libertarian Party expropriating that term (which predates the LP by centuries).
They didn’t co -opt “socialist” — they were socialists.
http://rexcurry.net/mussolini.html
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1143131/posts
http://jonjayray.tripod.com/hitler.html
http://www.abelard.org/briefings/fascism-is-socialism.php
http://democraticpeace.wordpress.com/2009/05/23/hitler-was-a-socialist/
http://www.hubertlerch.com/modules/European_Dictatorship/Mussolini_the_Socialist.html
http://www.williamcooper.com/socialist.htm
bfl
Libertarianism is a Utopian concept. If you are not 100% on board to it’s core principles, then you are not really a libertarian.
Utopia demands no exceptions
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.