Posted on 05/28/2002 3:08:38 PM PDT by logician2u
Edited on 07/12/2004 3:54:08 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
Well, that much is open-source: they have nuclear-armed interceptors around Moscow.
However, there is a world of difference between having nuclear-armed interceptors, and having nuclear-armed interceptors that will actually intercept incoming warheads.
Surprising words for a "mainstream" economist such as Rahn.
Also surprising to see this in The Washington Times.
I was wondering why the poster thought such words were surprising coming from someone associated with the Cato Institute.
I am aware they are entwined, but you could fool the many "higher-ups," and as such lofty people, they are indeed all too often, motley fools; for the highway they build to prosperity in tyrannical lands, is a pipeline for bitter returns ... "so much for" "open borders" in the purposeful absence of "legal controlling authority."
There is plenty to be said for national sovereignty and the maintenance of Liberty and private property; especially nowadays when what ought to be being said, is hardly uttered from the "higher-ups" at all.
But now that you have, I'd be happy to elaborate.
Since we've been through Round One on the definition of mainstream, I'll confess to a poor choice of words. Perhaps "reputable" or "well-regarded" is a better modifier (although if used in a news article, I would be the first to ask, "According to who?"). As opposed to, say, George Reisman, Richard Rahn has no ideological baggage other than his long-time association with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
My surprise was in part due to the title, "The New Fascism." Them's fightin' words. Rahn is known as a strong voice for lower taxes, deregulation of business and free trade. But he, along with the Cato Institute, generally avoids picking fights. Cato likes to dress up their annual report with photos of visiting politicians, which demands a whole lot of restraint when you know most of those invited to speak are at odds with Cato in many important policy areas. I think it has something to do with drawing more flies with honey than with vinegar.
So when Rahn writes so boldly that "The new fascism is not just a danger for Europeans; it is a present danger for us," I get the sense he is not just warning us about the Gepharts and Daschles and other Democrats who have not quite given up on the wonders of socialism.
He is addressing the bipartisan effort to enlarge government. He indirectly takes W to task for reneging on his free-trade stance, for signing into law the campaign finance reform bill, for increasing agriculture subsidies, for the surge in domestic federal spending. Are these valid points, or can you suggest others? Education funding, maybe?
All this has been hashed out many times on this forum, I know. We are divided, as you would expect with a number of FReepers more devoted to their party than to the ideas that were once held as more important that politics, such as freedom of speech, press, financial privacy, the sancity of private property. Partisan politics causes a temporary blindness in some people, I've noticed.
So it's refreshing to see the The Washington Times run a dissenting view, as alarming as it may be to some. Remember, not everyone in the country is as well-versed as FReepers are on the various "isms." They may have heard of fascism but thought it died with Mussolini or Franco, and would never in a million years believe that it was a close relative of socialism. Isn't it "right" and socialism "left," afer all?
Richard Rahn succeeded, I believe, in showing that it's statism in all its varied disguises we need to worry about.
Are you quite sure they didn't come to America and take over the NEA?
Ouch! That's gotta hurt.
;O)
I'll second that!
It so happens the scientist I heard was a bio engineer.
But, that's enough for this topic. I really don't care to discuss it further with folks who mislabel my info incorrect strawman, and have nothing to defend their own views, and fill the space with bluster.
Yes, "bajillion" and all them thar sci-en-ti-fic words! Ain't they a wonder to behold!! The facts are mind-boggling, and just all over the place. Such a plethora of "Scientific Info" produced by and just waiting to be harvested from ole lexcorp, yes indeed! Right here on the Free Republic. Pardon me while I take time to breathe!
Just where would we be without such "scientists" as you, eh lexi; just where would we be! LOLOLOLOL!
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.