Posted on 06/13/2002 8:27:39 AM PDT by christine
Yeah. This boils my blood, too.
You forgot shooting anyone who doesn't agree with your idea of morality.
If you are a "reactionary" it intimates that you are reacting to the opponent.
If your opponent acts first you have lost the initiative.
I want to be the one that acts first and make them 'react' to me.
Admittedly, that is going to take a while to be able to do.
I still don't want to get into the mindset of 'reacting' when I should be initiating.
Admittedly, that is going to take a while to be able to do. I still don't want to get into the mindset of 'reacting' when I should be initiating.
I think you're confusing "reactionary" with "reactive".
Benjamin Franklin
You libertarians are part of the problem.
Though I agree with the statements you made following the above assertion, I do not agree that our Republic will self-restore. Too much power has been consolidated among too few. Our country is run by an elite oligarchy, who impose their will, under the guise of a voters' mandate. We've already lost our freedom and no one....NO ONE...is going to give it back. If it is to be, it will have to be taken. And I don't think enough Americans have the stomach for it.
Same root word, 'react'.
Not to quibble semantics, would you rather hit or be hit?
While they may have the same root, they have very different meanings. I don't make 'em up, I just use 'em.
reactive: 1.Tending to be responsive or to react to a stimulus.
2.Characterized by reaction.
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
revolutionary: 1. a.often Revolutionary Relating to or being a revolution: revolutionary war; a museum of the Revolutionary era.
b.Bringing about or supporting a political or social revolution: revolutionary pamphlets.
2.Marked by or resulting in radical change: a revolutionary discovery.
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Pretty similar as opposed to revolutionary.
Still, as long as we return to the constitution I don't really care what we're called.
That "return to the constitution" part is what makes you a reactionary. A revolutionary wants to discard the whole works and start over. A liberal wants to screw with what we've already got. A conservative wants to keep what we've got, just like it is. A reactionary wants to go back to what we had before the liberals screwed with it.
With what we have today I would say that discarding the whole works and starting over with the constitution IS the only way we will ever have it back.
May not be feasible, which is why I don't belong to a militia, but just the same, I don't see another way to bring the constitution back.
Benjamin Franklin
You libertarians are part of the problem.
How so? Libertarians are trying to save and expand the arena of human action, which is the only arena of morality. Many conservatives are trying to collectivize human action, which destroys the possibility of morality. Example, you lock someone in a cage and prevent them from taking an immoral action. Is that caged person acting morally? Answer, no, because his opportunity to act morally was taken from him.
Then the question of wheather you are revolutionary or reactionary depends on wheather you (or whoever is doing the labeling) think the Constitution is still in effect at all.
May not be feasible, which is why I don't belong to a militia, but just the same, I don't see another way to bring the constitution back.
According to Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution, if you are between the ages of 17 and 45, you already belong to the unorganized militia.
BTTT
Very little, very small portions of the original are still in effect.
According to Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution, if you are between the ages of 17 and 45, you already belong to the unorganized militia.
My bad, I should have stated "organized militia".
I've been called most of those names, but based on your profile page, I'd say that that puts me in good company.
The various social pathologies which clearly rose after the entrenchement of the welfare state supports your version of cause and effect.
The various social pathologies which clearly rose after the entrenchement of the welfare state supports your version of cause and effect.
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.