Editorial
How to Win This One in November
Seeing that it looks like Mitt Romney may well win the Republican nomination – though it's too early to be sure about that – it has been a concern of freedom loving Americans whether the nod given to human individual liberty by the Tea Party back in 2010 will have staying power. When the Republicans began their primaries it looked like one or another of the champions of serious liberty, such as former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson or Texas Representative Ron Paul, could either make it or at least have an influence on who will. This last is still a possibility but not very likely now.
With Gingrich injecting the influence of the Beltway Republican insiders into the race and with Mitt Romney derailing any progress toward a consistent political philosophy of liberty among Republicans, prospects for repeating, let alone enhancing, the central trends represented by the Tea Party – which itself has never been fully focused on true liberty – are waning. And that is very disturbing because it looks more and more like Barack Obama has no interest whatever in individual rights, in a bona fide free society and market, or even in civil liberties. What he is after is a populist reformation of the American polity, one that will usher in democratic socialism, with its confusing "market" socialism added.
This is the politics of soft Marxism; which is to say it aims to establish a legal order that's basically collectivist, communitarian to the core. The idea is that all Americans should be treated as one huge team lead by Obama or some similar minded politician and his or her cronies, with all property (including human labor) treated as public or social, with the serious implementation of the major step Marx and Engels identified on the road to socialism, namely, the abolition of the right to private property. The modern explication of this idea was laid out by NYU professors Liam Murphy and Thomas Nagel in their book The Myth of Ownership (Oxford 2002). It is an unabashed attack on the principles of free market economics and individualism (i.e., on a system of law based on Lockean individual rights).
OK. Is there any chance to nipping all this in the bud? I can only think of one way to do it, namely, to conduct a political campaign that is relentlessly focused on the threat of the loss of American liberty not just in American but around the globe. This liberty is the true hope of humanity, not the egalitarian nonsense that Obama & Co. preach. What is needed is to run an articulate, self-confident and unapologetic campaign that emphasizes the minimalist thesis of liberty as against the totalitarian thesis that all of us must be herded into a collective mass (of which the best current manifestation is North Korea).
If the Republican candidate for the presidency– or per chance someone else with sufficient support – keeps to this theme and forthrightly refuses to get entangled with side issues like illegal immigration, funding Planned Parenthood, etc., etc., details that can easily be made to serve to distract Americans from what really is politically important, there is a chance of unseating Obama and his team in time to continue the momentum of the American revolution. The candidate to do this may not yet be in evidence but whoever it will be needs to focus clearly and be superbly articulate and intellectually competent in the effort to advance the cause of liberty.
Now, Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney do not sound bad in debate and on the campaign trail but their ideas are muddled and so their leadership is seriously wanting when it comes to opposing Obama's populist appeal. That appeal rests on phony hopes and aspirations, on false promises and on magical economics. But packaged in the cool style and rhetoric of Obama and absent competent challenge, it can continue to take the country toward a major setback on the road to realizing its destiny, the fulfillment of the ideas of the Declaration of Independence and, less exactly, the Bill of Rights. It is this mission that must be the candidate's central purpose, put in the clearest and most informed terms that American citizens can appreciate and support. I am convinced it has a chance in November.
l Latest Daily Bell Articles
Feedback
 |
Posted by Aquinomas on 02/13/12 05:15 PM
|
Posted by Luis Magno on 02/13/12 12:31 PM
I will only be characterized as "human being" and have disaffiliated myself (exercised my freedom to "not associate) with all barbarians (those who initiate aggression and / or hold philosophies which imply aggression such as ethnocentric "rights")
as I stated: your myopic / divisive views are part of the problem and, I suspect, a "lawyer" to boot, a "class" I have particular axes and whatever other weapons may become available to grind with:
Click to view link
and, I suspect, like many others (such as judges), you will be unable to characterize me, to get a handle on whether I am friend / foe, predator / prey, etc. This lack of comprehension leads most to invariably conclude: unknown, unpredicatable: ENEMY.
None of the above. I am neither predator nor prey. I have zero tolerance for predators nor, anyone being prey.
-H. L. Mencken--
 |
Posted by rossbcan on 02/13/12 11:55 AM
If so which ethnorace or sub-ethnorace do you speak for?
And if so where do you stand on the issue of immigration?
Luis Magno
European American
I will only be characterized as "human being" and have disaffiliated myself (exercised my freedom to "not associate) with all barbarians (those who initiate aggression and / or hold philosophies which imply aggression such as ethnocentric "rights")
as I stated: your myopic / divisive views are part of the problem and, I suspect, a "lawyer" to boot, a "class" I have particular axes and whatever other weapons may become available to grind with:
Click to view link
and, I suspect, like many others (such as judges), you will be unable to characterize me, to get a handle on whether I am friend / foe, predator / prey, etc. This lack of comprehension leads most to invariably conclude: unknown, unpredicatable: ENEMY.
None of the above. I am neither predator nor prey. I have zero tolerance for predators nor, anyone being prey.
|
Posted by Luis Magno on 02/13/12 11:38 AM
If so which ethnorace or sub-ethnorace do you speak for?
And if so where do you stand on the issue of immigration?
Luis Magno
European American
Luis Magno
European American
|
Posted by Luis Magno on 02/13/12 11:18 AM
does place of birth, race, culure have ANYTHING to do with human beings, apart from political "divide and conquor" based on "my group / belief" has special rights?
off to DB's glossery / archives with you.
If so which ethnorace or sub-ethnorace do you speak for?
And if so where do you stand on the issue of immigration?
Luis Magno
European American
|
Posted by paradox on 02/13/12 11:15 AM
... hardly. Before we were born, as we speak, and, for all eternity, natural law (reality) is doing what we are collectively and politically too stupid / cowardly to do. Since we will not CHOOSE correctly, the consequences (costs) of incorrect choice will continue to smite us until we either "have no other choice", and comply with reality, or, do not exist:
Click to view link
|
Posted by rossbcan on 02/13/12 10:56 AM
I call for a seven-year moratorium on all immigration, legal and illegal, pending a politically and diplomatically negotiated constitutional resolution and legal settlement of the issue of ethnocultural sovereignty for each of the American ethnoraces including but not limited to the majority European American ethnorace.
Ten historically significant and identifiable ethnoraces are the Judean American, the Anglo-Saxon American, the Iberian American, the European American, the Mexican American, the Latino American, the Hispano American, the African American, the Asian American, the Native American and all of their many sub-ethnoraces.
Each ethnorace is a surviving remnant of a once sovereign people in cultural exile. I speak for the two European American and Spanish American ethnoraces. And I will do so until a better or a higher ethnoracial voice replaces mine.
Which ethnorace or sub-ethnorace do you speak for?
And where do you stand on the issue of immigration?
Luis Magno
European American
does place of birth, race, culure have ANYTHING to do with human beings, apart from political "divide and conquor" based on "my group / belief" has special rights?
off to DB's glossery / archives with you.
|
Posted by Luis Magno on 02/13/12 10:34 AM
I call for a seven-year moratorium on all immigration, legal and illegal, pending a politically and diplomatically negotiated constitutional resolution and legal settlement of the issue of ethnocultural sovereignty for each of the American ethnoraces including but not limited to the majority European American ethnorace.
Ten historically significant and identifiable ethnoraces are the Judean American, the Anglo-Saxon American, the Iberian American, the European American, the Mexican American, the Latino American, the Hispano American, the African American, the Asian American, the Native American and all of their many sub-ethnoraces.
Each ethnorace is a surviving remnant of a once sovereign people in cultural exile. I speak for the two European American and Spanish American ethnoraces. And I will do so until a better or a higher ethnoracial voice replaces mine.
Which ethnorace or sub-ethnorace do you speak for?
And where do you stand on the issue of immigration?
Luis Magno
European American
|
Posted by rossbcan on 02/13/12 09:59 AM
Most Americans reject individual liberty and self responsibility and have instead accepted the collectivist idea of the Nanny State. The Globalist Elitists,through their political hacks, have taken control of the status quo. To change this Matrix politically,I am sad to say,is almost impossible. I say almost because one can always hope. The problem is not Obama and the other political hacks but instead a majority of the American voting population that desire something for nothing. To wean the majority of the American voting population off of the public teat will be a monumental if not impossible task. But this is what has to be done if we want to live in a truly free society.
... hardly. Before we were born, as we speak, and, for all eternity, natural law (reality) is doing what we are collectively and politically too stupid / cowardly to do. Since we will not CHOOSE correctly, the consequences (costs) of incorrect choice will continue to smite us until we either "have no other choice", and comply with reality, or, do not exist:
Click to view link
|
Posted by Libertarian Jerry on 02/13/12 07:56 AM
Most Americans reject individual liberty and self responsibility and have instead accepted the collectivist idea of the Nanny State. The Globalist Elitists,through their political hacks, have taken control of the status quo. To change this Matrix politically,I am sad to say,is almost impossible. I say almost because one can always hope. The problem is not Obama and the other political hacks but instead a majority of the American voting population that desire something for nothing. To wean the majority of the American voting population off of the public teat will be a monumental if not impossible task. But this is what has to be done if we want to live in a truly free society.
 |
Posted by the_IRF on 02/13/12 04:43 AM
I very much would like to hear commentary from Dr. Tibor Machan on the implications that arise from the below blog post:
"FINANCIAL TYRANNY: The Final Sections" You have got to read this.
Click to view link
It is a long read, but worth it. Many tell me they can't stop until they get to the end and are dumbfounded to hear that there really is 200M tonnes of gold in the world and not the officially reported 120,000 tonnes AND that the Pentagon, Russia and China and 138 other nations are getting ready to put the corrupt 'banksters', et. al. in jail and take away the money they have been stealing these last 10-20 years.
If the reported world changing events detailed in the blog post above unfold and do prove to be true a lot of people are going to be very happy. I for one would very much like to hear what cautionary considerations might evolve from the thinkers at Ayn Rand Institute and all others heeled in the fervency of Individual Sovereignty. Were the promise of what is foretold in the above post to all unfold, it will be a game changer and many of those of the 'bankster' set {the White Shoe Boys, as Gerald Cellente likes to call them} will be off to jail, hopefully.
Robert .'.
