Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
Are Libertarians Drifting Away From Obama and the Democrats?
That's the suggestion from David Boaz, executive vice president of the Cato Institute, in this op-ed. Excerpt:
Research that David Kirby and I have done shows that libertarian-leaning voters have typically given up to 70 percent of their votes to Republicans. But in 2004 and 2006, that number fell off sharply. Republican congressional candidates barely held a majority of libertarian votes in 2006, and of course the Republicans took a pounding in that election. [...]
Some of those independents voted Democratic in 2006 and 2008, figuring that the Democrats would be more tolerant and could hardly be more profligate. And what are they now seeing?
President Obama is exceeding all their fears on fiscal and economic issues. After promising a "net spending cut" during the campaign and denouncing "the most fiscally irresponsible administration in history," he has sent federal spending and the deficit soaring into the stratosphere.
Meanwhile, he's not delivering what some of his voters hoped for on social issues. [...]
Independents who turned against the Republicans are likely to become equally disillusioned with Obama, and there's already some evidence of that in the polls. Support for "smaller government with fewer services" has risen in the ABC News/Washington Post poll, and independents prefer it by 61 to 35 percent, a margin three times as large as a year ago. The number of people who see Obama as an "old-style tax and spend Democrat" has risen by 11 percentage points.
Whole thing here. Related reading: Virginia Postrel, Brink Lindsey, Richard Epstein, Bruce Bartlett, Jonathan Rauch, and Deirdre McCloseky assess whether there is "Any Hope for this Man," back in our November 2008 issue.
|8.17.09 @ 2:16PM|#
"the most fiscally irresponsible administration in
history,"
Some of us recognized that only meant "they aren't spending in the
right places."
Warty|8.17.09 @ 2:17PM|#
I can't believe some of you assdrizzlers ever believed that he was something different than an "old-style tax and spend Democrat".
|8.17.09 @ 2:23PM|#
But Obama is so cool and errudite. He is a pramatist who will bring everyone together!! I think I am down to two liberal friends who can still give that line with a straight face. The rest of them either say fuck you do what we tell you to you RACIST!! or they have this sort of embarassed and dazed look on their face and try to change the subject.
|8.17.09 @ 2:23PM|#
I don't explicitly define myself as libertarian as I don't like
to put my views in any sort of preconceived boundary. Nevertheless,
if you sit a self-defined liberal, a conservative, and a
libertarian at a table, I'll be most in accord with the
libertarian's views.
With that said, I saw through Obama's BS at his speech during the
2004 DNC. Unlike most people, and purely by chance, I read the
transcript of his speech before I actually saw or heard it. I
thought his speech was silly then and I've never taken anything
he's said seriously since then.
But the *snap* of the media strapping on its kneepads for the
long-haul was evident in the aftermath of his "breakout" day.
|8.17.09 @ 2:26PM|#
DanD,
All of his speeches are silly if you read the transcipt. When you
read the transcipt you are reading for content and argument. But
sadly, no one reads the speeches. They hear them given and are
under the spell of "look there is a black man and he is sayiing
such cool stuff".
How anyone who was paying attention didn't know BO was a nasty
leftist is beyond me. I guess people see what they want to see.
Billy!|8.17.09 @ 2:27PM|#
This is news? Are their any libertarians actually defending Obama? Didn't pretty much every libertarian who voted for him (or voted third party but rooted for him, i.e. me) assume they were going to be disappointed? I sure as hell did.
|8.17.09 @ 2:29PM|#
Warty,
I don't know many people (who frequent this pace) who thought that
Obama was going to be anything other than a grade-A clusterfuck,
financially. However, some of them (including me, though I voted
Barr anyway) figured that he was either lying categorically or (far
less likely) telling the truth categorically. Little did we know
that he was lying about the things we agreed with him on and
telling the truth about the things we didn't.
Should we have suspected as much? In retrospect, probably.
|8.17.09 @ 2:30PM|#
"This is news? Are their any libertarians actually defending
Obama? Didn't pretty much every libertarian who voted for him (or
voted third party but rooted for him, i.e. me) assume they were
going to be disappointed? I sure as hell did."
Not the ones on here. They were convinced he was cool. And they so
wanted to vote for a black guy who was acceptable. They thought he
was another Clinton without the bimbos and the McDonalds. Lots of
people convinced themselves that he would be an economic centrist
and actually intended to curb the Bush anti-terror policies.
|8.17.09 @ 2:30PM|#
I can't believe some of you assdrizzlers ever believed that
he was something different than an "old-style tax and spend
Democrat".
I'm still waiting for the douchebags who voted (why would you
vote?!?) for Obama to say "whoops, we fucked up".
You didn't have to vote for McCain--just vote for Barr or just
don't vote (like me).
|8.17.09 @ 2:33PM|#
"Little did we know that he was lying about the things we agreed
with him on and telling the truth about the things we
didn't."
Suckers!! I said all along he was not going to change one thing
about Iraq or the war on terror. But even I never thought he would
be sending 60,000 more troops to Afghanistan and would manage to
run up a one and a half trillion dollar debt in his first six
months in office. If I had predicted that last fall, everyone would
have called me a nut.
Franklin Harris|8.17.09 @ 2:33PM|#
"Liberaltarianism" is now as dead an issue as the paleolibertarian/paleocon alliance of the 1990s is. Libertarians are always going to be the battered spouse in these relationships, and it's past time to stop being so damn codependent.
Sean W. Malone|8.17.09 @ 2:33PM|#
"All of his speeches are silly if you read the transcipt.
When you read the transcipt you are reading for content and
argument. But sadly, no one reads the speeches."
I only *read* the speeches. I can't stand
listening to him talk.
|8.17.09 @ 2:35PM|#
"I only *read* the speeches. I can't stand listening to him
talk."
Neither can I. And also, what happened to Obama being the great
communicator? He is out doing these town halls on Obamacare and
falling on his ass. You don't hear much about his incredible
rethorical skills these days.
kinnath|8.17.09 @ 2:36PM|#
I caught Obama on the TV at lunch talking about Afghanistan --
it could have been Bush in 2002.
I never liked the dude, but I can't understand how the people who
voted for him still believe anything he says.
Warty|8.17.09 @ 2:37PM|#
I can't stand listening to him talk.
Word. He's only a half-step above Bush.
creech|8.17.09 @ 2:39PM|#
What are the odds American troops will be still fighting in his Afghan quagmire long after Obamessiah is gone from the White House?
|8.17.09 @ 2:42PM|#
"I caught Obama on the TV at lunch talking about Afghanistan --
it could have been Bush in 2002."
He is everything his supporters accused Bush of being. He has no
plan. No idea what victory looks like. No idea what our interest in
staying in the country is. All he has is the idea that the surge
worked in Iraq so therefore we should do it in Afghanistan.
He and sadly the country is paying the price for being a lying sack
of shit during the Bush years. The Left played the Afghanistan war
as the "just war" as a way to beat Bush over the head about Iraq.
First, they never really supported or gave a shit about
Afghanistan. They were just looking to score cheap points. Second,
wars of this type are never so simple as to be definitely good or
bad. Yeah, Afghanistan was a just war in 2002. But that doesn't
mean that we should stay there forever and fight out their civil
war or that it will remain the front line in the war on radical
Islam forever. But, BO and the Dems talked so much shit on
Afghanistan being the good war and how it was being lost for Iraq,
that he has painted himself in a corner. He can't get out without
admitting that he didn't mean anything he said during the Bush
years. So we are now stuck doing a surge in Afghanistan and staying
there for God knows how long. Maybe that is the right thing to do.
I am not sure to be honest. But it doesn't matter because that is
what we are doing thanks to BO painting himself in a corner.
Xeones|8.17.09 @ 2:44PM|#
I can honestly say that, in my life, i have never voted for a Republican or a Democrat, and any a' youse who has and who feels ok with that fact can swing on my balls. Just swing right on 'em.
24AheadDotCom|8.17.09 @ 2:46PM|#
A new poll shows that 99% of those libertarians who voted for
BHO did so because they thought there'd be free pot. Now they see
that they were wrong.
But, seriously, anyone who voted for BHO not knowing what he'd do
is an idiot.
|8.17.09 @ 2:46PM|#
"What are the odds American troops will be still fighting in his
Afghan quagmire long after Obamessiah is gone from the White
House?"
My bet is they are good, unless of course Pakistan goes hostile and
we have 100,000 people in the middle of Asia with no way to supply
them or extract them. That will put an end to that quagmire.
Xeones|8.17.09 @ 2:49PM|#
Shut the fuck up, LoneWacko. You are not worthy to even prostrate yourself near my balls.
Xeones|8.17.09 @ 2:53PM|#
100,000 people in the middle of Asia with no way to supply
them or extract them
They could go native, like a bunch of Alexander's troops did. I saw
an article in National Geographic once about a remote Afghan tribe
whose dialect contained a strong Greek influence, and who still
worshipped Greek gods.
Warty|8.17.09 @ 2:53PM|#
You got a backhanded compliment, Lonewacko. Better shut the fuck up while you're ahead.
!</ </a>|8.17.09 @ 2:53PM|#
Great, and I only have twenty more years to straighten this mess
out in my book series before we go to war with Iran.
If he keeps pulling this crap not even erotic romance future
fiction will be able to save the world.
Mike in PA|8.17.09 @ 2:53PM|#
"Drifting"???!!
I guess that depends on your definition. If you mean running away
like hell like a school girl from Chris Hansen's house, then yeah,
I suppose we're "drifting."
|8.17.09 @ 2:54PM|#
Wow. LW made a good point.
In other news, I think I just saw a group of pigs flying by my
office window. Not sure what that was about.
hmm|8.17.09 @ 2:55PM|#
If by drifting you mean running like a stripped assed ape with
his nuts on fire, then yes one could say I am drifting. We traded a
lumpy corn ridden turd for a shinny polished turd. It still smells
like shit.
It's really nothing surprising for since I tend to take Chuck D's
advice. Because I don't believe the hype
- its a sequel
As an equal, can I get this through to you?
I'm a little bummed someone didn't run this as a campaign add
against Obama.
Sean W. Malone|8.17.09 @ 2:55PM|#
Xeones, you may want to have those testicles examined by a
medical professional, they shouldn't be swinging that low.
In other news: I don't think I personally know any libertarians who
voted for Obama. My roommate might qualify - but he's not yet a
libertarian, he's slowly being converted by weekly infusions of
P&T's Bullshit! and my constant proselytizing.
Rich|8.17.09 @ 2:58PM|#
The rest of them either say fuck you do what we tell you to
you RACIST!! or they have this sort of embarassed and dazed look on
their face and try to change the subject.
On a brighter note, I am seeing much more genuine interest in
libertarianism as a result of the Bush-Obama double whammy.
|8.17.09 @ 2:58PM|#
It was the prospect of having to defend Obama/Pelosi/Reid's policies that drove Joe from this board.
Art-P.O.G.|8.17.09 @ 2:58PM|#
Xeones, you may want to have those testicles examined by a medical professional, they shouldn't be swinging that low.
I think he's a teabagger.
Naga Sadow|8.17.09 @ 2:59PM|#
A new poll shows that 99% of those libertarians who voted
for BHO did so because they thought there'd be free pot. Now they
see that they were wrong.
Wait. There isn't going to be free pot?
Oh. And . . . .
Chris Kelly
*shakes fist at LoneWacko*
spambot|8.17.09 @ 3:00PM|#
It's as if a million libertarian voices cried out and were suddenly silent.
|8.17.09 @ 3:01PM|#
I seem to recall that LW was more of a mainstream poster 6-7
years ago. For instance, see this post.
LW: Sorry for talking about you like you aren't here, but that's
one of the problems with blog comments. We're all of questionable
existence around here, anyway. I'm almost certainly the product of
Google Labs.
|8.17.09 @ 3:01PM|#
Well, now that the cosmotarians have gotten this "let's end the legacy of racism by voting for a black dude" identity politics rubbish out of their system, can they consider going back to voting LP or not voting at all, like I did? (I voted for Barr, just to be on the record that SOMEONE in Hawaii isn't a statist).
|8.17.09 @ 3:02PM|#
Word. He's only a half-step above Bush.
Yup, you can train a parrot to speak well. It's how the leader
leads that really matters.
|8.17.09 @ 3:03PM|#
We're all of questionable existence around here, anyway. I'm
almost certainly the product of Google Labs.
Nah, I met Epi in person when I was in Seattle recently. So there's
at least two verifiable non-bots posting here. :o)
Warty|8.17.09 @ 3:03PM|#
HA! "Lonewacko" is the correct capitalization!
...of course, that probably means I need to start typing it wrong.
Whatever.
Shut the fuck up, Lonewacko.
|8.17.09 @ 3:04PM|#
I happen to know that the person you met was hired to impersonate the Internet persona, Episiarch.
Naga Sadow|8.17.09 @ 3:05PM|#
They could go native, like a bunch of Alexander's troops
did. I saw an article in National Geographic once about a remote
Afghan tribe whose dialect contained a strong Greek influence, and
who still worshipped Greek gods.
Xeones,
Sounds about right. I believe they call such locations linguistic
shatterbelts. The terrain is so rugged that it resists any changes.
I've heard there are still people with blue eyes and blonde hair in
those places.
|8.17.09 @ 3:06PM|#
It is funny to watch BO continually fuck up and embarass his supporters. If Hillary had won the election, it wouldn't be as funny because no one would have sold her as anything beyond something that might be better than Bush. But the media and BO's derranged supporters sold Obama as the one. The next FDR and JFK. He sent a thrill up their legs. The entire mainstream media and any number of nitwit 20 something put their entire credibility and identity behind Obama being some historically great figure. Now every day it is more and more apparent he is a nasty leftist. And they are stuck either defending him or trying to pretend they never said any of the stupid shit they did last fall.
Naga Sadow|8.17.09 @ 3:07PM|#
Episiarch? Fictional.
Pro Lib? Nigerian e-mail scammer. I don't think he even speaks
english. He just writes his comments in the google translater and .
. . POOF!
|8.17.09 @ 3:08PM|#
@Xeones: I suspect it would be more like the Greco-Bactrian
Empire, which ruled from Iran to Kazakhstan to India.
Actually that's one of the better possible outcomes for the
region.
|8.17.09 @ 3:10PM|#
"I've heard there are still people with blue eyes and blonde
hair in those places."
There are blond haired and blue eyed people all over the middle
east. There are more than a few in Syria.
Craig|8.17.09 @ 3:10PM|#
I'm not sure what specific changes his supporters expected in
social policies, if they actually listened to him during the
campaign.
As a libertarian who never supported Obama but thought he might be
slightly better than Bush (or even McCain), I am amazed at how
anti-libertarian he has turned out to be.
Instead of bringing the troops home from Iraq within a year, as he
once promised during the campaign, he's adopted Hillary's plan of
leaving 50,000+ there indefinitely. Instead of following Bill
Clinton's lead by returning to some semblance of matching
expenditures to revenues, he's making George W Bush look like an
amateur on the reckless spending front.
The only positive libertarian development to come out of the Obama
administration so far is an easing of travel restrictions with
Cuba. Given the rest of Obama's record, I view this less as a
manifestation of latent libertarian tendencies and more as a move
of solidarity for his fellow Marxist dictators.
Naga Sadow|8.17.09 @ 3:12PM|#
I haven't been keeping up the last few months but anything that gets me stares in my universities library because I'm laughing hysterically is gonna be remembered.
bob42|8.17.09 @ 3:16PM|#
I hanged my chad for Bush in 2000. By 2004 I knew better and
wrote in Ann Archy in that election as well as the 2008
race.
Having been sufficiently screwed by both halves of the two party
duopoly, I conclude that we do not have a political system. It's
more like a political industry.
I further conclude that we'd be better off if the oval office was
entirely unoccupied compared to the mashed up sacks of crap offered
by either party.
Art-P.O.G.|8.17.09 @ 3:18PM|#
I seem to recall that LW was more of a mainstream poster 6-7 years ago. For instance, see this post.
Wow...old school.
No it is not Naga. It is Central Asia.
Or Southwest Asia?
anything that gets me stares in my universities library because I'm laughing hysterically is gonna be remembered.
I'll have what he's having.
Xeones|8.17.09 @ 3:20PM|#
The poster known as "Xeones" is actually an infinite number of
monkeys locked in a slow-time pocket in subspace for all eternity,
banging away on laptops.
The poster known as "Naga Sadow?" Three monkeys, fifteen minutes a
day.
Art-P.O.G.|8.17.09 @ 3:23PM|#
Well, there's little mystery to the commenter known as "Art-P.O.G.", save the source of his occult powers.
Craig|8.17.09 @ 3:24PM|#
Nah, I met Epi in person when I was in Seattle recently. So
there's at least two verifiable non-bots posting here.
Oh, great. Now the bots have advanced to the point where they're
spontaneously fabricating "eyewitness" accounts of each other to
deflect suspicion....
kinnath|8.17.09 @ 3:25PM|#
So Obama is now making noises about repealing DoMA. Wouldn't
this effectively make same sex marriage legal in all states -- once
the federal law that exempts state same sex marriage laws from the
full faith and credit requirements of the constitution is
gone?
That would be the perfect sequel to Obamacare.
The Angry Optimist|8.17.09 @ 3:26PM|#
kinnath - is that really something you have a huge problem with? My god, what small potatoes is this marriage debate: a tempest in a teapot.
JB|8.17.09 @ 3:28PM|#
I'm generally a non-voting libertarian, but I'm getting damned
close to voting a straight Republican ticket just to punch Obama
zombies in the head.
I really don't want to, but the pleasure derived from punching
Obama zombies is too much to overcome.
|8.17.09 @ 3:28PM|#
If you're a libertarian and "disappointed" by Obama then you're
just a dumbfuck because he hasn't done anything he didn't promise
to do during his campaign. If anything his actions have been
decidedly less liberal than he promised. So sorry you weren't
paying attention.
The only sticking point is with the stimulus money, which is the
source of a lot of Obama bashing from libertarians. Either you
accept that this was necessary or you don't. Personally I feel
whining about the stimulus as if it's some sort of nefarious Obama
plan and not a necessary response to a financial collapse is to be
misinformed and unfair.
Naga Sadow|8.17.09 @ 3:29PM|#
Xeones,
Not three monkeys. Just one. That damn dirty ape who's gonna take
humanity down!
"In this world gone mad, we won't spank the monkey. The monkey will
spank us."
Xeones|8.17.09 @ 3:29PM|#
whining about the stimulus as if it's some sort of nefarious
Obama plan
It was a Bush plan, too. I didn't realize you were such a huge fan
of W.
|8.17.09 @ 3:29PM|#
Craig,
Yours is the superior riposte.
JB,
Divided we stand, united we fall. I'll vote straight GOP in 2010.
It's our only hope for change.
Naga Sadow|8.17.09 @ 3:31PM|#
Art POG,
What? What occult powers? Personally, I'm a son of Zeus. The source
of my powers of annoyance are mighty indeed.
|8.17.09 @ 3:31PM|#
If you vote for any Republican, ever, you're a moron. You don't have to love Democrats to realize how corrupt and anti-freedom the GOP is.
kinnath|8.17.09 @ 3:32PM|#
kinnath - is that really something you have a huge problem
with?
No, but the senior citizen contingent that is smacking Obama's
balls over Obamacare is also one of the most strident groups
against same sex marriage.
That would make two in a row where Obama is really pissing off a
big part of the Democratic base.
|8.17.09 @ 3:33PM|#
Tony,
The TARP was the response to the financial collapse. The stimulus,
most of which hasn't even been spent, was just the Dems looting the
government as opposed to TARP where Bush and later the Dems looted
the Treasury for Goldman Sachs.
The Angry Optimist|8.17.09 @ 3:35PM|#
kinnath - oh, I gotcha. I personally think we should start a
feature around here called "When the Left Eats Itself".
We could do blacks v. gays on prop 8.
Old people v. young people on welfare payments.
It'd be awesome.
kinnath|8.17.09 @ 3:35PM|#
Also the circus that results from repealing DoMA would halt just about all other work on the hill . . which is just fine by me.
Naga Sadow|8.17.09 @ 3:35PM|#
By the way, Pro Lib. How go the preparations for Lab Whore Day? Tiring, no doubt.
hmm|8.17.09 @ 3:36PM|#
If you vote for any Republican, ever, you're a moron. You
don't have to love Democrats to realize how corrupt and
anti-freedom the GOP is.
Wow. Do you get a check from the DNC?
Because the last person or group on the planet that needs to point
to anyone, GOP or not, and scream corrupt is the DNC.
I don't know what you smoke, but I'd like a sample. I can sell that
shit and make a fortune around here.
Meta4|8.17.09 @ 3:36PM|#
"That's your best comment in five years."
And a room full of monkeys with typwriters...
|8.17.09 @ 3:36PM|#
It was a Bush plan, too. I didn't realize you were such a huge fan of W.
Yeah and you'd think that such consensus among espousers of wildly
divergent economic philosophies on the need for massive stimulus
would indicate that perhaps it was necessary. The federal
government saved your sorry ass from the bread line and all you do
is bitch bitch bitch.
Art-P.O.G.|8.17.09 @ 3:36PM|#
OTO, Art-POG? I love those hats.
Thanks. I got it at a department store in Germany.
What? What occult powers?
OK, maybe not "occult", and maybe not "powers", but you get the
idea.
BTW, I met anonymity guy in real like, and he's basically Marlon
Brando's character from Apocalypse Now. "Do you find my
methods unsound?"
If you vote for any Republican, ever, you're a moron.
Good job. You topped JB for the WTF? of this thread.
|8.17.09 @ 3:36PM|#
Naga,
No, it isn't 1994. It's 1994 rebooted, with edgier characters,
gritter scripts, and supermodel stars. And with less trust of the
GOP and even more distrust of the Democrats. What happened to that
fiscal responsibility gong they were banging during the Bush years?
joe used to go on and on about that, and it was complete bullshit.
The GOP is horrific and doesn't deserve control of the government,
but I'll willingly hand them Congress. Something's got to stop this
spendathon.
|8.17.09 @ 3:37PM|#
I worry about the backlash in 2010 and 2012. There are millions of morons out there like Tony. After Obama crashes and burns and the entire country vows never to vote Dem again two things will happen. First, the Republicans will go bizerk and do God knows what. And second, rather than doing any soul searching or self reflection, the Tony's of the world will conclude the Obamasiah failed because the evil interests groups and Republicans were allowed to destroy him. They will conclude that the only sollution once they get back into power is to drop all pretents of Democracy and just destroy their enemies. The Left went fucking insane during the Bush years. How fucking nuts are they going to be after Obama crashes and burns and they get kicked out of power again?
|8.17.09 @ 3:39PM|#
Naga,
I'm married, dude. However, I believe that the Urkobold is judging
candidates for Lab Whore of the Year for
Lab Whore Day 2010.
Art-P.O.G.|8.17.09 @ 3:39PM|#
No, it isn't 1994. It's 1994 rebooted, with edgier characters, gritter scripts, and supermodel stars. And with less trust of the GOP and even more distrust of the Democrats.
You forgot to mention the shaky, handheld camera.
|8.17.09 @ 3:40PM|#
What has Obama failed at?
Given the sheer number of crises he inherited I'd say he's doing an
adequate job. But then again I paid attention during the campaign
and didn't expect him to be a libertarian zealot, which bizarrely
is what you all seem to be complaining about.
Xeones|8.17.09 @ 3:41PM|#
wildly divergent economic philosophies
Ok, i laughed out loud. Keynesian economics is wildly divergent
from... Keynesian economics? Really, dude?
Tony, face it: Obama is Bush with better PR and a tan.
|8.17.09 @ 3:41PM|#
My bet is they are good, unless of course Pakistan goes
hostile and we have 100,000 people in the middle of Asia with no
way to supply them or extract them. That will put an end to that
quagmire.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massacre_of_Elphinstone%27s_army
|8.17.09 @ 3:41PM|#
Art-P.O.G.,
You're right--good catch. I just hope the finale is better with
this reboot.
Mike M.|8.17.09 @ 3:41PM|#
Having been sufficiently screwed by both halves of the two
party duopoly, I conclude that we do not have a political system.
It's more like a political industry.
It's definitely a political industry now, and no longer even a
pretense to a representative political system.
This was more or less confirmed the other day by a major national
newspaper saying that there is no point in members of Congress
reading the bill because they're too stupid to understand it.
|8.17.09 @ 3:41PM|#
Tony, face it: Obama is Bush with better PR and a tan.
And a teleprompter. Don' forget the teleprompter.
Xeones|8.17.09 @ 3:42PM|#
I just hope the finale is better with this
reboot.
Also, i was REALLY disappointed in the sex scenes.
|8.17.09 @ 3:42PM|#
"I conclude that we do not have a political system. It's more
like a political industry."
I wish I could argue with you.
|8.17.09 @ 3:43PM|#
The stimulus that did nothing to stimulate and created $700 billion in debt and is wildly unpopular is a failure.
Warty|8.17.09 @ 3:43PM|#
The federal government saved your sorry ass from the bread
line and all you do is bitch bitch bitch.
I take back my eariler STFU. Keep it coming Tony, this is comedy
gold.
|8.17.09 @ 3:44PM|#
I fully stand by my comment about Republicans. I mean for the
love of fuck has any of you paid any attention to anything in your
entire lives? When the best guy the GOP can come up with in 40
years is Richard Nixon I think there's a problem.
Let me guess: none of the corporatist corruption, religious
pandering, torture supporting, phony warmongering, wiretapping,
economy destroying matters because they believe in no higher taxes
ever. Why don't you go jerk yourselves off to low taxes you
simpleminded wingnuts.
Sean W. Malone|8.17.09 @ 3:44PM|#
"wildly divergent economic philosophies"
Huh???
Which philosophies are those Tony? Do tell... This should be
good.
|8.17.09 @ 3:45PM|#
"Let me guess: none of the corporatist corruption, religious
pandering, torture supporting, phony warmongering, wiretapping,
economy destroying matters because they believe in no higher taxes
ever. Why don't you go jerk yourselves off to low taxes you
simpleminded wingnuts."
Because the Democrats repealed the Patriot Act, stopped bailing out
Wall Street, ended the phony wars and stopped all the wiretapping
once they go in power. You are funny Tony.
Warty|8.17.09 @ 3:46PM|#
Why don't you go jerk yourselves off to low taxes you
simpleminded wingnuts.
Would you like a video?
Xeones|8.17.09 @ 3:51PM|#
Why don't you go jerk yourselves off to low taxes you
simpleminded wingnuts.
It's gonna have to wait till i get home.
Sean W. Malone|8.17.09 @ 3:53PM|#
Oh fuck Tony... You're brilliant:
"none of the corporatist corruption"
Like
this??
"religious pandering"
You mean
like Obama, right?
"torture supporting, phony warmongering"
Did you miss Obama's
War Mongering?
"wiretapping"
I suppose that practice had "ended"
now, huh?
"economy destroying"
|8.17.09 @ 3:54PM|#
Sean,
Bush said the bailout goes against everything he believes in. What
about redistributing wealth to the top 1% under the assumption that
it will magically result in more jobs is Keynesian?
Sean W. Malone|8.17.09 @ 3:54PM|#
"economy destroying"
Say
WHAT???
Jesus H. Christ, Tony. You have to be a spoof.
|8.17.09 @ 3:55PM|#
So Reason Editors, how's that Obama thing working out for you? Do you still think punishing Barr for the sins of Bush was the right way to go?
|8.17.09 @ 3:55PM|#
You think I like that Obama hasn't waived a magic wand and reversed the entire Bush administration yet? What exactly are you arguing? The Dems are slightly less bad on liberty, therefore we might as well support the GOP who is worse?
Dale|8.17.09 @ 3:58PM|#
Gawddammit Tony, I expect mah vittles to be on the table when I git home from werk! Now git yer ass off that dam puter and come over here! *SMACK*
Tom|8.17.09 @ 3:58PM|#
Last week, Chris Matthews of MSNBC had as a guest on his show
the protester who showed up with a gun at the New Hampshire town
meeting. Matthews berated him thus:
"OK, you brought a sign that says, 'The tree of liberty has to
be watered with the blood of tyrants,' and you're carrying a
goddamn gun at a presidential event. I think those things make
people wonder what you're about."
I can help you with that, Chris. A few years ago I wrote the
following: "Governments are instituted among Men, deriving
their just powers from the consent of the governed, - That whenever
any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the
Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new
Government."
Hope that helps.
Regards,
Tom Jefferson, fascist
roystgnr|8.17.09 @ 3:58PM|#
Hey, Tony, nice of you to bring up the wiretapping issue! That
was the reason I voted for Obama in the primary: because he'd made
a lot of libertarian statements and a lot of strong promises about
actually supporting the Bill of Rights, and because it wasn't until
it was too late that I discovered "promise to filibuster" was
actually code for "will vote for".
Remember that promise? About not letting telecoms get away with it
after they caved in and broke federal law by supporting
unconstitutional unwarranted wiretaps? That was my first big clue
that I couldn't trust Obama. It's too bad that you weren't able to
reach the same conclusion on as little data, but don't worry, he
keeps adding *lots* more evidence, and you'll catch on
eventually.
Xeones|8.17.09 @ 3:59PM|#
Cesar, is that you?
Hm. Good eye.
What the fuck? I brought that up months ago.
|8.17.09 @ 4:00PM|#
EAP what's with your handle. Do you have to remind yourself that Sarah Palin is an incompetent narcissistic psychopath? Yeah Sarah Palin, she's a real good argument for supporting the GOP. Did you know they ran that airheaded theocratic cunt for VP last time around?
Sean W. Malone|8.17.09 @ 4:00PM|#
"Bush said the bailout goes against everything he believes
in. What about redistributing wealth to the top 1% under the
assumption that it will magically result in more jobs is
Keynesian?"
Bush SAID a lot of things, you fucktard. Are you now telling me
that Bush's words were to be trusted? Guess he didn't lie at all
about Iraq then, huh? Or does he only lie when what he's saying
might conflict with your version of reality?
And I'm a little confused with the second half of that comment,
you're referencing Obama, right? Massive government spending is
Keynesian in any case, but considering the great bulk of all
"stimulus" has gone directly to major investment banks like
2nd Highest Obama Campaign Donor; Goldman
Sachs.... I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to
suggest as a distinction here.
Xeones|8.17.09 @ 4:00PM|#
And again last week. I was roundly pooh-poohed (and not in the way Tony likes).
|8.17.09 @ 4:01PM|#
Tony, there's a time where you've made enough of an ass of yourself and proven your ignorance. The time to stop talking is before that. Unfortunately, you've blown right past that line. So... it may be time to cut your losses. Yeah.
Art-P.O.G.|8.17.09 @ 4:02PM|#
What the fuck? I brought that up months ago.
I missed it, therefore it didn't happen.
Gunboat Diplomacy|8.17.09 @ 4:03PM|#
"The federal government saved your sorry ass from the bread line
and all you do is bitch bitch bitch."
It didn't save my ass. I'm rich. But it seems to be shoving its
hand waaaaaay up my ass looking for loose change.
Sean W. Malone|8.17.09 @ 4:04PM|#
Warty, why are self-fisting midgets dumb? Nobody loves you like yourself.
|8.17.09 @ 4:05PM|#
Xeones,
You lack my authority and gravitas. And you have a pansy-ass Greek
cognomen rather than a Latin one.
I hope it is Cesar.
Warty|8.17.09 @ 4:06PM|#
Sean, because they're not even wearing latex gloves. Jesus Christ, do I have to explain everything?
Gunboat Diplomacy|8.17.09 @ 4:07PM|#
"Shut the fuck up Tony."
Even the Lonewacko is right once every five years or so. But you?
Not so much.
|8.17.09 @ 4:07PM|#
Can we please confine Tony and Lonewhacko to posting on a single thread so the rest of us can avoid it?
Gunboat Diplomacy|8.17.09 @ 4:09PM|#
"Why don't you go jerk yourselves off to low taxes you
simpleminded wingnuts."
I prefer fat, pasty-white rednecks engaged in testicular
play.
Wanna snuggle?
Art-P.O.G.|8.17.09 @ 4:09PM|#
It didn't save my ass. I'm rich.
Oh, one of those "Monocle Minarchists", eh? ;)
Sean W. Malone|8.17.09 @ 4:09PM|#
Nah John... As much as Tony is a mindless dolt, flame wars are what the internet is all about.
Art-P.O.G.|8.17.09 @ 4:11PM|#
I hope it is Cesar.
Me too. If he's for real, he has ideological blinders on. If he's Cesar, he's a fucking genius.
Art-P.O.G.|8.17.09 @ 4:12PM|#
Well in defense of Tony, he's right about the WoD. What's
Lonewacko right about?
....
....
Xeones|8.17.09 @ 4:13PM|#
If he's for real, he has ideological blinders on. If he's
Cesar, he's a fucking genius.
I HAVE BEEN SAYING THIS FOR MONTHS
Warty|8.17.09 @ 4:13PM|#
Lonewacko is right that Democrats suck. His reasons are mostly retarded, but that doesn't count.
|8.17.09 @ 4:18PM|#
Xeones may be Cesar, too. In fact, this blog may have only two real commenters--me and Cesar.
MNG|8.17.09 @ 4:19PM|#
It's retarded to compare LW to Tony. Really, it just shows how off in the head the person making such a comparison is. I don't agree with Tony's views all the time, but his views certainly more rationally reflect a big chunk of the ideological pie out there, while LW couldn't make a point with a pencil.
Art-P.O.G.|8.17.09 @ 4:19PM|#
I HAVE BEEN SAYING THIS FOR MONTHS
Ha ha, I'm sure you have. Ha ha, and I'm sure I just "magically"
missed it every time, and not just because I'm 7 hours ahead of EST
and come early or late to every thread and sometimes miss a whole
day's worth.
And what Warty said. ;)
|8.17.09 @ 4:20PM|#
Xeones, do you think Tony prefers the Cleveland Steamer, or
the Hot Carl?
If you must know, what I *really* enjoy is waking up in the morning
and having my redneck boyfriend treat me to a warm, delicious brown
shower after pounding a 12 pack of Budweiser the night before!
|8.17.09 @ 4:20PM|#
"EAP what's with your handle."
Great way to work in yet another DNC talking point.
Palin is an idiot. I've said that p[lat out to you before, but
you're a little slow. But that's okay because that just means that
your on the death panel's short list. ;-)
I chose the handle nearly a year ago because for about two weeks
straight every fucking story at reason (I'm looking at you Weigel
and Cavanaugh) was about Palin.
But more to the point here. Tony, you are an idiot and hence forth,
I will never post in response to you anything other than Shut the
Fuck Up Tony or its equivalent. And I respectfully ask all other
H&R posters to consider doing the same.
Now shut up and suck my balls, Tony.
BTW spellcheck suggests weasel for Weigel. Funny that.
Art-P.O.G.|8.17.09 @ 4:21PM|#
And, uh, what MNG said.
In fact, this blog may have only two real commenters--me and Cesar.
Am I real?
|8.17.09 @ 4:21PM|#
Warty is a real person. I have photographic evidence. He sent this to me just the other day.
MNG|8.17.09 @ 4:22PM|#
Tony
I think if I were a libertarian I would have to find the Democrats
worse on some issues (gun rights for example) and the Republicans
worse on others (defense spending of blowing cops).
Now which one I would find worse would be a function of which
issues I felt most crucial. For example I've argued that criminal
justice matters are the most important since the worst thing the
government can do vis-a-vis the individual citizen is to deprive
them of their life or liberty via direct force, and that the Dems
are superior (read: less bad) when compared to the GOP.
MNG|8.17.09 @ 4:24PM|#
Pro
I used to never abbreviate it, but when I lost the bet and had to
post as Crow-Eating Dumbass I started to just post CWD. I found it
much easier and started doing the MNG abbreviation.
I figure everyone will know it means Mr. Nice Guy because of my
always pleasant and civil demeanor...
Xeones|8.17.09 @ 4:24PM|#
Warty, the closest thing you have to a kettlebell is that growth on your back.
hmm|8.17.09 @ 4:24PM|#
Warty | August 17, 2009, 3:46pm | #
Why don't you go jerk yourselves off to low taxes you simpleminded wingnuts.
Would you like a video?
If I say yes will you hold it against me?
I already masturbate to lower taxes. I have to use less drug raids
and less trampling of civil liberties lately taxes just aren't
enough.
Gunboat Dipolmacy|8.17.09 @ 4:25PM|#
"Oh, one of those "Monocle Minarchists", eh? ;)"
No. Just thankful for the labors of my ancesters. And of course
their legion of slaves.
Art-P.O.G.|8.17.09 @ 4:25PM|#
Seriously, Xeones, sorry.
I didn't mean to hurt you
I'm sorry that I mad you cry
I didn't want to hurt you
I'm just a jealous guy
Bryan Ferry version.
Wait, what?
Rich|8.17.09 @ 4:25PM|#
John | August 17, 2009, 3:37pm | #
I worry about the backlash in 2010 and 2012. There are millions of
morons out there like Tony. After Obama crashes and burns and the
entire country vows never to vote Dem again ...
John, I generally agree with you. But here's a different
pessimistic scenario: The folks who voted for BHO will "reason"
that the Dems haven't had enough time to implement their change --
after all, they *did* inherit quite a mess, which point will be
trotted out ad nauseum. (Moreover, there's considerable precedent
for throwing more money/laws at problems.) The true believers will
not be able to let it go, simply because their ideal is too
big/pure to fail.
Gunboat Dipolmacy|8.17.09 @ 4:27PM|#
"Well in defense of Tony, he's right about the WoD. What's
Lonewacko right about?"
That Reason's editors attend coctail parties.
Art-P.O.G.|8.17.09 @ 4:28PM|#
oops...I made you cry.
And of course their legion of slaves.
That's it. Gimme some reparations. ;)
|8.17.09 @ 4:29PM|#
I've taken the first steps to solipsistic enlightenment. Well,
not quite solipsism. 'Cause there's Cesar and me. What do they call
that?
MNG,
"Who is it?" Yossarian shouted anxiously at Doc Daneeka as he ran up, breathless and limp, his somber eyes burning with a misty, hectic anguish. "Who's in the plane?"
"McWatt," said Sergeant Knight. "He's got the two new pilots with him on a training flight. Doc Daneeka's up there, too."
"I'm right here," contended Doc Daneeka, in a strange and troubled voice, darting an anxious look at Sergeant Knight.
"Why doesn't he come down?" Yossarian exclaimed in despair. "Why does he keep going up?"
"He's probably afraid to come down," Sergeant Knight answered, without moving his solemn gaze from McWatt's solitary climbing airplane. "He knows what kind of trouble he's in."
And McWatt kept climbing higher and higher, nosing his droning airplane upward evenly in a slow, oval spiral... A white parachute popped open suddenly in a surprising puff. A second parachute popped open a few moments later and coasted down, like the first... The plan continued south for thirty seconds more, following the same pattern, familiar and predictable now, and McWatt lifted a wing and banked gracefully around into his turn.
"Two more to go," said Sergeant Knight. "McWatt and Doc Daneeka."
"I'm right here, Sergeant Knight," Doc Daneeka told him plaintively. "I'm not in the plane."
"Why don't they jump?" Sergeant Knight asked, pleading aloud to himself. "Why don't they jump?"
"It doesn't make sense," grieved Doc Daneeka, biting his lip. "It just doesn't make sense."
But Yossarian understood suddenly why McWatt wouldn't jump, and went running uncontrollably down the whole length of the squadron after McWatt's plane, waving his arms and shouting up at him imploringly to come down, McWatt, come down; but no one seemed to hear, certainly not McWatt, and a great, choking moan tore from Yossarian's throat as McWatt turned again, dipped his wings once in salute, decided oh, well, what the hell, and flew into a mountain.
|8.17.09 @ 4:29PM|#
I think if I were a libertarian I would have to find the Democrats worse on some issues (gun rights for example) and the Republicans worse on others (defense spending of blowing cops).
Exactly, I don't expect libertarians here to like Democrats, but at
this point in history it's not a matter of minor policy
differences, it's a matter of civilization itself. It's like
everyone's living in a time warp where the GOP is still the cuddly
corporatist warmongering party of daddy Bush and not the
neo-fascist corporatist warmongering know-nothing party of Bush
Jr.
I simply share former Nixon counsel John Dean's opinion of the
current GOP: you should never vote for any Republican, ever.
Art-P.O.G.|8.17.09 @ 4:30PM|#
That Reason's editors attend coctail parties.
Yeah and I always detect a hint of envy...almost as if Lonewacko wsihes he were invited to fancy cocktail parties...any excuse to wear that t-shirt with the tuxedo design printed on the front.
Warty|8.17.09 @ 4:32PM|#
Xeones, I'm going to sneak into your house while you're away and short-sheet your bed.
Xeones|8.17.09 @ 4:33PM|#
it's not a matter of minor policy differences, it's a matter
of civilization itself.
No, it's not, you silly, silly little man.
Warty|8.17.09 @ 4:33PM|#
it's a matter of civilization itself
Shut the fuck up, Tony, you hyperventilating queen.
Art-P.O.G.|8.17.09 @ 4:33PM|#
wishes*...dammit...I need a vacation.
MNG = Tony?
Not even close.
Xeones,
I'm glad you feel better. That theory was too crackerjack. I
should've known you'd beat me to it. :::hanging off rope ladder
attached to ascending helicopter::: "You win this time!"
Art-P.O.G.|8.17.09 @ 4:35PM|#
I don't think they should let people join the Army, or probably any armed service, if they haven't first read Catch-22.
Gunboat Dipolmacy|8.17.09 @ 4:35PM|#
"Yeah and I always detect a hint of envy...almost as if
Lonewacko wsihes he were invited to fancy cocktail parties"
I always sense that too.
|8.17.09 @ 4:37PM|#
Tony is MNG's differently abled little brother that MNG feels to the need to defend.
Gunboat Dipolmacy|8.17.09 @ 4:37PM|#
And can only wonder in horror what types of parties he actually attends.
MNG|8.17.09 @ 4:37PM|#
The GOP has been riding the stupid train a lot. Maybe this started with Agnew and the hate on "pointy-headed intellectuals."
Sean W. Malone|8.17.09 @ 4:37PM|#
Tony.
I've already explained to you in no uncertain terms that the
Democrats are JUST as much corporatist war-mongers who are ok with
torture and neo-fascism.
In fact, arguing from a purely economic stand point, you could say
that they are worse in the neo-fascism department, what
with Obama firing CEOs of private corporations and using $1.5
Trillion+ in taxpayer stolen dollars to bailout campaign supporters
and take over large chunks of the US Economy.
I'm shocked that you'd vote for any Democrats ever given the kinds
of things you claim you're against (like corporatism). The
reality is, however - you're not against any of that... you just
want your team to win.
|8.17.09 @ 4:39PM|#
Have you ever been around someone so crazy you could smell it on
them--the damp stink of cackling desperation, the cat-piss reek of
self-serving fantasy, the sweet gangrene of an infected mind ruined
by constantly crashing against a reality it refuses to understand
or accept?
There a reason LoneWacko doesn't get invited to cocktail
parties.
|8.17.09 @ 4:39PM|#
The GOP has been riding the stupid train a lot.
The GOP is a combination of fundies who believe thinking and
learning leads to doubt and doubt leads to eternal hellfire, and
middle management drones who read Tom Peters and tell themselves
their very ignorance is their greatest asset, because they don't
know what conventional wisdom considers possible, so they ask for
(and get) the impossible.
What of it? I'm not a Republican.
MNG|8.17.09 @ 4:40PM|#
Catch-22 is a great book, and I happened to like the movie too. I heard Heller did a sequel?
Xeones|8.17.09 @ 4:42PM|#
What of it? I'm not a Republican.
Ah, but Tony (and many others i know, even) live in a binary world,
where if you do not support Obama you ARE a Republican, whatever
you may say to the contrary. The fact that you say you're not is
just further evidence that Republicans are liars.
Art-P.O.G.|8.17.09 @ 4:43PM|#
There a reason LoneWacko doesn't get invited to cocktail parties.
Word. It's a vicious cycle.*
*But with dark comic potential!
MNG|8.17.09 @ 4:43PM|#
Sean
I think what's wrong with your view is that when people look back
at the fascists in horror they don't think of their industrial
policy, they think of making their political opponents drink castor
oil and such...
I mean, the Nazi's drove around in cars, but that doesn't make cars
bad. D'inesh D'Souza called this sort of thinking argument ad
Hitlerum...
MNG|8.17.09 @ 4:45PM|#
Pro
The Democrats at least pay some symbolic deference to
intellectualism instead of hating on it as a wicked form of
"elitism." That is meaningful. If you are a intellectual it's hard
to identify with a party that actively sets out to antagonize
someone with your tastes, mannerisms, etc...
|8.17.09 @ 4:45PM|#
Sean,
Forgive me if I've given the wrong impression. I'm a very strong
liberal and thus am represented by a minority of Democrats in
Congress. They do many, many things I don't like. But the strongest
and best-informed criticism of Democrats comes from the left. If
I'm on a lefty board I'm very critical of Dems. Here I feel like I
have to bash the GOP just to even things out a bit. There is
nothing to admire about the current party makeup and frankly I
haven't heard anyone claim that there is. I seriously don't
understand what a libertarian could possibly admire in the GOP
except for some of the same irrational reasons their own
constituents do.
And yes I want my team to win because, given only two choices, I
prefer the one least likely to turn my country into a banana
republic with nukes.
Sean W. Malone|8.17.09 @ 4:47PM|#
"I think what's wrong with your view is that when people look
back at the fascists in horror they don't think of their industrial
policy, they think of making their political opponents drink castor
oil and such..."
I actually think that this is more the way that Americans
think of Fascism more than anything else.
Let's try not to forget that the Italians invented the term, and
the Spanish & French also employed the system.
But I was really responding to Tony. Fascism employed a corporatist
economic system (not unlike ours in virtually any respect). But
corporatism isn't enough to be "fascist" - for that you have to
include the jackboots.
We don't have the jackboots in the US, but we didn't have the
gestapo under Bush either.
So if we're going to talk "fascism" in the US we have to just talk
about Corporatism, no? In that case, I think the Dems win hands
down.
MNG|8.17.09 @ 4:47PM|#
TAO
I'm just tired of this game where people say "hey, you know who was
concerned about (for example) obesity in the citizenry? The
FASCISTS!" And these people hope you make the connection that
people concerned about that=fascists.
I mean, if the only thing Mussolini had done was a stimulus
package, do you really think fascist would be the epithet it is
now?
|8.17.09 @ 4:49PM|#
"The GOP has been riding the stupid train a lot. Maybe this
started with Agnew and the hate on "pointy-headed
intellectuals."
Of course intellectuals have caused a lot of pain, stupidity and
death and destruction over the last 200 years. Is there a more
intellectual event than the French Revolution? That and its progeny
revolutions and utopian ideals have killed 100s of millions and
caused untold suffering.
Intellectuals should always be held at arms' length. Intellectuals
have a bad habbit of indulging in Utopianism. Yeah there is the
occasional Madison, or Hayak or Hamilton. But then there are also
the Marxs who do real damage.
Xeones|8.17.09 @ 4:49PM|#
I mean, the Nazi's drove around in cars, but that doesn't
make cars bad.
Cars pollute. Why do you hate the environment so, you fascist?
The Angry Optimist|8.17.09 @ 4:50PM|#
MNG - given that, as Sean said, you have two parts to
fascism:
jackbooter nationalism + economic corporatism
And under we have never had the former, when people invoke fascist,
they mean the latter.
The problem is that the castor oil comes out as a manifestation of
the former to intimidate the populace into accepting the
latter.
|8.17.09 @ 4:50PM|#
I'm re-reading The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich,
and I ran across a bit talking about the Volkswagen. Hitler
apparently had some input on the design of the original
Beetle.
So, if you're driving around in a New Beetle, you're driving
Hitler's car. Not just one designed during the Third Reich, but one
that may have his design elements in it. Creepy.
MNG,
I think the GOP is anti-academia, especially when it comes to
liberal arts academics. I don't think it's particularly
anti-intellectual in any other sense, though the fundamentalist
extreme has a definite anti-science bend. But that's a minority,
and the left has the same thing with some of the more radical
greens.
Sean W. Malone|8.17.09 @ 4:50PM|#
"I prefer the one least likely to turn my country into a
banana republic"
Yeah, I'm a fan of that. Cept, I'm also a fan of not turning the
country in to the Zimbabwean version of the Soviet Union.
MNG|8.17.09 @ 4:50PM|#
Sean
This game could be played forever. For example, the fascists loved
to proclaim the wonders of God, country and the military. Which
contemporary US party does that sound most like?
The actual fascist movements had many characteristics. One could
abstract out any one, or set, match them to a modern movement, and
call that movement fascists I guess.
The Angry Optimist|8.17.09 @ 4:50PM|#
Is there a more intellectual event than the French Revolution?
The American one?
T|8.17.09 @ 4:51PM|#
I don't think they should let people join the Army, or
probably any armed service, if they haven't first read
Catch-22.
And Slaughterhouse Five.
|8.17.09 @ 4:51PM|#
MNG,
There needs to be a lot of skepticism of educated know it alls who
aim to run every aspect of our country and our lives. When shows up
with a grand scheme to solve all our problems, they are selling
snake oil. Just because they have a PHD, doesn't make it anything
other than snake oil.
|8.17.09 @ 4:52PM|#
Who was it who said there were things so stupid only intellectuals could believe them? Oh, Orwell. Thanks, Google.
MNG|8.17.09 @ 4:53PM|#
"you have two parts to fascism"
That't the problem with this goofy view; there are many
characteristics to the historical fascists.
Pro
You can take a rough indicator like who they nominate for
President. Say what you will, but usually the Democratic candidate
has better intellectual credentials and is better spoken. For some
reason lacking that is not something the GOP voters will hold
against you much...
|8.17.09 @ 4:53PM|#
Say what you will, but usually the Democratic candidate has
better intellectual credentials...
W went to Harvard and Yale.
|8.17.09 @ 4:53PM|#
"Is there a more intellectual event than the French
Revolution?
The American one?"
Not even close. The French Revolution claimed to reset the clock to
year one and completely make over society. The American revolution
was a conservative revolution aimed at restoring the rights
Americans felt they always had as English subjects.
"the fascists loved to proclaim the wonders of God, country and the
military."
What fascist movement was religious? The Nazi's were atheists or
held wierdo occult nordic pagan views. They hated the church.
MNG|8.17.09 @ 4:54PM|#
John
TAO has made my point for me. Thank god we had all those
intellectuals involved in our revolution...
|8.17.09 @ 4:55PM|#
What the hell are BO's academic credentials? He was editor of the Harvard law Review. BFD. There is one every year. He never clerked for a judge, was never a successful attorney and never held an important position in government or private practice. BO hadn't done shit since law school beyond run for office and write books about himself.
|8.17.09 @ 4:55PM|#
Thank god we had all those intellectuals involved in our
revolution...
You mean the smugglers and slave owners like Hamilton and Jefferson
and Washington?
Gunboat Dipolmacy|8.17.09 @ 4:55PM|#
"The Democrats at least pay some symbolic deference to
intellectualism instead of hating on it as a wicked form of
"elitism.""
Intellectualism and elitism are two distictly different
things.
Examples:
Thomas Sowell -- intellectual.
Al Gore -- elitist.
The Angry Optimist|8.17.09 @ 4:56PM|#
That't the problem with this goofy view; there are many characteristics to the historical fascists.
If you want to be nitpicky, fine, but broadly speaking,
socialist-nationalism with a corporatist sheen is the
standard.
Do you have other substantively different criteria for
defining the word?
|8.17.09 @ 4:56PM|#
MNG,
I haven't seen much sign of true intellect in the Democratic
candidates--they just get acclaimed as intellectuals. Frankly, we
haven't seen anyone brilliant in the White House in a long, long
time.
TAO is right. The American Revolution absolutely was an
intellectual one, with the revolt based on a good understanding of
history, political philosophy, ethics, and even economics.
|8.17.09 @ 4:56PM|#
"John
TAO has made my point for me. Thank god we had all those
intellectuals involved in our revolution..."
Thank God we had a mix of those and practical people. And thank God
those intellectuals understood how the world actually worked and
didn't try to remake society. Unchecked intellectuals gives you the
French Revolution.
MNG|8.17.09 @ 4:57PM|#
John
If you want to maintain that Hitler did not invoke God and country,
be my guest.
Mussolini fooled with anti-clericism in his newspaper days, but he
was seen as a clearly better choice than the materialist communists
which he opposed.
Franco actively invoked the image of himself protecting Catholicism
from Communism.
You don't know what you're talking about.
The Angry Optimist|8.17.09 @ 4:57PM|#
The French Revolution claimed to reset the clock to year one and completely make over society. The American revolution was a conservative revolution aimed at restoring the rights Americans felt they always had as English subjects.
What kind of goalpost moving is this? You cannot have conservative
intellectuals now? Tell that to WFB and Burke.
|8.17.09 @ 4:58PM|#
Too much intellectualism in the US is the equivalent of "What do business owners know about running their businesses, or parents about raising their children? I'm a junior at Hudson University, majoring in Lesbian Peace Studies with a GPA of 2.68. Kneel before me and worship me as a god, you ignorant cattle, for I am the end product of thousands of years of human intellectual and moral progress, and compared to me, you are a farm animal."
Sean W. Malone|8.17.09 @ 4:58PM|#
You know what I'd love?
If we quit assuming that all Ph.D's are "intellectuals".
I've got a Masters, I know a few others do around here, some might
have Ph.D's as well... Seriously though, has anyone who's spent a
significant amount of time in Academia not figured out that a Ph.D
- like any education - says relatively little about a person's
intellect.
A lot of 'highly educated' people are retarded and have the same
logical failings as anyone else. Additionally, a lot of highly
educated people may know quite a lot about their particular subject
but dick all about anything else. I often think of my first
composition professor in undergrad, who I called "doctor" on my
first lesson with him.
To paraphrase his response; "Cut the doctor shit, only pretentious
assholes want to be called that." Still holds true, as it turns
out.
MNG|8.17.09 @ 4:59PM|#
TAO
The fascist movement in Spain for example could hardly be said to
be characterized by its corporatist policy.
C'mon man, you're talking about something you don't know much about
either. Glenn Beck specials don't count.
T|8.17.09 @ 4:59PM|#
You mean the smugglers and slave owners like Hamilton and
Jefferson and Washington?
Yes, but well-read, intellectual smugglers and slave owners. It's
important to read books, apparently, even if they're outdated bilge
like Keynes General Theory or Marx's Theories of
Surplus Value or the U.S Constitution. Being well-read is
important to democrats like Tony.
|8.17.09 @ 5:00PM|#
Franco was a strict Catholic. But I would say he was a fascist who happened to be Catholic. I don't see how his devotion to the Church was essential to his fascism.
|8.17.09 @ 5:00PM|#
Instead for just turning "conservative" in an insult, like the
right did with "liberal," the left reaches for fascist. All they
really mean is "not-leftist."
Better insults all around are called for. But there are few things
that "not-leftist" all believe. What is the common thread of the
modern right other than "anti-left?"
(The common thread for the left is, of course,
redistributionism.)
The Angry Optimist|8.17.09 @ 5:00PM|#
give it a rest, MNG. I know plenty of what I am talking about - look at any operational definition of fascism and you will see "economic corporatism/nationalist-socialism" in there. I knew you were going to be a nitpicker about this.
|8.17.09 @ 5:00PM|#
I have multiple master's degrees. Each one has left me less impressed with education being any more than showing a willingness to jump through arbitrary hoops.
|8.17.09 @ 5:01PM|#
John I find it cosmically funny that the one thing I admire about Ayn Rand is the thing you dismiss--her staunch advocacy of logic and brain power.
hmm|8.17.09 @ 5:02PM|#
If we quit assuming that all Ph.D's are
"intellectuals".
What is possible the smartest and most intellectual person I know
never graduate college. Degrees and intellect are not the same
thing.
|8.17.09 @ 5:02PM|#
It's odd that for a bunch of atheists, the military honor known as the Iron Cross was so important.
|8.17.09 @ 5:04PM|#
Hey, wait a second. Franco was a Catholic. Mussolini was a Catholic. Hitler was a Catholic. I've never noticed that before.
Sean W. Malone|8.17.09 @ 5:06PM|#
"Each one has left me less impressed with education being
any more than showing a willingness to jump through arbitrary
hoops."
Me too... Though that observation started when I was in high
school. Although I'd always been an "A" student, I didn't do all
that much of my homework because it was repetitive bullshit that
mostly just wasted my time. Watching the teachers' pets gradegrub
was a mildly amusing way to learn that for most of formal education
"success" is equivalent to being the best-trained seal in the
group.
|8.17.09 @ 5:06PM|#
"What kind of goalpost moving is this? You cannot have
conservative intellectuals now? Tell that to WFB and Burke."
Of course you can. But so what? On the whole intellectuals have
done a lot of damage to the world because they have a bad habbit of
being utopian. In that sense, Republicans are not "anti
intellectual" they are anti utopian intellectual.
|8.17.09 @ 5:06PM|#
Franco was a Catholic. Mussolini was a Catholic. Hitler was
a Catholic.
And where does the Catholic church stand on economic/social policy
outside of abortion?
|8.17.09 @ 5:07PM|#
The GOP has its own vast propaganda machine.
It is unabashedly anti-intellectual.
It panders to religious fundamentalists for votes.
It has an interventionist war policy, and that is very much a
euphemism.
You're hard pressed to find many GOP pols who don't actually defend
the use of torture as US policy.
Its economic theories are unashamedly plutocratic and
pro-corporate-rule.
Fascist is a loaded word but jesus christ how much closer can you
get.
The Angry Optimist|8.17.09 @ 5:08PM|#
whatever, John - I could point out plenty of places where intellectulism spawned great leaps of the quality of life for millions (The Renaissance, the Enlightenment, the American Revolution), but if you are just going to keep adding "-qualifiers", there is no point.
Art-P.O.G.|8.17.09 @ 5:08PM|#
Hey, wait a second. Franco was a Catholic. Mussolini was a Catholic. Hitler was a Catholic. I've never noticed that before.
You are now on Mad Max's shitlist. ;)
BTW, only someone more educated about history than me could unravel
the hodge-podge of secular and religious influences (Nietzsche,
Norse Mythology, socialism?) than guided the Nazi ethos. It's hard
for me to think of them as just being left/right or
religious/secular. I don't think the dichotomies work right with
them.
|8.17.09 @ 5:10PM|#
I seriously had never noticed that the three principal leaders
of old school fascism were all Catholic. I doubt it means anything
at all. Certainly, at least two of the three weren't too concerned
about their Catholicism.
Stalin was Georgian Orthodox, I think.
T|8.17.09 @ 5:11PM|#
her staunch advocacy of logic and brain power.
Logic means nothing if your starting premises are crap.
hmm|8.17.09 @ 5:11PM|#
I love the left being the intellectual side of the political
spectrum argument. You truly need to walk around a college and
discuss a few real life issues with PhDs to get a feeling for just
how far the intellectual left has its head up its ass.
My favorite quote from the bailout bonanza was, "...the banks
received a bailout so we should bailout GM and Chrysler. At least
they make something." From a PhD. in finance. How's that for fucked
up logic.
The intellectual white tower has a brown interior. It's full of
shit.
The Angry Optimist|8.17.09 @ 5:11PM|#
Its economic theories are unashamedly plutocratic and pro-corporate-rule.
Given that many fascist regimes wanted to move towards autarky and
considered their corporatism the "third way" between international
communism and liberal capitalism, you know that this point is
totally bogus.
|8.17.09 @ 5:11PM|#
John, just because some intellectuals have done bad things doesn't mean we should let the stupid people run things. Anti-intellectualism is the cause of utopian/authoritarian regimes anywhere for the obvious reason that intellectuals tend to question the power structure.
Bingo|8.17.09 @ 5:12PM|#
Sure the fascists had strong, dominant Aryan women with a penchant for stiletto heels, leather, and riding crops, but does that make them bad??
|8.17.09 @ 5:13PM|#
Beyond that, any amount of murderous horse shit has been foisted
on the human race under the guise of science and reason. Marxism
always considered itself a science. There were back in the day
"fascist scientists and science courses". Intellectuals in the
early 20th Century believed and pursued policies of eugenics after
Darwin became popular. Name any murderous or disastrous human
ideology and you can find vanguard intellectuals at the front of
the movement.
The problem we have today is that we brand things into black and
white cartoon. Science is a good brand, so anything no matter how
ridiculous that is branded as science can't be questioned.
Intellectual is another good brand. So, anyone who questions the
propriety of letting intellectuals run the country at the expense
of anyone else is immediately branded a crazy and a fundie.
|8.17.09 @ 5:14PM|#
Logic means nothing if your starting premises are crap.
That's exactly what I kept screaming while reading Ayn Rand!
Sean W. Malone|8.17.09 @ 5:14PM|#
"The GOP has its own vast propaganda machine."
Which one is that Tony? Last I checked it didn't exactly have most
(or even many) newspapers or television networks on its
side...
And I know that "republicans" of any type account for
(generously) 5% of the entertainment industry (you know... the
industry I work in). I'd venture to say that solidly 98% of all
media ordinary people are exposed to day in and day out - between
news, television, music & movies reflects a decidedly pro-state
bias... Of that, 80% or so is pro-Democrat in essence.
T|8.17.09 @ 5:16PM|#
Sure the fascists had strong, dominant Aryan women with a
penchant for stiletto heels, leather, and riding crops, but does
that make them bad??
Didn't we agree last week a lot can be overlooked in the face of a
rack as magnificent as Dyanne Thorne's?
Art-P.O.G.|8.17.09 @ 5:16PM|#
And go to bed! It's after midnight!
Yeah, I'm about to. But I'm hell-bent on destroying myself. ;)
Urkoboldâ„¢|8.17.09 @ 5:17PM|#
WHO IS THIS CHICK? IS SHE AN INTELLECTUAL? BECAUSE THE URKOBOLD SAW HER ON 60 MINUTES AND HAD TO TAKE A SELF DE-BATING BREAK.
|8.17.09 @ 5:18PM|#
Some of you guys would believe anything as long as a guy in a lab coat or someone of the right class told you it was true. Further, if someone wants to go dig up Hamilton and Madison and bring them back to life I am all for letting intellectuals run things. Sadly, our entire political and intellectual class is completely broken. We are not producing any Hamiltons. We are producing morons. To quote WFB, I would rather be governed by a random selection of people in the Boston phone book than the faculty at Harvard or something like that. Our intellectual class is completely broken and decadent and has no business running a pay toilet let alone the country.
The Angry Optimist|8.17.09 @ 5:19PM|#
no, John, not one person here would believe anything that came
out of a guy wearing a lab coat.
you are arguing with the slavish liberal devotees to "science" in
your head. Just because we don't join in your ridiculousness
doesn't believe that you can believe whatever the hell you
want.
|8.17.09 @ 5:21PM|#
Sean,
There is absolutely no Democratic equivalent to the GOP propaganda
machine. This is what's so darn insidious about the likes of FOX
news and rightwing radio: every other source of information on the
planet is by default, without question, in bed with the Dems. As
such, it's best to avoid all other sources of information because
only we at FOX are fair and balanced and have the truth.
Now you have some minor liberal voices, say on PBS, MSNBC, and one
or two radio stations, but none of them simply go along with
whatever Dems want--as I said the best critics of Dems are on the
left.
But you can unarchive Rush Limbaugh or Bill O'Reilly defending the
GOP for the exact same action they later trash Dems for doing. FOX
and rightwing radio are without question the propaganda arm of the
GOP and the primary reason it has had so much success despite being
so corrupt and useless.
|8.17.09 @ 5:22PM|#
I'll join John in this: What passes for political
intelligentsia in this country these days is pathetic. I'd give a
lot to dig up some zombie 18th century thinkers.
Cesar, you aren't even trying.
T|8.17.09 @ 5:22PM|#
Dammit, TAO! You've ruined my plans. I was gonna go buy a labcoat. For science and stuff.
The Angry Optimist|8.17.09 @ 5:24PM|#
That's exactly what I kept screaming while reading Ayn Rand!
What premises did she get wrong, exactly?
this should be good.
|8.17.09 @ 5:24PM|#
How funny that lab coats are being discussed in the same thread where Lab Whore Day was mentioned. Coincidence?
|8.17.09 @ 5:26PM|#
Perhaps I would hold "intellectuals" in higher regard if everyone I meet doesn't have some giant as dogmatic government program designed to take my money and my freedom away in service of the common good. If intellectuals want to run things, perhaps they ought to get their heads out of their asses. There is more common sense and wisdom to be found from the guy who fixes your car than there is in pretty much any faculty room of PHD dissertation being done in this country. That is a sorry state of affairs. But it is sorry or not the situation we find ourselves in.
Sean W. Malone|8.17.09 @ 5:28PM|#
"Now you have some minor liberal voices, say on PBS, MSNBC,
and one or two radio stations, but none of them simply go along
with whatever Dems want--as I said the best critics of Dems are on
the left."
Are you really this retarded?
Liberals have controlled the media for virtually its entire
existence.
The VAST majority of movies you'll ever go to implicitly
accept/support liberal positions, virtually all TV does as well,
I've yet to meet a single successful filmmaker or writer here who's
not a flaming liberal. I know a couple musicians who are
independent, but largely liberal. You'll be hard pressed to find
more than a handful of actors or actresses who are "Republican" and
even then you'd struggle to get them to admit it in public since
it's often a career killer.
Being an outspoken libertarian is even hard - and I actually
agree with self-professed "liberals" a good chunk of the
time.
But where the fuck did this "liberals don't have a voice" idiocy
come from!? AS far as I can tell it just cropped up in the last few
months.
Hey asshole - you have the entire news industry in print & on
TV (except for Fox), you have a huge chunk of FM radio and a small
slice of AM radio, you have THE ENTIRE FILM AND TELEVISION
INDUSTRY!!! and damn near all the Music Industry...
AND... You control the Whitehouse, the Senate, Congress & now
effectively the Supreme Court.
WHAT the FUCK are you talking about whining about how powerful a
voice Republicans have? They don't have shit.
The Angry Optimist|8.17.09 @ 5:29PM|#
There is more common sense and wisdom to be found from the guy who fixes your car than there is in pretty much any faculty room of PHD dissertation being done in this country.
oh my god, are you still planning on running your party on Joe the
Plumber?
Anyway, this quasi-"noble savage" stuff is highly ironic, given
that it was airheaded "intellectuals" who gave us that piece of pap
in the first place. And here's John, swallowing it whole!
The Angry Optimist|8.17.09 @ 5:30PM|#
Sean - someone is trolling you. You have to let it go. I think it is Cesar (thanks, Warty...and fuck you, X :)
|8.17.09 @ 5:30PM|#
Mussolini fooled with anti-clericism in his newspaper days, but he was seen as a clearly better choice than the materialist communists which he opposed.
Mussolini was an anti-cleric in his newspaper days becuse he was a
communist in his newspaper days.
Fascism was what he created after he came to the conclusion that
"the people" could not be trusted to carry out a proper revolution
against decadent Democracy and Capitalism. Such a revolution he
pretty much concluded could only happen under a strong leader with
totalitarian (a word invented to describe the fascist state)
powers. The aims were still essentially Marxist.
Of course, Lenin, Stalin and Mao later came to the same conclusion
about the People and the Revolution but they paid more lip service
to Marxist principles.
And, Hitler's nazism difered from Mussolini's fascism in many
ways.
|8.17.09 @ 5:31PM|#
What premises did she get wrong, exactly?
The premise that her wacky economic ideas were the natural end
result of unadulterated reason.
Sean W. Malone|8.17.09 @ 5:32PM|#
And Rush Limbaugh, FWEW, was criticizing Bush on spending from
about 2003 on.
If you (Tony) think that you are included in being a good critic of
the left, you need to get your brain examined. You do nothing but
shill for the party and backtrack or ignore all the shit they do...
It's insanity at it's most hilarious.
The Angry Optimist|8.17.09 @ 5:32PM|#
that's not a premise, Troll, that's a conclusion.
I don't even know why I am letting myself get trolled here.
Sean W. Malone|8.17.09 @ 5:33PM|#
TAO - I'm sorry - if I am getting trolled by someone who isn't Tony, his positions are identical to those that I'd expect from the real Tony. So hard to tell sometimes.
|8.17.09 @ 5:35PM|#
Sean,
I didn't say liberals don't have a voice. I said they don't have a
propaganda machine at their disposal.
Did it ever cross your mind that most academics, entertainers, and
journalists are liberals because they're smart and smart people
tend to be liberals?
The Angry Optimist|8.17.09 @ 5:36PM|#
bwa ha ha. Alright, someone come out and take a bow for Tony, please.
|8.17.09 @ 5:36PM|#
Tony thinks anyone who isn't demanding 100% taxes Right Now is a
conservative, therefore Katie Couric qualifies.
Once we started giving 'intellectuals' power, they stopped being
intelligent and started attracting power hungry egomaniacs. As a
wise intellectual once said, power corrupts.
You want disinterested, objective intellectual pursuits? Then stop
tempting them with authority.
|8.17.09 @ 5:37PM|#
entertainers, and journalists are liberals because they're
smart and smart people tend to be liberals?
Academics? Maybe Journalists? You're pusing it. Entertainers are
smart? *snort*
|8.17.09 @ 5:37PM|#
I know an awfully large number of stupid liberals. I've noticed
no particular advantage in the brains department for either major
political stripe.
Cesar must reveal himself at the appropriate time.
Sean W. Malone|8.17.09 @ 5:39PM|#
"Did it ever cross your mind that most academics,
entertainers, and journalists are liberals because they're smart
and smart people tend to be liberals?"
HAHAHAHAHahahahahaha AHAHAHAHHAhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa HAHAHAH
LMFAO.... OMFG... OMG.... *stitches*.... oh fuck.... my
god....
Tony. Come let me introduce you to some of the few hundred
entertainers and media people I know. Though I suppose given your
level of intellect, I shouldn't be too surprised if their amazing
brain-power impresses you.
|8.17.09 @ 5:44PM|#
If you can't trust the intellectual heft of the guys who have us Dukes of Hazzard, The Movie, who can you trust?
The Angry Optimist|8.17.09 @ 5:44PM|#
fwiw, there is plenty of extrinsic evidence via google that poster "Tony" (aka Tony Quinn) is a real person - I am just not sure whether he's being sockpuppeted right now.
FYI|8.17.09 @ 5:46PM|#
"Dammit, TAO! You've ruined my plans. I was gonna go buy a
labcoat. For science and stuff."
Labcoats are germy:
http://www.mndaily.com/2009/08/11/first-year-medical-students-receive-lab-coats
Sean W. Malone|8.17.09 @ 5:50PM|#
It crossed my mind that most journalists are liberal because
they almost invariably care more about changing the world &
emotional sob-stories than truth. And now it seems they all just
want to be Woodward & Bernstein and take down a
Republican.
It crossed my mind that most academics are liberals because most of
them get their rocks off by dreaming up utopian worlds of centrally
planned perfection. If only the "right people" (read: the
academics) were in charge of everything, things would be great...
Because they iz smarter than you!
It crossed my mind that almost 100% of entertainers are liberal for
the exact same reasons as the journalists - AND because they are
almost all retarded. Making emotional appeals is what entertainers
do! It's what they're good at, and why they're
successful. The name of the game here is connecting with audiences
on subconscious, emotional levels - NOT on
intellectual ones. (This is also why they are much more influential
than talk radio hosts in what premises people accept).
Entertainment industry people, by and large, also are
literally among the most historically, scientifically, and
economically illiterate people I've ever had the pleasure of
spending most of my living time with.
These are people who quite often believe that a magic crystal from
Sedona is going to help their Aura be more "Green", Tony.
I seriously hope you are even a fraction as embarrassed as you
should be with that nonsense.
hmm|8.17.09 @ 5:50PM|#
There is absolutely no Democratic equivalent to the GOP
propaganda machine.
Every Union
ACORN
Center for American Progress
GE (every rent seeking subsidiary)
Soros and Sandler backed enterprises
Democracy Alliance
New Democrat Network
Economic Policy Institute
Media Matters for America
People For the American Way
EMILY's List
Progressive Majority
Campus Progress
America Votes (soros & sandler)
Brady Campaign
MoveOn
There's a fairly decent list of the larger movers of progressive
propaganda. Seems like a pretty decent machine to me. I didn't even
mention the print media.
I guess when you agree with them it isn't propaganda.
The Ghost of Nancy Reagan|8.17.09 @ 5:52PM|#
"I seriously hope you are even a fraction as embarrassed as you
should be with that nonsense."
Just say no to Tony.
Sean W. Malone|8.17.09 @ 5:53PM|#
I'm going to have to start saying no to Tony... but... Ech... C'mon.
The Ghost of Nancy Reagan|8.17.09 @ 5:54PM|#
"Soros"
Plundered the Jews homes as they were being gassed in the
camps.
|8.17.09 @ 5:59PM|#
hmm,
If you can't recognize classic propaganda when you see it then
you're probably a victim of it. That was a really weak response.
The mere fact of an organization that supports liberal causes
doesn't make it propaganda. None of those organizations has ever
told me what to think, and it is a defining feature of liberalism
that thought should be free. Propaganda isn't just any old
opinionmaking. It's a specific thing and some things fit the
definition and others don't. FOX is the closest thing this country
has to genuine propaganda.
MNG|8.17.09 @ 6:02PM|#
TAO, Sean
It seemed like you just try to side step counter-examples that
don't fit your scheme, like Franco's lack of corporatism. Funny
that Hitler and Mussolini had no problems finding commonality in
Franco's regime...
Most actual scholars of fascism seem to find the central feature to
be irrational/a-rational hyper-nationalism.
As you yourself note the fascists, in rhetoric and in practice,
noted they were not like the socialists/communists they so hated.
For one thing, they differed greatly over the concepts of class and
nationalism. Socialist/communist doctrine at the time was dominated
by Marx's idea that people were really defined by their class, and
that national differences were not only irrelevant but were leading
distractions. Mussolini, Hitler, etc., hated this idea, in their
idea the classes of a nation should realize their common
nationality and work towards making the nation greater.
Compared to libertarianism the various fascist parties were indeed
less free market oriented, but of course at that time free market
parties were very discredited (hell, Hayek himself makes this point
in Road to Serfdom). Every major party appealing to voters was
selling government control and interference in the economy; the
telling thing is that the fascists were to the "right" of the other
major faction (socialists/communists).
And I know what party
Sean W. Malone|8.17.09 @ 6:04PM|#
Tony, the fact that you don't recognize your own propaganda is insulting our collective intelligence here. The fact that the other day you told me that you didn't even know who George Soros was should have given you a clue.
MNG|8.17.09 @ 6:08PM|#
I know what party is more intoirrational nationalism is what I meant to say...
T|8.17.09 @ 6:08PM|#
If you can't recognize classic propaganda when you see it
then you're probably a victim of it.
Mote, eye, beam, etc.
MNG|8.17.09 @ 6:09PM|#
OK. Third time is the charm: I know what major US party is more into irrational nationalism today.
Sean W. Malone|8.17.09 @ 6:11PM|#
MNG, I've been too engrossed in Tony's idiocy to side-step
anything you've said.
The point as far as I'm concerned is that Fascism &
Soviet-style Socialism have vastly more in common with each other
than with either "right" or "left" moderates and nothing at all in
common with libertarianism or anarchism.
See this version
of a Nolan Chart I did a while back (and have been meaning to
edit/add to).
You have to realize that government owning all means of production
outright, and government controlling the means of production
through corporatism is a nearly identical proposition in the de
facto sense. And frankly, the nationalistic chunk of fascism isn't
particularly different than the nationalistic aspect of Russian
communism...
"Right" or "Left" is hardly a distinction when we're talking about
totalitarianism.
MNG|8.17.09 @ 6:12PM|#
hmmmm
We could name right and left contributors and interest groups all
day. I think Tony's point is that in things like Fox, Washington
Times, Conservative talk radio, National Review, etc., you have a
propaganda machine the left cannot match.
Geotpf|8.17.09 @ 6:12PM|#
Episiarch | August 17, 2009, 2:30pm | #
I can't believe some of you assdrizzlers ever believed that he was
something different than an "old-style tax and spend
Democrat".
I'm still waiting for the douchebags who voted (why would you
vote?!?) for Obama to say "whoops, we fucked up".
You didn't have to vote for McCain--just vote for Barr or just
don't vote (like me).
Not voting, or voting for anybody other than the two major party
candidates, is an excuse for everybody to ignore your
opinions.
Actually, the libertarians actually did something right in
2008-they attempted to make a move in the primaries, via Ron Paul.
Paul's complete and total failure in the primaries just proves that
libertarian philosophies are simply unpopular. You can't win
elections if only five percent-or less-of the population votes for
you.
Libertarians will NEVER have an acceptable
candidate for President. They must vote for the least unacceptable
candidate, or be excluded from the political process completely. In
2008, the least unacceptable was clearly Obama.
Sean W. Malone|8.17.09 @ 6:13PM|#
MNG - Sure, the (R)'s are more into irrational nationalism in the US... But the (D)'s are more into irrational corporatism. So for my money, it's a wash and the (R)'s irrational nationalism doesn't affect me all that much - and in either case, neither R or D's are that far off from each other in either the nationalistic or corporatist sense. The Patriot Act was voted for almost unanimously after all.
MNG|8.17.09 @ 6:14PM|#
Sean
There's a reason why the communists and fascists hated and fought
each other so bitterly. They realize their deep divisions. Class
conflict, the raison'detre of the commies, was opposed by the
fascists. The commies hated nationalism, the fascists adored
it.
To say "well, both agreed on government intereference in the market
so they are so similar" is like saying "they both agreed militaries
were good things, so they are so similar."
MNG|8.17.09 @ 6:20PM|#
I realize to some libertarians all coercion is the same, all
government interference is the same, etc., but why should any
non-libertarian turn a blind eye to the fact that the fascist
government interference was so different in rhetoric and action
from the communists, and for that matter the left in liberal
democracies of the time?
Notice how the fascists took brutal control over the unions that
were beginning to flex in Italy and Germany at the time, but FDR
empowered them. There are many other examples.
|8.17.09 @ 6:20PM|#
I just LOOOOOOOVE the Dem vs GOP screeds! Do you really want to
know the difference?
GOP pols erode your civil liberties and raise your taxes, and get
criticized for eroding civil liberties.
DEM pols erode your civil liberties and raise your taxes, and get
criticized for raising taxes.
That is all.
|8.17.09 @ 6:20PM|#
Sean W. Malone | August 17, 2009, 5:50pm | #
see:
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/scalliwag/200908/kiss-my-apa
tony, if you think bill oreily is a subsidiary of the R party,
you're as ignorant as all the rest of your blather implies.
he has probably given the most balanced coverage of prezbo around.
just cause he doesn't lick his boots? really?
and i think oreieley's a jackass populist douchebag
Sean W. Malone|8.17.09 @ 6:21PM|#
"I think Tony's point is that in things like Fox, Washington
Times, Conservative talk radio, National Review, etc., you have a
propaganda machine the left cannot match."
And Tony is retarded in thinking that.
The left has a MUCH more comprehensive propaganda machine, as well
as control of virtually the entirety of the education establishment
and the much more important control of all of the entertainment
media.
I've long made this case, but fundamentally - the entertainment
media is what actually affects people's opinions. See:
John Stewart as the most overt example... But also start to think
about the movies you watched as a kid - Fern Gully, perhaps. What
have you been told, what premises has the entertainment you've
watched over the years prompted you to accept without thinking that
effects your mind today? I'm betting a hell of a lot.
|8.17.09 @ 6:24PM|#
" but FDR empowered them. There are many other examples."
i wish they still had fdr stamps, i never got the opportunity to
spit on both sides of postage....
MNG|8.17.09 @ 6:24PM|#
Sean
I just don't think economic corporatism was the defining
characterstic of the historical fascist movement in Europe. Such
corporatism was engaged in by liberal democratic governments like
the US, Britian, etc., that were despised by the actual fascists,
while it was not embraced by regimes like Franco's that were
embraced as ideological siblings by the actual fascists.
I think a lot of this goes back to a misunderstanding of Hayek in
works like Road to Serfdom. In that book Hayek seemed to argue that
government control of the economy would inevitably result in the
kind of government power and totalitarianism that the hated
fascists (this was just after WWII); that's not quite the same
thing as saying this stuff was the "essence" of fascism.
|8.17.09 @ 6:26PM|#
@MNG | August 17, 2009, 6:14pm | #
Sean
There's a reason why the communists and fascists hated and fought
each other so bitterly.
Yes these was. The same reason that the two biggest, meanest
baboons in a group beat the fuck out of each other to determine who
is gonna be king shit.
When your goal is for the entire planet to be in your thrall and
subject to your twisted whims, a "this continent isn't big enough
for the two of us" mentality exists.
hmm|8.17.09 @ 6:28PM|#
If you can't recognize classic propaganda when you see it
then you're probably a victim of it. That was a really weak
response.
Today's lesson in irony.
Brought to you by the letter "T" as in Tony.
MNG|8.17.09 @ 6:29PM|#
"The left has a MUCH more comprehensive propaganda machine, as
well as control of virtually the entirety of the education
establishment and the much more important control of all of the
entertainment media."
The vast majority of the content of the entertainment media is
apolitical, not focused or disciplined, and hardly rooted in
helping the Democratic party specifically. The influence of the
education establishment is overrated, and a great deal of their
content is apolitical as well. The right wing propaganda machine,
on the other hand, is much more consciously engaging in the
business of trying to shape public opinion and government policy
along the lines of specific talking points aiming to aid a specific
political party.
hmm|8.17.09 @ 6:29PM|#
We could name right and left contributors and interest groups all
day. I think Tony's point is that in things like Fox, Washington
Times, Conservative talk radio, National Review, etc., you have a
propaganda machine the left cannot match.
I'm not the one claiming it's lopsided. So "doing it all day" just
proves my point. Thanks.
MNG|8.17.09 @ 6:31PM|#
Maybe they hated each other because their ideas were so diametrically opposed? This is of course why they said they hated each other. Why not take them on their word rather than engaging in unverifiable socio-psycho speculation?
hmm|8.17.09 @ 6:31PM|#
Towing the lion with the Fox bashing is great. I get a kick out
of the station that is slaughtering the other networks in cable,
local, syndication being the bad guy all the time.
It's clearly because of the propaganda.
MNG|8.17.09 @ 6:35PM|#
hmmm
I don't dispute the success of Fox. I simply maintain that its news
network is full of propaganda for the GOP. And yes, propaganda is
more popular with the right than it is with the left, so such
success is to be expected.
As to the entertainment, Fox, including its movie division, they
seem pretty apolitical to me.
|8.17.09 @ 6:35PM|#
hmm...
yeah cause greg gutfeld and andy levy are tools of the republicans
ya know...
|8.17.09 @ 6:37PM|#
The vast majority of the content of the
entertainment media is apolitical, not focused or disciplined, and
hardly rooted in helping the Democratic party specifically. The
influence of the education establishment is overrated, and a great
deal of their content is apolitical as well. The right wing
propaganda machine, on the other hand, is much more consciously
engaging in the business of trying to shape public opinion and
government policy along the lines of specific talking points aiming
to aid a specific political party.
I guess that would depend on the narrowness of your definition of
"political".
If by political you mean party-specific talking points, you might
have a point.
But if you are claiming that the entertainment industry, the media,
organized labor, the education system, et al ad nauseum (basically
anyone in the "opinion-making business") are not dominated by an
obvious ideology, you are either a dipstick or are intentionally
obtuse.
MattXIV|8.17.09 @ 6:38PM|#
Now which one I would find worse would be a function of which issues I felt most crucial. For example I've argued that criminal justice matters are the most important since the worst thing the government can do vis-a-vis the individual citizen is to deprive them of their life or liberty via direct force, and that the Dems are superior (read: less bad) when compared to the GOP.
The problem is that the magnitude of the difference on criminal
justice is very small in policy outcomes. There are handful of
Democrats that are consistently pro-reform, but when Democrats are
in charge they're about as effective in practice as the few
authentically budget-concious GOP members were during the Bush
administration. Some Democrats, like Biden, are worse than your
average Republican. I expect bad economic policy from them, but if
Democrats are useless on the stuff that I actually agree with
liberals on, then they've got nothing to offer me, just like a
fiscally irresponsible GOP.
|8.17.09 @ 6:41PM|#
MNG | August 17, 2009, 6:31pm | #
Maybe they hated each other because their ideas were so diametrically opposed? This is of course why they said they hated each other. Why not take them on their word rather than engaging in unverifiable socio-psycho speculation?
Why not take them at their word????? Ok, you got me. Do I have to
wear a dress tomorrow, or do you have other suitable punishment in
mind for allowing myself to be spoofed.
hmm|8.17.09 @ 6:41PM|#
The thing that never bothered me about Fox that I dislike about
the other networks is Murdoch will openly admit the news network
falls in line with his views. You get Griffin or Turner to admit
their bias and you might have a leg to stand on. The "conservatives
are stupid" so of course propaganda works on them line is nice.
Would have been more honest to just come out and say it. But that
might have made you look like elitist dipshit.
I love the argument that either side is more successful at
propaganda. Did you watch the last election? Do you listen to and
watch the current administration?
Like I said, it's only propaganda if you don't agree with it.
hmm|8.17.09 @ 6:45PM|#
The funny thing is MSNBC was excited about a 61% bump in
viewership, and they still didn't even touch the gap between them
and Fox. Their bump came with the Obama coverage. What do you want
to bet there is a decline in viewership in their future.
Lets not forget the rent seeking dipshitery of the parent company,
of course that couldn't have anything to do with the Obamafest that
is MSNBC. CNN is just a dinosaur trading gimmick upoin gimmick to
keep its head above water. (ya it's 3D Obama and McCain!!) What a
fucking joke.
Sean W. Malone|8.17.09 @ 6:47PM|#
"is much more consciously engaging in the business of trying
to shape public opinion"
Which is, frankly, why it's much worse propaganda.
It's interesting to me that many of the people around here don't
understand what actually influences people's opinions. It's not the
"in-your-face" stuff like Fox. It's the subtle stuff that people
grow up being told over and over and over.
You don't need direct message - in fact, I'd venture to say, a
direct message probably hurts your abilities as a propagandist.
What you need is an indirect message that is present in virtually
everything everyone ever sees or hears. A message like "government
is there to take care of you", for instance. It also doesn't
necessarily take a leader. We had this discussion on the District 9
thread - but when was the last time a businessman was a hero in a
movie? What's the ratio of businessmen being shown as the
villain::hero? At least 100:1 in the last 50 years, wouldn't you
agree?
The developer who might provide affordable housing for 200 people
is evil, the Jason Schwartzman emo guy who saves the cute blue
butterfly is the hero for all time.
How many times have we seen that play out?
So kids see that story in various re-tellings what... 5,000 times
or so by the time they're teenagers? And we wonder why there's so
much hatred of business, of free enterprise... And then Fox says
something different. And frankly, their message isn't even very
unified. Napolitano's show is directly at odds with most of the
rest of the content on that network. Glenn Beck & O'Reilly do
totally different things... Hannity has a different schtick. Sure,
most of it's retarded, but good propaganda, it is not.
Sean W. Malone|8.17.09 @ 6:55PM|#
Yes, well I should also stop using the term "propaganda".
By and large, the views expressed in any media are simply those
views that the creators happen to hold. The film industry isn't
like Pravda... The
"liberal"/socialist/progressive/statist-douchebag viewpoint just
happens to have an ubiquitous monopoly within the industry.
And also - what hmm said:
"The thing that never bothered me about Fox that I dislike about the other networks is Murdoch will openly admit the news network falls in line with his views. You get Griffin or Turner to admit their bias and you might have a leg to stand on."
Fox is pretty unabashed about their position on things. If MSNBC or
ABC came out and admitted their slavish devotion to Obama, that'd
be interesting.
|8.17.09 @ 7:00PM|#
gotta agree. media paints a picture of "the way life is" and it rarely diverges from the leftwing view.
The Angry Optimist|8.17.09 @ 7:02PM|#
MNG - not sidestepping anything. It just makes me laugh that the
main three of fascism and their subsequent corporatism (Italy,
Germany and Romania) aren't good enough for you: the marginal case,
Franco and Spain, is the one you have to hammer on to be
right.
Arguing about marginal cases is one thing. Using them to chip away
at something that is historically accepted fact (that economic
corporatism is a big part of fascism) is something else.
|8.17.09 @ 7:06PM|#
Bingo, Sean. The socialist/progressive/statist-douchebag strategy of miving in on education and children's entertainment predates the birth of anyone on this thread, I would wager.
|8.17.09 @ 7:13PM|#
"(that economic corporatism is a big part of fascism) is
something else."
isn't that exactly how mussolini defined it?
Sean W. Malone|8.17.09 @ 7:24PM|#
"Napolitano is the shit! is liberty watch broadcast or net
only?"
I have no clue, honestly - don't get cable or watch news on TV,
myself... If it was net-only, that would explain its criminal lack
of acceptable broadcasting standards.
Sean W. Malone|8.17.09 @ 7:28PM|#
From
Wiki
"Mussolini claimed that dynamic or heroic capitalism and the bourgeoisie could be prevented from degenerating into static capitalism and then supercapitalism if the concepts of economic individualism were abandoned and if state supervision of the economy was introduced.[4] Private enterprise would control production but it would be supervised by the state.[5] Italian Fascism presented the economic system of corporatism as the solution that would preserve private enterprise and property while allowing the state to intervene in the economy when private enterprise failed.[6"
And how is this different from what Tony advocates day in and day
out? Or what you often advocate, for that matter MNG?
Sean W. Malone|8.17.09 @ 7:33PM|#
More to the point, how's that any different from what 90% of our elected representatives advocate, most especially Obama?
The Angry Optimist|8.17.09 @ 7:42PM|#
isn't that exactly how mussolini defined it?
Apparently MNG wants us to take fascists at their word when it's
convenient for his argument.
|8.17.09 @ 7:42PM|#
"I have no clue, honestly - don't get cable or watch news on TV,
myself... If it was net-only, that would explain its criminal lack
of acceptable broadcasting standards."
like sound quality and production? i guess i'd have to
agree...
lew rockwell:
red state fascism:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/rockwell/red-state-fascism.html
headed to national socialism:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/rockwell/headed-to-national-socialism123.html
Rich|8.17.09 @ 9:30PM|#
Not voting, or voting for anybody other than the two major
party candidates, is an excuse for everybody some
to ignore your opinions.
FTFY. And if your vote counted, they wouldn't let you do it, nyah,
nyah.
|8.17.09 @ 9:32PM|#
aiming to aid a specific political party.
This is the definition I was going for. Real propaganda is always
in the service of a political party or totalitarian state. If
someone can point to the network of media outlets that defends the
Democratic party no matter how absurdly they have to twist facts
and contradict themselves, be my guest. It doesn't exist. And not
only is there a highly connected propaganda network in the service
of the GOP, most of its media are unprofitable--thus funded my
specific interests. Curious how the opinionmakers so in favor of
free markets have trouble paying for themselves without your
Reverend Moons and such.
Sean W. Malone|8.17.09 @ 10:46PM|#
Fox news is unprofitable now, Tony?
Man... Do you ever NOT just make shit up?
|8.17.09 @ 11:02PM|#
it is a defining feature of liberalism that thought should
be free.
Then the Democrats are not Liberals. Thanks for admitting that,
even though we all knew it already.
-jcr
|8.17.09 @ 11:43PM|#
If you are under the age of 50, and you were
socialized educated in a U.S. K-12 system, you should
know first-hand about an agenda in service to a totalitarian
state.
If you meet the above criteria, and do not understand the premise,
you were either high for the balance of your K-12 education, or
incapable of critical thought as a teen.
|8.18.09 @ 12:05AM|#
The people in this country most likely to claim the mantle "intellectual" are pseudo-intellectuals with a taste for power, not people actually pursuing knowledge. They've also by and large taken over the academies, purged those who think differently, and have contributed significantly to the current mess both directly (through direct advice to policy-makers and holding politically appointed positions) and indirectly (by molding current and future generations). Fuck'em and their pointy-heads.
The Libertarian Guy|8.18.09 @ 1:16AM|#
Some of us never were fans of Obama, so how could we have
drifted away from him?
For that matter, how many libertarians have "drifted away" from
John McCain?
MNG|8.18.09 @ 8:16AM|#
TAO
Romania is a bigger example of fascism than Franco?
See, you don't know wtf you're talking about.
Everyone was trying out government interference, the Commnunists,
the Fascists, the liberal democracies, people thought capitalism
had failed. The fascists thought corporatism to be a way to squelch
the very class conflict the Communists/socialists used as a
defining point.
Even were corporatism an integral part of fascism, which as I've
said Franco's example shows it was not (again, Hitler and Mussolini
sure recognized who their brethern were and were'nt), there were
other more integral parts, like hyper-nationalism. This was a
defining feature: it set them apart from and at odds with the
Communists and was shared by every example (Hitler, Franco,
Mussolini). That would make it more a defining feature rather than
an incident.
MNG|8.18.09 @ 8:24AM|#
"And how is this different from what Tony advocates day in and
day out? Or what you often advocate, for that matter MNG?"
First, let's acknowledge the crucial differences between
Mussolini's words you quote and socialism (in the latter there
would be no emphasis on retaining private ownership; no wonder the
owners preferred the fascists to the communists!). So
interestingly, the hook you use to try to equate fascism and
progressivism on is their common committment to property ultimately
being in private hands!
So how is it different than what I espouse? Well, in all the
important respects, that's what I have been trying to tell you. It
doesn't share the other aspects of fascism which I maintain are the
more defining ones, the ones we remember as being so morally
abhorrent: the militarism, the nationalism, the glorification of
conflict, the brutal suppression of dissent. Interestingly,
progressivism or liberalism, whatever, lacks these things. If any
party shares these aspects it is the GOP (but far short of anything
that deserves to be called "fascist", which is why I think calling
Bush one was so over the top).
|8.18.09 @ 9:08AM|#
To say the gop has more media, media-related organizations and machines on its side is lunacy, piffle.
Mike M.|8.18.09 @ 10:00AM|#
The people in this country most likely to claim the mantle
"intellectual" are pseudo-intellectuals with a taste for power, not
people actually pursuing knowledge.
I agree. Almost everything of true significance in America is run
by people who went to schools like Harvard and Yale, and if they
were truly that much smarter than everyone else like they think
they are, then everything in America wouldn't be f*cked up beyond
recognition the way that it is.
Sean W. Malone|8.18.09 @ 3:54PM|#
MNG, do you not understand what I meant by saying that
corporatism - the de facto control of the
means of production by the state in a fascist/corporatist society -
is nearly the same in net effect as the literal control of
the means of production by the state in a socialist society.
In either case, the state controls the means of production. The
only real difference is that in a fascist state, "private"
government-sanctioned monopolies/cartels are the prime
beneficiaries and of course they still maintain a bastardized form
of a price system (which helps them allocate resources much better
than a fully-socialist system) - and in a socialist state, the
government cronies who fleece the proletariat are actually
part of the government now.
At any rate, I think very few historians would agree with your
definition as mere jack-boot nationalism with no economic component
what-so-ever. It's also silly on it's face since jack-boot
nationalism describes a myriad of nations over the years, most of
which we wouldn't define as "fascist" at all. As I said earlier -
it describes Lenin/Stalinist Russia for godsake! If all you have is
authoritarian + nationalism, you have to include tons and tons of
people. China... Japan... Iran... North Korea.
As far as I can tell, virtually every dictatorial regime has a
massive nationalist component. Kind of how it works, isn't
it?
The fact that you bring up Franco to prove that fascism doesn't
also include corporatism is also kind of bizarre... For two
reasons: Franco's Spain is only on the border of what we consider
"fascism" to begin with (see below), and they DID employ
many of the same corporatist economic policies as Italy &
Germany...
Another bit from Wiki;
"Although Franco and Spain under his rule adopted some trappings of fascism, he, and Spain under his rule, are not generally considered to be fascist; among the distinctions, fascism entails a revolutionary aim to transform society, where Franco and Franco's Spain did not seek to do so, and, to the contrary, although authoritarian, were conservative and traditional.[2][3][4][5][6] Stanley Payne, the preeminent scholar on fascism and Spain notes: "scarcely any of the serious historians and analysts of Franco consider the generalissimo to be a core fascist."[5][7]"
Franco is generally the outlier here anyway and even still the
state completely controlled the economy in a corporatist fashion
until the late 50's when Franco finally conceded to adopt some
market-liberalization.
We're sort of debating two things here, though.
1. Fascism has to include more than just nationalism &
authoritarianism. To qualify, you also need to include corporatism
as part of your definition.
2. Corporatism/Fascism & Socialism are damn close to the same
thing in a real-world sense. They are two different routes of
accomplishing the same thing - complete control of the economy by a
centralized authority.
Walter
Block on this topic
And again... Since you continually advocate for more and more
central control (like our other "liberals" around here like Tony,
Chad, etc.), how do you not realize the direction you're pushing
for? Note that I'm not saying that you/liberals are "fascists"
(since again, you lack the brutality & nationalism), but the
economic position is the same.
Sean W. Malone|8.18.09 @ 4:03PM|#
"So interestingly, the hook you use to try to equate fascism
and progressivism on is their common committment to property
ultimately being in private hands!"
Just to be quite clear. No. You missed the point.
The "hook" to equate fascism/socialism & progressivism is your
commitment to CONTROLLING the economy via state
coercion.
So-called "private" or "public" ownership matters very little when
the state runs the show either way.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245