Reason.tv: Nick Gillespie on Freedom Watch With Judge Andrew Napolitano

Reason.tv's Nick Gillespie appeared on Fox News' Freedom Watch with Judge Andrew Napolitano on Wednesday, September 23 and discussed tea party protests, the death of conservativism, and the future of libertarian politics.

Approximately 10 minutes. Edited by Meredith Bragg.

Go here for embed code, downloadable versions, and more videos.

And go here for the official site of Freedom Watch, including archives of shows.

Comments

[FTG]

I love that show, but have not seen any uploads to youtube recently. Hopefully someone will upload this episode.

Does anybody know where else can one see the episodes of Freedom Watch from middle of August onwards?

[Flex Nasty B.I.G.]

Excellent show.

My opinion is that the libertarian movement is forward-looking, progressive, and futuristic - whereas the conservative movement is negative, reactionary, and culturally backward.

[FTG]

whereas the conservative movement is negative, reactionary, and culturally backward.

Unfortunately, after hearing Mark Levin's rant against the libertarians and his imperialism, I reluctantly agree with that.

[shrike]

Libertarians are the only true "conservative Republicans" left?

Now I know why this site has gone to shit.

Napolitano (anti-choice mom-killer) and Gillespie have somehow joined gonads and shat out a "Conservative Republican" hybrid mutant fully dependent on tacit Christo-authoritarianism.

[Slow Lurching Beast]

Racist.

[\"Conservative Republican\" hy]

shrike, I am your father.

[Tman]

I think that conservatives should remember that personal liberty is at the center of the foundation behind the philosophy, and if they want to get back to what made Goldwater and Reagan so successful, it would behoove them to emulate these tested principles.

"The individual is the wellspring of conservatism. The purpose of conservative politics is to defend the liberty of the individual and-lest individualism run riot-insist upon individual responsibility."- PJ O'Rourke

[Mari Dupont]

This was great, but what time does Freedom Watch air? Has it been condemned to the libertarian/stoner hours of 3-5 am like Red Eye?
Also, I detect a subtle bouffant of the hair for both Nick and the Hon. Judge...is this some low-budget product placement for one of Fox's hair gel advertisers?

[Chadwyck]

It's nice to see a talk show where people have more than 15 seconds to get across their point before they're interrupted.

[jordan 6 rings]

I agree, it definitely does teach a lesson about strength and perseverance. Very cool, thanks for sharing!

[M o n k e e]

A kind of soft-libertarianism is making something of resurgence in the UK

The Conservative Party is currently looking at close to a landslide victory in next springs election after spending years in the political wilderness. Its been carefully engineered by promoting maybe not libertarian values but certainly fiscal conservatism, social liberalism and the decentralization of government.

The leader of the Conservative Party Dave Cameron's only solid policy positions when he first became leader was the decriminalization of Ecstasy and LSD and an opposition to ID cards. He embraced environmentalism but with a hint of Neo-Georgism that suggested that income taxes should be decreased and put on polluters.

Its been joked that the Telegraph, which is the bastion of UK Conservatism, is currently running the country after it slowly revealed a list of MP's gratuitous expenses which turned the masses distinctly against the political classes.
Maybe coincidentally the Telegraph also has championed the Conservative MEP (and telegraph blogger) Daniel Hannan's plans for localism or government decentralization as the solution to the government corruption that they revealed. Hannan spouts a kind of rhetoric that equates libertarianism with historical British patriotism which is considered pretty influential on the party leadership.

what happens after the election will probably be far different from whats promised. The current mayor of London who is a Conservative politician, professed libertarian values prior to winning the position and they faded soon after the election. Feigning libertarianism is certainly a good political strategy in much of the anglophone world even if you have little intention of actually implementing it.

[Scott Rasmus]

The problem with "returning to our Goldwater roots" -- Goldwater never got elected president. The "roots" are all about a beautiful theory that's never been tested in the crucible of actual governing experience.

[phocion]

FTG, all the episodes are posted on http://freedomwatchonfox.com/

[Peter Russo]

But what HAS been tested, Scott, is varying degrees of increased government control. Though an anarcho-capitalist system has not been tried there is plenty of evidence that government fails on many more levels than it succeeds. So why persist in defending a system demonstrably false in both theory and in practice?

[Isaac Bartram]

M o n k e e | September 26, 2009, 7:23am | #
A kind of soft-libertarianism is making something of resurgence in the UK

I was thinking about that while pondering the significance of Merkel's Christian Democrats winning in Germany and their being able to dump the Social Democrats in favor of the Free Democrats.

Things across the pond seem to be trending in a slightly different direction than here in the USA.

We'll see if that's actually true come Nov, 2010.

[Tman]

Scott,

The Goldwater revolution is what set the stage for Reagan's ascension and the conservative take over of the Republican party. The "roots" aren't an untested theory, they are the fundamentals behind the constitution (limited government, personal liberty, due process). They most certainly have been tested, and the results are the United States, which despite its flaws is the most prosperous and powerful nation in the history of the world.

[Scott Rasmus]

Reagan and the Bushes presided over a massive expansion of the federal government. If you want to be honest about it, the dreaded Bill Clinton achieved more goals that once would have been characterized as "conservative". Please tell me what was conservative about the last eight years? (and yes, Napolitano, you couldn't imagine walking into TX six years ago with a serious critique of Bush/Cheney's post-9/11 power grab; that would have required courage. It's easy enough to disassociate yourself with a movement once the consensus has arrived that it was a disaster)... As for Goldwater, his change of heart regarding gay rights alone would have gotten his ass kicked out of the "conservative" movement of the present, which seems to be undergoing some kind of Stalinist purge. I'm afraid that as long as libertarians continue to go the expedient route and align themselves with the philosophy of 'run the f***ing country into the ground, just don't raise my taxes' their message is going to continue to be co-opted by the lunatic fringe of the right.

[Scott Rasmus]

As for anarcho-capitalism -- There was a time in our nation's history where corporations did whatever the hell they wanted; so we had child labor, hazardous shithole factories, an unsafe food supply and, of course, slavery. I guess that was somebody's golden age.

[Tman]

"Please tell me what was conservative about the last eight years?"

Who said anything about the last eight years? Are you paying attention to this post at all? It's about how the republicans have lost their way in terms of conservatism, and how they should emulate libertarian principles to get back to what made Goldwater and Reagan successful.

"I'm afraid that as long as libertarians continue to go the expedient route and align themselves with the philosophy of 'run the f***ing country into the ground, just don't raise my taxes' their message is going to continue to be co-opted by the lunatic fringe of the right."

The point of this whole thread was, as I mentioned above, a plea for conservatives to get republicans back to basics in terms of the principles of which a majority of Americans relate. "Run the f***ing country into the ground, just don't raise my taxes" is not one of those principles.

[Peter Russo]

If you think slavery is a function of laissez faire, your understanding of both is negligible. Governments perpetuated and maintained slavery for decades. Jim Crow itself is a product of southern Democrats. And get it straight, government, if not federal than local, has had a hand in commerce since well before our founding. We've never had free market capitalism in America. Period.

[Michael Ejercito]

As for anarcho-capitalism -- There was a time in our nation's history where corporations did whatever the hell they wanted; so we had child labor, hazardous shithole factories, an unsafe food supply and, of course, slavery.

Slavery was a government institution, enforced by the courts.

[Michael Ejercito]

As for anarcho-capitalism -- There was a time in our nation's history where corporations did whatever the hell they wanted; so we had child labor, hazardous shithole factories, an unsafe food supply and, of course, slavery.

Slavery was a government institution, enforced by the courts.