Comments on: Left and Right Making Common Cause Against CFR??? http://www.ryansager.com/blog/index.php/2005/04/21/left-and-right-making-common-cause-against-cfr/ What's your M.O.? Fri, 18 May 2012 15:38:23 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.4 by: Seerak http://www.ryansager.com/blog/index.php/2005/04/21/left-and-right-making-common-cause-against-cfr/#comment-545 Tue, 14 Jun 2005 03:23:22 +0000 http://www.ryansager.com/blog/index.php/2005/04/21/left-and-right-making-common-cause-against-cfr/#comment-545 Sorry for the heavily delayed response Stehpinkeln, but someone emailed me about my comment here and linked back, and since that email is connected to what is currently my "vanity" blog (i.e. one I'm not actively promoting), I didn't get it until now. The primary piece of evidence supporting my position is that while Republicans talk the small-government talk, few (if any) walk the walk, and it's for a very good reason; cutting any government program (and here "cutting" means reducing or eliminating, not merely throttling or cutting the rate of growth of its funding) will instantly result in screams of "heartlessness", images of the people "hurt" by the cuts splashed all over the place by media, and other attacks wielding the one ideological weapon that is so powerful only Objectivists are proof against it: the altruist morality. The self-sacrifice ethic which unites Christianity and the Left still dominates the Republican Party, even if card-carrying Christians don't. So never mind what they *say*; look at what they do. The term "libertarian" as I used it was loosely meant to designate those who, despite their conservatism, show a heavy Ayn Rand-like emphasis on individual rights and capitalism (examples being Thomas Sowell and Walter Williams) The tension in the Republican Party is ultimately between this "selfish" ideology and the self-sacrifice ethic that unites Christians and the Left. That tension does not exist amongst the Democrats; over there, they are all supporters of the sacrifice of individuals to the common good. If there are Ayn Rand-alikes amongst the Democrats, I'd like to know who they are. Sorry for the heavily delayed response Stehpinkeln, but someone emailed me about my comment here and linked back, and since that email is connected to what is currently my “vanity” blog (i.e. one I’m not actively promoting), I didn’t get it until now.

The primary piece of evidence supporting my position is that while Republicans talk the small-government talk, few (if any) walk the walk, and it’s for a very good reason; cutting any government program (and here “cutting” means reducing or eliminating, not merely throttling or cutting the rate of growth of its funding) will instantly result in screams of “heartlessness”, images of the people “hurt” by the cuts splashed all over the place by media, and other attacks wielding the one ideological weapon that is so powerful only Objectivists are proof against it: the altruist morality.

The self-sacrifice ethic which unites Christianity and the Left still dominates the Republican Party, even if card-carrying Christians don’t. So never mind what they *say*; look at what they do.

The term “libertarian” as I used it was loosely meant to designate those who, despite their conservatism, show a heavy Ayn Rand-like emphasis on individual rights and capitalism (examples being Thomas Sowell and Walter Williams) The tension in the Republican Party is ultimately between this “selfish” ideology and the self-sacrifice ethic that unites Christians and the Left.

That tension does not exist amongst the Democrats; over there, they are all supporters of the sacrifice of individuals to the common good. If there are Ayn Rand-alikes amongst the Democrats, I’d like to know who they are.

]]> by: Stehpinkeln http://www.ryansager.com/blog/index.php/2005/04/21/left-and-right-making-common-cause-against-cfr/#comment-544 Sat, 23 Apr 2005 14:14:45 +0000 http://www.ryansager.com/blog/index.php/2005/04/21/left-and-right-making-common-cause-against-cfr/#comment-544 Seerak, your mistake is in overestimating just how much influence the Religous right has in the Republican party. That is understandable, since the Religous right makes the same mistake. No, the major issue in the Republican party is along the lines of government size and it's handmaiden, Taxes. President Bush made a strategic error is chosing to deal with Social Security before Taxes. As the Demonrats become more socialist, their power base will shrink. Main Entry: lib·er·tar·i·an Pronunciation: "li-b&r-'ter-E-&n Function: noun 1 : an advocate of the doctrine of free will 2 a : a person who upholds the principles of absolute and unrestricted liberty especially of thought and action b capitalized : a member of a political party advocating libertarian principles I'm not sure just what you mean by libertarian, so I posted the Merriam-Webster definition. I haven't seen any libertarians that were willing to be pinned down on just what they mean. Maybe they don't know. Seerak, your mistake is in overestimating just how much influence the Religous right has in the Republican party. That is understandable, since the Religous right makes the same mistake. No, the major issue in the Republican party is along the lines of government size and it’s handmaiden, Taxes. President Bush made a strategic error is chosing to deal with Social Security before Taxes.
As the Demonrats become more socialist, their power base will shrink.
Main Entry: lib·er·tar·i·an
Pronunciation: “li-b&r-’ter-E-&n
Function: noun
1 : an advocate of the doctrine of free will
2 a : a person who upholds the principles of absolute and unrestricted liberty especially of thought and action b capitalized : a member of a political party advocating libertarian principles

I’m not sure just what you mean by libertarian, so I posted the Merriam-Webster definition. I haven’t seen any libertarians that were willing to be pinned down on just what they mean. Maybe they don’t know.

]]> by: Seerak http://www.ryansager.com/blog/index.php/2005/04/21/left-and-right-making-common-cause-against-cfr/#comment-543 Sat, 23 Apr 2005 06:12:10 +0000 http://www.ryansager.com/blog/index.php/2005/04/21/left-and-right-making-common-cause-against-cfr/#comment-543 Stehpinkeln: While you are right that a major party is in danger of splitting apart, with one of the resulting fragments being libertain-ish types, it is not the Democrats. The socialist Left won that battle a long time ago; the Democrats are fast becoming monolithically (and soon, openly) socialist. Real "libs" of either stripe haven't been in control there since the sixties. It is the Republicans who are in danger of splitting, because of the tension between the free-market, relatively secular libertarian wing, and the theocratic wing. Merely being anti-socialist is not enough to keep them together, especially when the kinships between socialism and theocracy are realized. Lastly, if such a split occurred, it would be a good thing -- because it would force a political realignment much more akin to the real political alternative of freedom vs. tyranny. As both theocracy and socialism are species of the latter, that would truly be superior to having merely two inverted checkerboards to choose from. Stehpinkeln:

While you are right that a major party is in danger of splitting apart, with one of the resulting fragments being libertain-ish types, it is not the Democrats. The socialist Left won that battle a long time ago; the Democrats are fast becoming monolithically (and soon, openly) socialist. Real “libs” of either stripe haven’t been in control there since the sixties.

It is the Republicans who are in danger of splitting, because of the tension between the free-market, relatively secular libertarian wing, and the theocratic wing. Merely being anti-socialist is not enough to keep them together, especially when the kinships between socialism and theocracy are realized.

Lastly, if such a split occurred, it would be a good thing — because it would force a political realignment much more akin to the real political alternative of freedom vs. tyranny. As both theocracy and socialism are species of the latter, that would truly be superior to having merely two inverted checkerboards to choose from.

]]> by: Stehpinkeln http://www.ryansager.com/blog/index.php/2005/04/21/left-and-right-making-common-cause-against-cfr/#comment-542 Sat, 23 Apr 2005 01:47:41 +0000 http://www.ryansager.com/blog/index.php/2005/04/21/left-and-right-making-common-cause-against-cfr/#comment-542 So the left changed the rules and still got their ass beat! Poor Liberals, when will they figure out it's the message, not the messenger? Socialism is a failure, capitalism acomplishs what socialists dream about. If the Democrats want to reverse their decline, they will have to change their message. That means trashing 50 years of doctrine. If they don't, the party will fracture. It will split into Libertarians and Greens. That would be a bad thing, since American government needs a Loyal opposition to fuction properly. The Democratic party has been taken to the woodshed the last 3 elections. Without some serious change they will get spanked again in '06 and '08. So the left changed the rules and still got their ass beat! Poor Liberals, when will they figure out it’s the message, not the messenger? Socialism is a failure, capitalism acomplishs what socialists dream about. If the Democrats want to reverse their decline, they will have to change their message. That means trashing 50 years of doctrine. If they don’t, the party will fracture. It will split into Libertarians and Greens. That would be a bad thing, since American government needs a Loyal opposition to fuction properly. The Democratic party has been taken to the woodshed the last 3 elections. Without some serious change they will get spanked again in ‘06 and ‘08.

]]> by: dick http://www.ryansager.com/blog/index.php/2005/04/21/left-and-right-making-common-cause-against-cfr/#comment-541 Fri, 22 Apr 2005 02:57:35 +0000 http://www.ryansager.com/blog/index.php/2005/04/21/left-and-right-making-common-cause-against-cfr/#comment-541 Amazing how now they see it as being against "progressive" groups. "Progressive" groups supported by Soros and Lewis and the Hollywood contingent are the ones who used the McCain Feingold facilities to bypass what would not have been permitted in the past. Now they want to call this a "free speech" issue. It was then but the "progressives" would never admit it. Funny how having your own ox gored grabs the attention of the LLL contingent. Amazing how now they see it as being against “progressive” groups. “Progressive” groups supported by Soros and Lewis and the Hollywood contingent are the ones who used the McCain Feingold facilities to bypass what would not have been permitted in the past. Now they want to call this a “free speech” issue. It was then but the “progressives” would never admit it. Funny how having your own ox gored grabs the attention of the LLL contingent.

]]> by: Mark Tinder http://www.ryansager.com/blog/index.php/2005/04/21/left-and-right-making-common-cause-against-cfr/#comment-540 Thu, 21 Apr 2005 20:45:02 +0000 http://www.ryansager.com/blog/index.php/2005/04/21/left-and-right-making-common-cause-against-cfr/#comment-540 Good to see that the Left is finally seeing the light on this so-called reform! In reality, McCain-Feingold was (and is) nothing less than an all-out assault on the Constitution, designed to insulate incumbents from messy criticism (you know, democracy). As should be abundantly clear by now, the right to speak out against our government should not be considered a "liberal vs. conservative" issue; it should be properly addressed as what it is-a free-speech issue. Good to see that the Left is finally seeing the light on this so-called reform! In reality, McCain-Feingold was (and is) nothing less than an all-out assault on the Constitution, designed to insulate incumbents from messy criticism (you know, democracy). As should be abundantly clear by now, the right to speak out against our government should not be considered a “liberal vs. conservative” issue; it should be properly addressed as what it is-a free-speech issue.

]]>