Reply With Quote
This is all over the place.
SCOTUS is libertarian now?
The Marriage of Libertarians and Racists
The modern Republican Party and its chic libertarians have dallied with white supremacists as a political necessity, because blacks and other minorities have rallied to the Democrats due to their better civil rights record. But the Right’s dancing with the racist devil is not new. It’s as old as the Founding.
In the U.S. news media, there is often a distinction made between the racist Right, which emerged from the struggle to maintain slavery and segregation, and the “small-government” Right, which supposedly represents a respectable conservatism focused on the libertarian ideals of personal freedom and free-market principles.
But the reality is that both of these major branches of the American Right grew from the same political trunk, i.e., the South’s fear that a strong federal government would intrude on the practices of slavery and, later, segregation. And, throughout U.S. history, those two branches of the Right have been mutually supportive.
Conservative pundit and publisher William F. Buckley Jr.
Thus, prominent leaders of the “libertarian” Right – the likes of William F. Buckley, Barry Goldwater, Ronald Reagan and Ron and Rand Paul – have opposed major legislative efforts to combat Southern segregation, typically citing the “liberty” of a white restaurant owner to bar black patrons as trumping the right of the patrons to be treated fairly.
Similarly, on Tuesday, the right-wing majority of the U.S. Supreme Court embraced the freedom of states and communities with a history of racial discrimination in voting to change their voting rules without having to get clearance from federal authorities as the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (and renewed in 2006) had required.
The right of these districts to set their own standards topped the power of Congress to require that the principle of one person, one vote be respected for black and brown people, according to the Court’s five right-wing justices. Thus, the libertarianism behind “small government” principles again supported the goal of white supremacy.
The reality of these two wings of the Right flapping together in coordination has existed since the Founding of the Republic when Southern opponents of the Cons ution’s proposed concentration of national power in the federal government argued that the shift away from state sovereignty – as contained in the Articles of Confederation – would inevitably doom slavery.
In the Virginia ratification convention of 1788, opponents of the Cons ution – Patrick Henry and George Mason – pressed the case that Virginia’s lucrative investment in slavery would be put at risk by a powerful central government that they claimed would eventually come under Northern dominance
http://consortiumnews.com/2013/06/27/the-marriage-of-libertarians-and-racists/
Remember Ron Paul? "My white supremacist/racist newsletters? I didn't write them"
This is all over the place.
SCOTUS is libertarian now?
Basically what this author believes is that it is racist not to want totalitarianism.
Rand Paul's White Supremacy Double Game
Paul's aide Jack Hunter says he’s leaving to protect his boss and clear his own name -- but there's plenty of reason not to buy it.
Jack Hunter, the Rand Paul social media staffer who wrote columns attacking Abraham Lincoln and defending Southern secession under the name “Southern Avenger,” tells the Daily Caller that he’s leaving the senator’s staff and returning to punditry to clear his name and avoid dimming Paul’s rising star. Even though Paul defended Hunter when the Washington Free Beacon broke the news of his long career of neo-Confederate race-baiting, Hunter says he must leave the senator’s payroll “to avenge his own honor,” the right-wing site reports.
“I’ve long been a conservative, and years ago, a much more politically incorrect (and campy) one,” Hunter told W. James Antle III of the Daily Caller News Foundation in an email (Antle identifies Hunter as a friend). “But there’s a significant difference between being politically incorrect and racist. I’ve also become far more libertarian over the years, a philosophy that encourages a more tolerant worldview, through the lens of which I now look back on some of my older comments with embarrassment.”
News of Hunter’s resignation broke just as the Washington Free Beacon was publishing more samples of his racist commentary, from a CD he once sold on his own website, “Southern Avenger Smash Tracks: 20 Essentials, Vol. 1.” In one, Hunter compares Lincoln to Adolf Hitler and the South’s Civil War defeat to the Holocaust. “The sadistic policies and tactics of Abraham Lincoln destroyed the America of the Founding Fathers,” Hunter declared in one track. “And as I gaze at the picture on my wall of my great grandfather, who fought bravely against that sick bearded bas , I still dream of what could have been — our glorious Confederate States of America….The reason we Southerners remember the war is because it does matter — just like slavery, just like the Holocaust.” In another track he says whites deserve a “long overdue” thank you from African Americans for ending slavery. “If it weren’t for white people, who knows how long slavery would have lasted?” he asked. “The very fact that slavery still exists today in African countries like Ghana and Sudan really makes one wonder.”
Lucky Rand Paul gets to have it both ways: He stood up to those Northern aggressors and refused to fire Hunter, but he will carry less of Hunter’s baggage into the 2016 GOP presidential primary than if his neo-Confederate staffer fought on.
http://www.alternet.org/tea-party-an...cy-double-game
Rand Paul
His base, like his father's ("my racist newsletters weren't written by me and I didn't read them"
Pretty much, tbh.... Boutons clearly thinks so, too....
basically, you're wrong
Without the northern central govt, with a superior industrial base delivered by railroads and telegraph vs the South's farmers, the South would still have slavery, and the USA would not exist.
I know this will blow your mind, but the civil war wasn't fought over slavery.
You Lie
Can someone clarify the part in bold for me. I admit my knowledge of U.S. history isn't that great, but wasn't there a big chunk of the North/Union that was Republican that actuated the Reconstruction and was mainly just anti-big government (lose term i know) in regard to business? To me, it seems disingenuous to say that all current Republicans came from what the writer is saying it came from.The Marriage of Libertarians and Racists
The modern Republican Party and its chic libertarians have dallied with white supremacists as a political necessity, because blacks and other minorities have rallied to the Democrats due to their better civil rights record. But the Right’s dancing with the racist devil is not new. It’s as old as the Founding.
In the U.S. news media, there is often a distinction made between the racist Right, which emerged from the struggle to maintain slavery and segregation, and the “small-government” Right, which supposedly represents a respectable conservatism focused on the libertarian ideals of personal freedom and free-market principles.
But the reality is that both of these major branches of the American Right grew from the same political trunk, i.e., the South’s fear that a strong federal government would intrude on the practices of slavery and, later, segregation. And, throughout U.S. history, those two branches of the Right have been mutually supportive.
Thus, prominent leaders of the “libertarian” Right – the likes of William F. Buckley, Barry Goldwater, Ronald Reagan and Ron and Rand Paul – have opposed major legislative efforts to combat Southern segregation, typically citing the “liberty” of a white restaurant owner to bar black patrons as trumping the right of the patrons to be treated fairly.
Similarly, on Tuesday, the right-wing majority of the U.S. Supreme Court embraced the freedom of states and communities with a history of racial discrimination in voting to change their voting rules without having to get clearance from federal authorities as the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (and renewed in 2006) had required.
The right of these districts to set their own standards topped the power of Congress to require that the principle of one person, one vote be respected for black and brown people, according to the Court’s five right-wing justices. Thus, the libertarianism behind “small government” principles again supported the goal of white supremacy.
The reality of these two wings of the Right flapping together in coordination has existed since the Founding of the Republic when Southern opponents of the Cons ution’s proposed concentration of national power in the federal government argued that the shift away from state sovereignty – as contained in the Articles of Confederation – would inevitably doom slavery.
In the Virginia ratification convention of 1788, opponents of the Cons ution – Patrick Henry and George Mason – pressed the case that Virginia’s lucrative investment in slavery would be put at risk by a powerful central government that they claimed would eventually come under Northern dominance
http://consortiumnews.com/2013/06/27/the-marriage-of-libertarians-and-racists/
Remember Ron Paul? "My white supremacist/racist newsletters? I didn't write them"
Why I Fled Libertarianism — and Became a Liberal
I was a Ron Paul delegate back in 2008 -- now I'm a Democrat. Here's my personal tale of disgust and self-discovery.
The night before the 2008 Nevada Republican convention, the Ron Paul delegates all met at a Reno high school. Although I’d called myself a libertarian for almost my entire adult life, it was my first exposure to the wider movement.
And boy, was it a circus. Many members of the group were obsessed with the gold standard, the Kennedy assassination and the Fed. Although Libertarians believe government is incompetent, many of them subscribe to the most fringe conspiracy theories imaginable. Airplanes are poisoning America with chemicals (chemtrails) or the moon landings were faked. Nothing was too far out. A great many of them really think that 9-11 was an inside job. Even while basking in the electoral mainstream, the movement was overflowing with obvious hokum.
During the meeting, a Ron Paul staffer, a smart and charismatic young woman, gave a tip to the group for the upcoming convention.
“Dress normal,” she said. “Wear suits, and don’t bring signs or flags. Don’t talk about conspiracy theories. Just fit in.” Her advice was the kind you might hear given to an insane uncle at Thanksgiving.
“Bring in the clowns,” she said, and smiled before I lost her in the mass of people.
I will never forget that moment: Bring in the clowns. At the time, I considered myself a thoughtful person, yet I could hardly claim to be one if you judged me by the company I kept. The young lady knew something I had not yet learned: most of our supporters were totally ing nuts.
but a few good ideas don’t make up for some spectacularly bad ones. Their saving grace is a complete lack of organizational ability, which is why they are always trying to take over the Republican Party, rather than create a party of their own.
The Ron Paul delegates were able to take over the Nevada convention in 2008, howling, screeching and grinding it to a painful halt. I was part of the mob, and once we took over, we were unable to get anything done. The national delegates were appointed in secret later.
From the ashes of the election rose the movement that pushed me from convinced libertarian into bunny-hugging liberal. The Tea Party monster forever tainted the words freedom and libertarian for me. The rise of the Tea Party made me want to puke, and my nausea is now a chronic condition.
My libertarian friends might call me a ing commie (they have) or a pussy, but extreme selfishness is just so isolating and cruel. Libertarianism is unnatural, and the size of the federal government is almost irrelevant. The real question is: what does society need and how do we pay for it?
A month before the 2012 election, I changed my party affiliation to Democrat. I am a very late bloomer, that it took me so many decades to develop my own values. I was thirty-nine.
I don’t think regular Americans have any idea just how crazy libertarians can be. The only human corollary I can offer is unquestioning religious fervor, and yeah, I used to be a true believer. Libertarians think they own the word “freedom,” but it’s a word that often obfuscates more than enlightens. If you believe the Johann Wolfgang von Goethe quote “None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free,” then libertarians live in a prison of their own ideology.
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/show...ht=libertarian
Lol. If he became a liberal he obviously was never a libertarian in the first place. Just someone who wanted to legalize drugs.
You know him better than he mis-knows himself, right?
Libertarians are ing frauds, fringe nut cases, who think their one or two good ideas offset all their weird, ideological fantasies that would be disasters if every put into practice.
It is true that libertarianism in a multicultural society would be a disaster. Singapore is probably the best example of a multicultural nation and you can't even chew gum in public. If you tried to run places like New York in a libertarian way it would be a blood bath, which is why there are fears that ending stop and frisk will send NY back to the 70s. Everyone, even if it's deep down, instinctively knows this. Just look at how Hispanics are ethnically cleansing blacks from neighborhoods in LA; libertarianism there would be a war zone, more so. But the multicult is the current state religion, so it must not be challenged.
So as long as everyone thinks the same, it's ok to do whatever they want, but if people think differently, there has to be someone telling them what to do. Yeah i don't think you're grasping the whole concept of freedom.
Unfortunately I do. That's the only way freedom can exist without it descending into violence.
What I believe is that you are poor at finding key words and ideas in an article. They hammer that stuff home in 7th grade in Texas.
I will help:
"the “small-government” Right, which supposedly represents a respectable conservatism"
"small govt" is a dog whistle for "weaken the govt EVEN MORE so the VRWC/UCA/1% can rape & pillage the people, their wealth, the environment with EVEN MORE impunity", is why Kock Bros finance and wanted to buy Cato, to be their very own equivalent of Fox propaganda spewer.
A small federal government that allows local government to make the vast majority of laws will result in segregation everywhere; people already segregate themselves on their own.
It's not news that whites in the south generally like to live amongst themselves. So do blacks. And Hispanics. And Asians.
sure, birds of a feather, and that's FREE choice, not legal, enforced segregation.
But PUBLIC spaces and services are not to be segregated. Libertarian hero, flag waver Rand Paul said he's for businesses to be FREE to deny serving anyone for any reason, and of course his father put out a bunch of racist newsletters.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
