Lost Political Ideals

“Found this great flash presentation that shows how we have surrendered so much to so many and lost a great deal of what made our country so great. If we lose just a little here and a little there we don’t miss it so much but when we stand back and look at what we could have and what we do have we see that we have been robbed of our freedoms. It’s got nice music too.

http://www.isil.org/resources/introduction.swf”

“and its all your fault”

“Well, you’ve got one taker, Nigal.

I started laughing a short ways into the program. It just hit my funny bone. I find myself talking about obvious stuff sometimes and it’s funny to see the different looks on the faces of some folks. We should find a way to play that for the schoolchildren of the Hollywood elite. OMG, I can hear the howls of protest now! I’ve never understood how leftists can ignore these basic philosophical truths, but the dark side is strong in them.


One thing about the show: They talk about Adam Smith’s revelation, but the hand that kept showing up wasn’t invisible.

Another thing: If we have no right to ask others to initiate force on our behalf, there’s gonna be a whole bunch of lawyers on the bread line.


Libertarianism, it isn’t just for breakfast anymore.




Regarding the nationalization of industry or private property: "Of what importance is all that, if I range men firmly within a discipline they cannot escape? Let them own land or factories as much as they please. The decisive factor is that the State, through the Party, is supreme over them regardless of whether they are owners or workers. All that is unessential; our socialism goes far deeper. It establishes a relationship of the individual to the State, the national community. Why need we trouble to socialize banks and factories? We socialize human beings."

Adolf Hitler to Herman Rauschning, pre-WWII [2] "Why Does Socialism Continue to Appeal to Anyone?", Robert Hessen




“The advancement and diffusion of knowledge is the only guardian of true liberty.”

James Madison




“I have no respect for the passion for equality, which seems to me merely idealizing envy.”

Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr




“Complete equality isn't compatible with democracy, but it is a agreeable to tolitarianism. After all the only way to ensure the equality of the slothful, the inept and the immoral is to suppress everyone else.”

Iain Benson




“As I would not be a slave, so I would not be a master. This expresses my idea of democracy.“

Abraham Lincoln (1809-1865)




Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!

Benjamin Franklin




“The more developed a nation is, the more complete is the independence of the individual, and the safer the individual from encroachments by another.”

Dmitry Pisarev




“Perhaps the fact that we have seen millions voting themselves into complete dependence on a tyrant has made our generation understand that to choose one's government is not necessarily to secure freedom.”

F.A. Hayek




“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be lead to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.”

H.L. Mencken (1880-1956)




“Individual rights are not subject to a public vote; a majority has no right to vote away the rights of a minority; the political function of rights is precisely to protect minorities from oppression by majorities (and the smallest minority on earth is the individual.”

Ayn Rand




“The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.”

Thomas Jefferson




"Americans who still remember their authentic tradition are known as 'libertarians', and the media treat them as an odd splinter group. But it's worth noting that the Libertarian Party was the only party that rallied to the Indians' defense in Arizona. The Libertarians don't have much money, and they may not get even a million votes this fall, but they have a near monopoly of political principle. ... If America can still produce a few such people, all is not lost. Maybe we should give libertarians a reservation of their own, where they could live under the U.S. Constitution. It should be an option for consenting adults.

Joseph Sobran, 1992”

“Good flash, we must remember that in society we exchange some of our liberty and property in exchange for allowing the Government to mediate disagreements. However each of the items listed in the Flash are useless unless people take RESPONSIBILITY for their own actions.
This means if I smoke I do not agree with theft from another to support my future consequences.

many times we must remember that those who refuse to bear any responsibility (the VICTIMS in LIFE) must understand the STBY theory.”

“I believe that we have been so enabled by the powers that be that we think if we take anything away from people such as free welfare they will simply go without and sit in the gutter and weep and wail. This is not true and it is insulting. When Clinton made the welfare reform effective a lot of people lost their benies. But ya know? They went to work! [GASP!] The reform worked.

Those above us always underestimate our abilities to look after ourselves and prosper if left alone. They also underestimate our kindness and generosity.”

“Actually Nigal, hate to burst your bubble, but a lot of them found the loopholes to stay on the Free Money Ride. Granted a percentage did get off...but the Republicrats have found ways to help maintain the Government Sponsored Slavery.”

“You do know that that is a Libertarian promo tape, right? Its basically saying we are all on our own in defense of our property.”

““You do know that that is a Libertarian promo tape, right? Its basically saying we are all on our own in defense of our property.”

Yes I know who put it out. I checked their main pages before posting it because I am concerned with source material and where it comes from. The truth is it doesn’t matter where it comes from. It’s neither right nor left. It’s an explanation of liberty and freedom and how we must change our thinking and talk about it or we stand to continue to lose more freedoms and liberties.

It is not advocating doing away with police, the law, or the army. It is not about anarchy. It is about protecting the freedoms the constitution grants us as well as the responsibilities that come with it. Here is a good article I found on the home page about self defense of our life and property:

The Sanity of Self Defense”

“Actually it says we can work with others to defend our property. Often that means we must "give" some of our liberty to the government for that protection. A couple of years ago I wrote a piece related to Anarchisim and WHO MAKES THE DECISIONS.


This was in response to a Supreme Court Decision.
Pure Libertarianism is like pure Communism, a perfect form of government until you put human beings into the mix. To say that we should all be able to do what we want as long as no one is harmed is a great philosophy as long as you eliminate the necessary interrelation of human beings. Human beings are, in essence, group members. We cannot live in a vacuum any more than we can live in a purely commune style of environment (which if I understand required total sublimation of the individual to the good of the community). We enter these interactions with other human beings as a composite of our past history, morals, and experiences. Each is different and for each of us there is a resultant different opinion of terms, ideas and policies.

This requires us to identify the definition of “harm”. Does harm mean physical harm, i.e. I cannot physically injure another person. Or does harm include the overall effect on society at large. Does harm also include the potential for my actions incurring injury to another? Human intimacy is an extremely involved and complex issue. How many examples can you remember of a young man becoming involved with a young lady, and the resultant crisis that erupts when the relationship ends? While there was never an intention of the young lady to injure the young man (granted I dated a few women who did it for revenge or so I thought) but “harm” did occur.

In all interrelationships there will be conflicting opinions and different ideas of what “is happening”. It is therefore logical to conclude that there will be different opinions as to what “harm” has occurred. If you sell me a product, and we barter for a price it is all well and good unless I think your price is too high and you think my offer of purchase is too low. Regardless of the reality there may be a loser in this relationship and that person will rightly (in their own mind) assume they have been wronged. After a wrong has occurred, who is to determine the proper “reparations” for the wrong? While you may feel that simply repaying me the money for the difference in the cost is acceptable. I and my friends may feel that the “wrong” should result in more serious repercussions (reference lynch mobs in the “old west”).

It is therefore incumbent that when humans congregate in a society that the society establish the yardstick of the term “fair” or “correct”. This allows for peaceful coexistence in society. And in the establishment of these rules, society must decide not only what is “wrong” in the present, but what may cause “harm” in the future. We prohibit adults from becoming involved in intimate relationships with “children” not because the children would be harmed, immediately (in fact some of the 15 year olds I know are more knowledgeable of those activities than I care to imagine), but because the serious nature of intimate relationships; the maturity required as it were, may result in damage to the children over the long term.

Governments or representatives of society at large do legislate morality. The results of the “government cannot legislate morality” theory would allow us to freely associate with whom we wanted, discriminate against whom we wish ad infinitum. I could easily argue that if I own a business I should be able to hire, promote and terminate who I wish. Unfortunately if I own a giant business (not publicly owned but owned in total by ME) the result of my discrimination, while not immediately “harming” to an individual, may create long term damage. If in a community my business provides the only service available, say a small hospital in a rural community, my refusal to admit a patient could indirectly result in the patient being harmed. I may see it as, hey I didn’t DO anything to him I just refuse to allow him into my facility. But the long term result is that the patient cannot access medical care and either becomes permanently incapacitated or dies.

This decision to allow a society, in this case the State of Texas to decide what is “immoral” allows the citizens in a particular area to decide what restrictions they are willing to live by. If two individuals do not wish to live by those restrictions they have the freedom to move, or work to change the law. Allowing five or six people, who in all likelihood know very little of the society in that state, to decide what they should or should not value means that you are placing the unelected unaccountable over the elected representatives of the people.”

“I agree that it is neither left or right. As I watched it I couldn't decide whose ox they were trying to gore. It could have gone either way. So its easy to see that both sides of the political spectrum are both trying to fight for liberty, but they have a different idea on what liberty means. That was my problem with that Flash. It spells out the vision of what our personal right is, but it ignores the idea that a group can decide what is right for that group in the form of a constitution.

(edit) oh yeah, I didn't like how it paced for the slowest of readers. I starting to get offended by the way they were insinuating that I was too ignorant to read 3 words faster than 30 seconds. I think I may sue those bastages.
last edited: 8/11/06 8:54:50 AM”

“I think we should sue AlGORE...since he created the Internet, and thus sprang the insult.”

“The democrats and republicans are both wrong and equally so in my mind. The democrats hold z, y, and z to be the most important rights but trounce all over a, b, and c. The republicans think a, b, and c are the most important rights but want x, y, and z to be illegal.

The Libertarian movement is a lot less concerned with the needs and wants of the government. Take the defeat of Joe Leiberman this week. Everyone was aghast that an incumbent got stomped. Why? The retention rate of incumbents is like 97% or something. These fukcers will do anything to stay in power. They want to make as many laws as they can to show how much they’ve been doing in Washington and why we need them so bad.

Ya know what I wanna see? I want to see a news letter in my mailbox from my Senator that says this:

Dear Constituencies,

Well, not much going on here. I was just sitting around the office and thought I’d drop everyone a note saying ‘Hi!’ and to let you know nothing is going on here that would threaten your rights. Soooooo…I guess I’ll just hang out and wait around fror something to happen.

Respectfully,
Senator Joe Blow”

“That was a great peice you wrote Dan. I agree that Libertarian politics can't be taken to the extremes. There is a happy middle where we will maximize happiness with freedom and safety.”

“Put libertarians in power in washington and in less than 20 years other than the rhetoric and the sign on the door you wouldn't be able to tell them from republicans and democrats. Its the nature of our political system.”

“The democrats and republicans are both wrong and equally so in my mind. The democrats hold z, y, and z to be the most important rights but trounce all over a, b, and c. The republicans think a, b, and c are the most important rights but want x, y, and z to be illegal.

right on!

Put libertarians in power in washington and in less than 20 years other than the rhetoric and the sign on the door you wouldn't be able to tell them from republicans and democrats. Its the nature of our political system.”

sadly, right on.”

“Then in 20 years they should be purged again. I think terms would be shorter and we would attract citizen servers rather than the Kennedys and the Bushes and Clintons who go to Washington and never leave. As it stands now the dems and repubs like things just the way they are…very little difference. If an independent came to win it would fracture the dems and repub’s power even further because more third parties would come up and we would have more choice such as the parliament type of democracies such as Israel have.

The first step is braking the power block the two parties hold.”

“Nah, the first step is to put forth candidates that are loons. I can't speak for libertarians in your area, but the only time I went to a libertarian rally here in Wilmington there were way to many "black helicopter"/militia types in the mix. Teh problem with the libertarian party is that its membership is made up more of people who are there because they hate repub or dems and can't go all the way to teh otherside, not because they have anything in common with each other.”

“Every party has it's kooks. I personally get tired of everything being a damn government conspiracy. But this does not mean we can make the changes we need to. I for one will never vote for the lesser of two evils again. If it means we get stuck with the worse of two evils then so be it. Sometimes things have to get bad to wake people up.”

“Then in 20 years they should be purged again. I think terms would be shorter and we would attract citizen servers rather than the Kennedys and the Bushes and Clintons who go to Washington and never leave. As it stands now the dems and repubs like things just the way they are…very little difference.

The first step is braking the power block the two parties hold.”

not only the repubs and dems, but all the lobbyists too. if you're a lobbyist with a few million to throw at a politician to get your way, you wanna safe bet, not some "loony" libertarian.

and so we have this vicious cycle between lobbying forces and politician. so I think the first step is real campaign finance reform. its the only way to ever give a third party a chance in hell”

“Your tax dollar and the bond money that comes from our global comsumerism are the evils that need attention. Forgot to mention foreign aid money that comes back to DC in the form of lobbyist treats.”

““The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.”

Thomas Jefferson

I see that quote all over the web, but never with a citation. Is this a real Jefferson quote? It sounds rather anachronistic.

What is funny is how it fits with another quote I see attributed to Jefferson (again, I don't know if he really said it):

"A democracy is nothing more than an angry mob, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine."”

“Draft all the lawyers to fill the frontline ranks in Iraq”

“AskOxford.com came up with neither. They did have some gems though...

"The sovereign invigorator of the body is exercise, and of all the exercises, walking is best."

"State a moral case to a ploughman and a professor. The former will decide it as well, and often better than the latter, because he has not been led astray by artificial rules."

"If I could not go to Heaven but with a party, I would not go there at all."

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."”

“Sell Yosemite to fund war in Iran.”

“I disagree with the idea that property should be the main goal of life.

I think that people and relations with them should be the primary goal.

I think that the biggest problem today is the quest for material things. That's why we fight wars for oil rather than living with a smaller car. That's why we cut taxes today so that our kids have to pay off a larger debt tomorrow.

Property is temporary.”

“BTW, America was founded on the premise of "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" not life, liberty and the pursuit of property.

It was Jefferson's greatest accomplishment. In America, people take precedence over property.”

“try attracting a mate by scrounging for nuts and pinecones for your dinner everynight. Then, after your dinner of grubworms, when its sleeting and snot icycles are forming over your lips, try telling whatever it was you convinced to be your mate that since you are already naked since you don't own any clothes that you think its time the two of yopu started a family, wink wink.

I'm interested in seeing how your utopian life of no property is going to work out then.”

““try attracting a mate by scrounging for nuts and pinecones for your dinner everynight. Then, after your dinner of grubworms, when its sleeting and snot icycles are forming over your lips, try telling whatever it was you convinced to be your mate that since you are already naked since you don't own any clothes that you think its time the two of yopu started a family, wink wink.

I'm interested in seeing how your utopian life of no property is going to work out then.”

WTF? Have you been smoking with Saleboard or something? LOL! Property rights are very important. We have eminent domain cases popping up everywhere it seams. Gun control advocates want all the guns taken away. And most of all, the unlawful raping of our pay checks by the IRS. It is moronic as well as sheepish to confuse the protection and retention of property as meaning working towards a Hummer, big house and big tittied trophy-wife so we can look down on everyone else.”

“nigal had me until the big titty comment.

everyone knows that a nice tight ass is way more important in a trophy wife.”

“I was commenting on Reformed Hiker's wish for a non-property oriented life. You won't find happiness without some property to give you security. And I don't think it is up to anyone else to decide how much or what kind of property I think I need to make me feel secure. I personally don't need a hummer (well not the SUV kind, anyway;) ) but if someone wants to orient his work ethic to get one thats his business.”

“Smoking property should have all rights, when you sit on a high elevation rock that's big enough to absorb all the 747's they can throw at you, then you are cool. Try life not hatred.”

“BTW, if you don't like eminent domain you can give the land your house is built on back to the indians to back up your principles.”

“Oh well that explains that. LOL! The pursuit of things is not a real fulfilling interest IMHO but it is the person’s choise to go after what they want. And that’s all good. And some people don’t pursue things and that’s cool too. It’s when these people try and take what’s mine to give to those who don’t go get it that I have a problem. Forced redistribution of wealth is one of the worst crimes IMHO.”

““BTW, if you don't like eminent domain you can give the land your house is built on back to the indians to back up your principles.”

And I should be penalized because they sold the land to the white man? Naw, I don't think so.”

“what happened to the indians is more like "Forced redistribution of wealth" which "is one of the worst crimes IMHO".

And I agree with your statement about forced redistribution of wealth.”

“History is not always pretty Tanto. You want some reperations then? Hey, wait a tick, I'm part (1/16th) Cherokee myself so I want what's coming to me too!”

“Nowhere is there any mention of collective responsibility.

BTW - a Libertarian Utopia was already created: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_of_Minerva

It didn't turn out so swell.”

“I don't want reperations, you do. I am a proponent of eminent domain when used for public works and not private interests.”

““Nowhere is there any mention of collective responsibility."

If the individual is responsible then how can the collective be irresponsible?

"BTW - a Libertarian Utopia was already created: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_of_Minerva

It didn't turn out so swell.”


One crack pot’s experiment didn’t work so it can only fail? No one is looking for utopia here. Our two party system is hardly a grand idea that come to fruition.”

“I understand they still want to restart Minerva. Maybe you can join them.

You go off tilting at windmills and I'll stay with the society that has produced the highest standard of living in history.

Why do you hate America so?”

“Always a man of extremes, aren't you V? It's either all the way this way or it's all the way that way. Very unhealthy attitude to live with.”

“LOL, those dang shoes keep ending up on the other foot.”

“big tittied trophy-wife - Nigal

LMAO!
Tits are overrated.

....and most of those trophy-wife boobs are 'store bought'.
last edited: 8/11/06 1:28:12 PM”

“This is V's vision for the future...

”

“My point was misconstrued.

My point is that the needs of people should rank higher in our order of priorities than the acquisition of property and things.

Please note that people NEED a house over their head. Please also note that people NEED food to eat. Please note also that people NEED transportation to get from one place another.

But if you look at the indebtedness of individual Americans and the indebtedness of our various governments AND you look at the spending of individual Americans and government, you will see that our priorities are out of balance.

Spend today and make your grandkids eat grubs, I guess?”

“so you think that you should decide how much is too much for one person and not enough for another? And will you head the committee that redistributes the property?”

“Hyway,

I have no problem with an individual enjoying the fruits of his or her labor. People who work hard deserve that.

However, I have a problem with a society cutting taxes today and adding that to a debt that our children and grandchildren will pay.

I also have a problem with a society based on oil consumption that necessitates a foreign policy that results in death and misery in another part of the world.

I also think that it is perfectly fine if a community identifies a NEED, takes a piece of property and fully compensates the property owner for the lost property. There are some situations in which the NEEDS of the community trump the rights of the individual.

For example, the city in which I live is working on a plan to create a well field to supplement a reservoir so that my city's water sources will be more diversified and cleaner.

This well field will require a big ole' main that will be placed in my front yard.

That is perfectly fine because it will help ALL of the residents of my city to drink clean water.

It's called living in a community.”

“BTW, we have elections that form that committee.

Try voting.”

“You go to war with what you have.”

“Rummy, you got no juice”