How Liberalism and Libertarianism Destroyed Liberty

The Bitpig Rant ^ | 2009.11.10 | Bitpig (B-Chan)

[B-Chan]

Technological improvements aside, Spain of the sigla de oro was a paradise compared to any modern secular megastate.

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

Reading for comprehension is obviously not your strong suit.

Rational analysis sure in the Hell ain't yours.

[Reagan Man]

>>>>>.... libertarian thought (which is just Liberal thought with a different name)

While that is very true on issues related to foreign affairs and international relations, I'm not so sure the case you make is valid. Libertarians support a return to small(er) government and have opposed ObamaCare or any form of nationalized health care.

OTOH. Sadly, too many libertarians are minarchists and in some cases, outright anarchists. Not something mainstream conservatives and traditionalists find appealing.

"... there are libertarians who are almost over at the point of wanting no government at all or anarchy. ~ Ronald Reagan, Reason Magazine Interview, 1975

[B-Chan]

Through Church-sponsored hospitals, homes, and orphanages.

[B-Chan]

freedom to pursue your own happiness as long as it doesn’t intrude on other people’s lives

Such "freedom" is an illusion, and is not a Christian virtue.

[fr_freak]

The author is a mouth-breathing idiot.

I still don't understand this insult. What is so bad about breathing through your mouth? The nose-breathing thing is convenient when one is nice and relaxed, but get the body moving and those two little nostrils just seem so inadequate. Only lazy people who never get up out of a chair would be able to avoid breathing through their mouths regularly. Besides, if God didn't want us to breathe through our mouths, He wouldn't have connected our pie holes to our air pipes. ;)

[B-Chan]

The author is a mouth-breathing idiot

Your mom doesn't seem to mind.

[mysterio]

150 years of voting the same two parties into power destroyed liberty.

[B-Chan]

What I am advocating is a return to Western civilization prior to the so-called enlightenment.

[DManA]

I don’t. What are we going to do about that?

[Lurker]

libertarian thought (which is just Liberal thought with a different name)

It's here that the author reveals himself as ill-informed at best and a deliberate liar at worst.

Modern day liberalism and libertarianism have absolutely nothing in common politically. The author would replace one tyranny with another, with the same results.

Whoever wrote this tripe certainly shouldn't be a member of this forum as he is plainly and squarely against the US Constitution.

L

[DManA]

Here’s what God has to say about monarchies:

1 Samuel 8
10 Samuel told all the words of the LORD to the people who were asking him for a king. 11 He said, “This is what the king who will reign over you will do: He will take your sons and make them serve with his chariots and horses, and they will run in front of his chariots. 12 Some he will assign to be commanders of thousands and commanders of fifties, and others to plow his ground and reap his harvest, and still others to make weapons of war and equipment for his chariots. 13 He will take your daughters to be perfumers and cooks and bakers. 14 He will take the best of your fields and vineyards and olive groves and give them to his attendants. 15 He will take a tenth of your grain and of your vintage and give it to his officials and attendants. 16 Your menservants and maidservants and the best of your cattle [b] and donkeys he will take for his own use. 17 He will take a tenth of your flocks, and you yourselves will become his slaves. 18 When that day comes, you will cry out for relief from the king you have chosen, and the LORD will not answer you in that day.”

[DManA]

The guy is a monarchist. Hardly worth debating him.

[ikeonic]

While I agree with many of your points, your conclusion is totally wrong. Libertarians are not to blame at all. In fact, it is libertarians who can make the strongest argument that charity is not the role of the government and that charity must be freely given, voluntarily given by indidivuals and private organizations and not coercively confiscated by an oppresive central government.

To that end, I strongly suggest you on this very topic. I didn't agree with the Archbishop's conclusions but his answers are very telling of how many in the Catholic Church think and believe the role of government should be.

Or better yet, start your own dialogue with Archbishop Chaput on the topic. He reads and responds to his email at shepherd@archden.org.

Finally, I find it highly ironic that someone on Free Republic is promoting a Catholic monarchy. Our founding fathers, including Catholic Charles Carroll, would not be amused.

[B-Chan]

I’m not going to do anything. I don’t have to. The positivist and materialist social order created as a result of the “Enlightenment”, which I assume you support, is unsustainable and contrary to the natural order of the universe; it will collapse and fall of its own accord. (It is already collapsing, in case you haven’t noticed.) From this collapse will come chaos, followed by the eventual rise of various ethnic warlords, whose tribes will serve as the nuclei of new nations.

The Catholic Church, which will preserve scientific knowledge and the knowledge of the Natural Law during the coming Collapse as it did during the last Collapse, will ultimately endorse one of these warlords and charge him with the protection of Christians and the establishment of a new Christian social order. This new Charlemagne will become the emperor of a restored West, and under his just rule our civilization will rise from the ashes of its own self-immolation.

[steve-b]

Through Church-sponsored hospitals, homes, and orphanages.

Which is paid for how, exactly?

[steve-b]

Hardly worth debating him.

Certainly, there's no point debating him without knowing the premises that go into what passes for his "argument".

For instance, let's revisit this rather astonishing statement:

Our Lord is not a free marketer.

In order to even understand where this notion came from, one would need to find and study the version of the Bible in which Jesus told of how the servants who doubled their master's money were cast into the outer darkness. It certainly does not follow from the traditional version, in which the story comes out quite the opposite.

[ikeonic]

He gets it exactly wrong. Individualism does not decry charity. Individualism decries forced charity at the point of a government controlled gun. The latter is tyrany and theft of our life ($ is time spent working).

Nail. On. Head.

This is exactly the point I tried to make to Archbishop Chaput back in August. Contrary to popular belief, Catholics are very open to dialogue and this is a hotly debated topic.

[steve-b]

The positivist and materialist social order created as a result of the “Enlightenment”, which I assume you support, is unsustainable and contrary to the natural order of the universe; it will collapse and fall of its own accord.

You are quite insightful and wise, for an unbeliever. I think I will kill you last.

[ikeonic]

The Catholic Church, which will preserve scientific knowledge and the knowledge of the Natural Law during the coming Collapse as it did during the last Collapse, will ultimately endorse one of these warlords and charge him with the protection of Christians and the establishment of a new Christian social order. This new Charlemagne will become the emperor of a restored West, and under his just rule our civilization will rise from the ashes of its own self-immolation.

Please stop. You're giving my church a very bad name.

Freepers do not want a return to feudalism. This country was founded who fled what was left of feudalism and sought to establish a true free republic where individual freedom was paramount and no man was a king. Your arguments are just plain silly.