Purposefully unprincipled - Those who preach pragmatism fear a government based on founders' ideals

OC Register ^ | 2/4/04 | Tibor Machan

[NormsRevenge]

There is a principle in logic that states once a contradiction has infected an argument, anything can follow. Another way of putting it is that once a viewpoint has contradictions in it, nothing reasonable can be expected from it, except by accident.

[NormsRevenge]

Tibor Machan is Ethics professor at Chapman University and adviser on libertarian issues to Freedom Communications.

[headsonpikes]

Clear thinking bump.

Libertarianism vs. socialism is the matchup this epoch.

[Reagan Man]

America has come a long way since the days of the Founding Fathers. As a conservative, I believe in the Constitution, but I also realize that in the current political atmosphere, there simple isn't enough broad based support to advance strict Constitutional government that the Founders intended. Therefore, being an ideologue, aka. impractical idealist, may make you feel warm all over, but doesn't win you elections or even advance an incremental policy consistent with conservative values.

[Ff--150]

In America, however, this putdown is used against libertarians especially often. This is because libertarians advocate public policies that are very close to what the basic principles of the American political system would imply.

Like they say, "Illogic always wins over logic." The dumbing down has worked... .

[Ff--150]

In America, however, this putdown is used against libertarians especially often. This is because libertarians advocate public policies that are very close to what the basic principles of the American political system would imply.

Like they say, "Illogic always wins over logic." The dumbing down has worked... .

[Jack Black]

ping

[adam_az]

If you don't aim for your ideal, you will never reach it.

The 'Rats are aiming towards socialism... and you are aiming for marginally less socialism.

[Just another Joe]

Like they say, "Illogic always wins over logic." The dumbing down has worked... .

The thug is aware that loudness convinces sixty persons where reasoning convinces but one. - Mark Twain

[billbears]

Therefore, being an ideologue, aka. impractical idealist, may make you feel warm all over, but doesn't win you elections or even advance an incremental policy consistent with conservative values.

Now would these conservative values that are 'incrementally' being instituted include $500 billion+ for healthcare, $15 billion for AIDS in Africa, addtional millions for hydrogen cars, education, etc.?

[Protagoras]

advance an incremental policy consistent with conservative values.

Same as the current Republican party and it's candidates and elected officials. In fact it is moving more than incrementally in the opposite direction. It is galloping to the left and away from the constitution.

[Prodigal Son]

The 'Rats are aiming towards socialism... and you are aiming for marginally less socialism.

OK. Also called choosing the 'lesser of two evils'.

When faced with a choice between two evils the rational man always chooses the lesser one.

What Libertarians need is a real plan to go mainstream. They need funding. They need a message that resonates with enough people and they need to be able to present the electorate with a viable alternative. Viable alternative here equals- legitimate chance of getting elected.

That's the bottom line. If a Libertarian has zero chance of getting elected it would always be foolish to vote for one if it meant electing real socialism as opposed to marginally less socialism.

Look on it as a form of political Darwinism. Libertarians have many logically sound principles that should do well with Conservatives (for example, Rush Limbaugh wouldn't be in his current pickle if the nation had a Libertarian attitude towards drugs). But the problem is not so much the principle but marketing that principle. Laissez faire works. Having a good product isn't enough. You have to make people want to buy it.

The 'dogcatcher up' method is sound. It's got all the elements of good team building. But times are changing quickly. Look at MoveOn.org. Soros has been instrumental in a political coup in Georgia and now he is looking to do the same in America. He also has his fingers in a few other pies. Libertarians need the same sort of propaganda machine. They need a coherent, marketable message and an election plan that can be put into effect in one election cycle. They need to achieve a governorship in a significant state and work on that success.

Most of all, they need to convince the average American that he will make more money under a Libertarian gov't. That his children will make more money under that gov't. But also- in these times- that he will be safe from terrorism under a Libertarian gov't. (border control and defense against foreign threats being Libertarians' big weakness).

When Libertarians can put all this together at one time, then we can truly berate people for not choosing this option. Until then, a Libertarian president and voting Libertarian in November is not a 'statement' but sheer idiocy. The Democratic Dwarves are basically representing th viewpoint of Michael Moore now that Lieberman has exited. Michael Moore's politics can NOT be allowed to gain power. No matter what. Michael Moore's politics achieving power would be worse than 10 more 9/11s. That cannot be tolerated.

So, yes, if it means choosing a little bit more socialism- or the less of two evils- that's what the thinking man must do.

[Prodigal Son]

BTW, here's a start. Stossel describes himself as libertarian. Just the thing that the party needs- a media outlet:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1071472/posts

[adam_az]

I'm a litle-l libertarian, not a big-L party member.

I would never vote for the Big-L Libertarians. I oppose their policies on defense, borders, and abortion.

[Prodigal Son]

OK. Just between you and me (and listening world- nudge, nudge, wink, wink) who do you vote for? I'm not being vindictive. I just see the libertarian agenda as a long term project, not a 'here and now' thing.

[ryanjb2]

In theory, libertarianism is bulletproof. The problem is that the vast majority of people aren't intelligent enough to live in a libertarian society.

Even though libertarians prohibit the "initiation of force," there still is a large portion of the population that doesn't understand the concept or refuses to follow it. Libertarians simply cannot control that segment of the population without resorting to un-libertarian methods.

Thats my theory anyway.