Replies

presidio9 asserts, regarding Ronald Reagan, that "He tries as hard as he can to say something nice about libertarianism."

Here's an excerpt from http://reason.com/archives/1975/07/01/inside-ronald-reagan

REASON: Governor Reagan, you have been quoted in the press as saying that you’re doing a lot of speaking now on behalf of the philosophy of conservatism and libertarianism. Is there a difference between the two?

REAGAN: If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. I think conservatism is really a misnomer just as liberalism is a misnomer for the liberals–if we were back in the days of the Revolution, so-called conservatives today would be the Liberals and the liberals would be the Tories. The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is.

Anybody who's interested in the truth of the matter should read the entire interview.

I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism.

It doesn't seem like Ronald Reagan strained very hard when he said that. In fact, he didn't remotely disagree with the REASON interviewer's statement that he was "speaking now on behalf of the philosophy of conservatism and libertarianism". If anything, Reagan is uncomfortable with having to use the "misnomer" of "conservative" because he considers himself a classical Liberal.

Does presidio9 have some inside knowledge about this interview, or is he just making an assertion from ignorance?

Libertarianism is the laziest of political philosophies, because it consistently fails to follow its own beliefs through to their natural conclusions. Libertarians on this website are fond of quoting that Reason Magazine article, because they read part of one sentence in a seven page interview, and assume that it sums up everything Ronald Reagan had to say about their cause. Every time I see someone misinterpret that quote, I do my best to stop them from making imbecilles out of themselves. It never works, because they want it to mean what they want it to mean.

I can remind people like you that the quote was intended for the very specific audience of a small magazine with a tiny readership, but then I'm apparently calling Reagan a liar. I could also remind you (again) that conservatives mostly revere Ronald Reagan the President. Not the Democrat. Not the governor who signed a California abortion bill into law seven years before this interview. President Reagan fired the air traffic controllers, sicced his AG on prostitution and pornography, invented the war on drugs, fought undeclared wars all over the globe, and increased the size of government whenever he damn well pleased. In other words, every time he was faced with a choice of libertarianism versus conservatism, he chose conservatism. Sometimes the ideals of conservatism and libertarianism overlapped. That's when you guys liked him. But rejection of libertarianism was an enormous part of his presidency.

Which gets us back to this interview. It's clear that none of you have read it, because each of you missed the hext paragraph:

I can’t say that I will agree with all the things that the present group who call themselves Libertarians in the sense of a party say, because I think that like in any political movement there are shades, and there are libertarians who are almost over at the point of wanting no government at all or anarchy. I believe there are legitimate government functions. There is a legitimate need in an orderly society for some government to maintain freedom or we will have tyranny by individuals. The strongest man on the block will run the neighborhood. We have government to insure that we don’t each one of us have to carry a club to defend ourselves. But again, I stand on my statement that I think that libertarianism and conservatism are travelling the same path.

Incidently, when he's referring to "anarchy" there, he's not talking about the post-apocalyptic world you three idiots are thinking of. "Road Warrior" hadn't come out yet. He's talking about places like Amsterdam today, and we know that based on how he governed as president. If you read the article correcly (as opposed to looking for what you want it to say), you see that he's constantly reiterating that he incorporates the parts of libertarianism that are consistent with conservatism. That's what all good conservatives do. We also incorporate the Christian beliefs that benefit society. Hopefully that won't mean you'll ever see a conservative president rejecting military action because it violated his ideals. That being said, Ronald Reagan would have easily said that "the heart and sould of conservatisim is Christianity/Judiasm," and it would have made just as much more sense. Politically speaking, Chirstianity and libertarianism are two means to an end.

Now, to get back to that interview (which oviously none of you had bothered to read), the next time Reagan opens his mouth it is to say this: Well, the first and most important thing is that government exists to protect us from each other.

That's the beginning of his very next answer, and there is not a libertarian alive today who could agree with it.

In this very same interview, Reagan goes one to defend several things which no libertarian on the planet could agree with. They include laws against prostitution, a 24% increase in spending in his first year as governor of California, "socialized fire departments," and laws against gambling. Among others. That's why I know none of you have ever bothered to read it, and why I laugh every time one of you idiots brings it up.