Posted on 11/29/2001 10:29:12 AM PST by A.J.Armitage
Jim Robinson posted Is Free Republic a Fraud? Is it time for Free Republic to go away? this was my reply, which wasn't really "on topic", given what he said in his article, but I think the problem I discuss is worth talking about. Maybe it's just growing pains with all the new people coming in, but even then, I think we ought to talk about it.
In an important sense, Free Republic already has gone away. Too many people here, especially the newbies but also some of the ones from way back, use Free Republic for shouting their love and support of what every violation of freedom anyone can think up. Secret military tribunals, not just for bin Laden but also for people in the United States? You're a traitor if you disagree. The Patriot Act? You're paranoid if you don't think it's just fine. If Bill Clinton had proposed this stuff, we'd have people on here talking about armed revolution. The fact that we're at war doesn't mean we should hand ourselves over, blindfold, to those with an interest in betraying us. The federal government is still what it was before September 11, and (I know this will be more unwelcome, but it's still the truth) it's still what it was when Clinton was in office. Human nature is what it is and politicians, even republican ones, are politicians. Any question of any real improvement having been made by changing the president has been settled by the ignoble exploitation of the attack to get more power for themselves.
It isn't so much that so many here are outright enemies of freedom, it's the unreasoning quality of it. Anything from certain sites, or by certain people (including, bizarrely, Ron Paul) is immediately set upon by people who seem incapable of using anything but ad hominem arguments. These people seem to see no distinction between believing in freedom and being a communist or a liberal or a member of the taliban or whatever pops into their heads. Not only is this bad in itself, it poisons the whole forum. The more of it goes on, the less rational discussion goes on. This sort of thing happened before, but it's choking off good discussion. Another thing polluting the forum is that the newbies are often carrying in bad habits from other forums or chat rooms. For example, I've seen people write "R" for "are". Some of them just aren't that good at writing English. Too many people use all-caps instead of arguments.
Sure, this stuff happened before, but it's a lot worse now.
I don't think it's so much the attack, although that made it worse (the nuke 'em all crowd and suchlike), as it is the fact that people let their guards down when Bush got elected. How many of the people exulting over every new government power would have the attitude with Clinton in office? Few or none, I would venture. Why did we hate Clinton, anyway? Because he was the kind of person to exploit tragedies to expand his power? So, it turns out, is Bush. He had a fascist Attorney General? Well, congratulations, now we have a mere authoritarian. Does anyone doubt that Ashcroft would've treated Elian the same way Reno did? But I suppose that would be fine, so long as the kid's taken by our jack-booted thugs. Did we go through the whole election thing just to get the privilege of having the same policies Clinton or Gore would've enacted pushed through by someone with an R after his name? The bill's the same, but the person signing it hasn't slept with the interns, so we're happy? Was it all about the sex after all?
Do we have anything that we really stand for, or are we here to be cheerleaders for Bush?
Freepers have largely given up the fight for freedom, or were never involved in fighting for freedom in the first place and just joined recently so they could cheer each new chain. I'm afraid we won't get the old Free Republic back until there's a democrat in office. But why don't we like the democrats? Is it really nothing more than the reason people in Chicago don't like the Packers? That kind of political activism is more than a little hollow. There has to be some set of principles that we hold even our own to, or there really is no reason for us to exist. If we're that destitute of principles, not even principles but just plain thoughts of our own, we really don't have a reason to exist. Not just Free Republic, but the whole Right. If we give up on the idea of freedom this easily, we might as well hand over the country to the Left. Why not? They're winning anyway, and Bush is helping them do it. Look at all the new democrats coming in over the border. Unless things change pretty radically, there won't be anything worthwhile left in 20 years. Maybe we should just give up, then. If there was somewhere else, we might go there when things break down too much here, but there isn't. Why not, then? As it stands now, they won, not just America, but humanity. Just have a good time, don't care, munch your grass like a good little sheep, and hope things get better a few hundred years from now.
Maybe things will look better in the morning.
While I'm at it, I'll reply to some of the replies in the original thread.
To WIMom:
If FR is so bad, why do you stay? (I'm not flaming, but really want to know)
I suppose you could say it's the bits of the old Free Republic. But, I'm not sure everyone, even the old timers, would recognize what I have in mind by that. There's always been a lot of crap. I ignored it; you have to take is as a given on any internet forum. But now there's so much more of it.
At it's worst, Free Republic is no worse than the surrounding political culture. Maybe any sanctuary of rational discussion is bound to get inundated eventually, but that's a grim future to imagine for my beloved Free Republic: a cleaned up version of the Usenet. No porn, no spam, people get kicked out, but no higher level of intellectual discussion. Maybe it can be turned around (if I didn't think so, I'd probably leave). Maybe it'll turn around on it's own after the air clears.
I'll tell you my ambition for Free Republic in the far future. If a scholar hundreds of years from now had only Free Republic, he could construct a fairly good history of our civilization, after sorting all the chaos typical of the internet out. Even if he had other sources, Free Republic would still be very worthwhile, the same way collections of pamphlets from earlier times are. But there's more: there are threads I've participated in, and some I've just read, that are worthwhile not for their historical content but for their philosophical content, if I can put it so grandly. The discussions are of course almost all about political philosophy. These are threads worth reading for your own edification.
I'm afraid it all might get buried under typical internet crap, to the point that people in the future ignore the whole thing, which would be a great loss.
To WileyCoyote22:
I think the tribunals ae needed. They sure arn't going to put you or I up there. So whats the beef with that rant ?
It's not just that. It's the tribunals and the Patriot Act and the fact that the public, including far too many here, call for more.
You also fail to even know what War times is and that W has done nothing more than what FDR did.
That's not a high standard.
To Dan from Michigan:
Never say die.
Yeah, I guess so. I just don't see how I can do any good if the whole forum is swamped with these people.
To Howlin:
Get over yourself, will you? I've been here longer than you have and I have seen it come and go; just because we all don't agree with you doesn't mean WE are wrong.
If I'm wrong, tell me why. If we never get past who's saying it to what's being said, no one will ever be persuaded, and all we'll ever have is personal attacks.
To Lucius Cornelius Sulla:
I hate to say it, but thanks for making my point for me.
Things which once would have been crucial, and needed debating must be put aside until our lives have been made secure.
You're wrong. It's precisely now that defending freedom is most important, because now is the time it's most under attack. That many, such as you, would like to give the politicians a blank check makes it even more important.
If you really think that there is no difference between the Clinton/Gore/Reno administration and the Bush/Cheney/Ashcroft administration you have allowed disagreement over policy to drive you into the arms of the bin Laden supporters.
Yeah, I've converted to Islam because I don't like Bush's policy. Or maybe bin Laden was really all worked up by the fact that our Constitution is being ignored.
In a war there is a front line, and the opposition front line. I am on the side of President Bush and the American people. Up to now, I had thought that you were there also.
This kind of attitude is part of the problem I'm talking about.
If and when they are misused we'll do something about it...
Oh. Ya mean, sorta like what 'we' are doing now, about the systemic abuse and corruption engendered by measures to help prosecute the (bogus) War on Drugs? Since when has the gummint ever restrained itself from wielding any power it found?
I believe that FR must remain an anti-ruling class forum or it will suffer the aimlessness of a Third Party. What this means in practice in post 9/11 America, as a paleo-libertarian myself, I think it is my roll to defend Bush from the Neo-Con bombers rather than spend my time debating from the right-- despite what I think. We are winning that battle and should acknowledge that Bush is closer to us than he is to them. We should celebrate this, rather than lament that all is lost. (No matter what I might privately think, he said, as he packed the truck to move to Idaho!)
We can still use our talents to turn neo-cons into paleo-libertarians-- or so I believe.
The new crop of Freepers, lets call them Christmas and Easter Freepers (elections and disasters) just want to root for their favorite team.
And this too shall pass...
It's wholly inappropriate for talking to another, though, and I think I've made a lot of progress in trying to use proper terms, break up my sentences and slice diatribes into neat blocks of paragraph.
If ever you're confused by what I say, I'm more than happy to do a better job at trying to express it. I'm confident a great part of our being at cross purposes is because I'm not making myself clear.
... absolutely correct on many counts regarding the morphing of the United States into a police state ...
I don't have time for a lengthy response -- all that pounding on my door ... got to be going.
You know, some of us don't think that everything bad ought to be illegal.
Frankly A.J. I do not give a damn whether or not you like the President's policies. There will be plenty of opportunity to discuss the wisdom of the President's approach, AFTER THE WAR IS OVER. That is one of the reasons to seek the earliest possible victory in the war. In the meantime, there are millions of people in the world, and tens to hundreds of thousands of people in this country who are doing their best to kill you and your family. Somewhat more importantly to me, they also are trying to kill my family. It is quite possible that scores of millions of Americans are not going to live to see the New Year, should the Al Khaeda nuclear weapons prove to be real. The only way that my family can be defended is if the President is successful in his defense of the country.
You are not the Commander in Chief. You are not going to become the Commander in Chief. By making the President and his administration turn his attention, even for a moment, from defeating our enemies to having to campaign for support from the American people, whose obligation it is to support him, you are endangering the lives of my family. An analogy might be made to a bus full of passengers, escaping from danger on a winding mountain road, with the President as the driver. And you are in the position of someone who comes forward and tries to grab the wheel from the driver's control, thus endangering all of the passenger's lives. I will do anything that I can to prevent you from grabbing that wheel.
The BUSH-ites have become entranced because of the ABC factor (Anybody But Clinton) and the fact that Bush has at least ACTED at times like he really supports our cause and freedom. However, if you really analyze his first 9 months you find:
He has only replaced one Clinton federal attorney. Clinton replaced them all immediately into office.
He has not investigated any Clinton crime.
He has let the BLM continue the Federal Land Grabs.
He has done nothing to stop the Federal Zoning authored by Clinton's HUD.
He instituted a tax cut scheme that doesn't cut crap until years that hardly any members of the executive and congressional branches are guaranteed to be around.
And that's his big accomplishment! Soon to be overturned by the revelation of deficits for the next few years and a Democratic Congress in 2002.
All this and the PATRIOT ACT. At least with Gore we could focus and foil the enemy. Too many people here think the only problem is Tin Foil and those who dare to ask questions and hold those accountable for their actions on our behalf.
As ol Tom Jefferson said (paraphrased)"Let's have no more talk of faith in men. Let the chains of the Constitution bind them down!"
Please explain to me how the Patriot Act/Military Tribunals will flush Senator Leahy out of office?
Da.
After der var ist ofer, zen ve vil allow der diskussin.
This is going to be over relatively soon, and then we'll have to live with the crap they get passed with the blank check you're handing them.
And that gun control idiocy is an example of what I was talking about when I said you people try to link lovers of freedom to whatever demonizing name pops into your head, with no logic or sense needed.
It is impossible for the average American to get through a single day, without breaking ANY laws.
We have so many laws, that Americans could not possibly even know what all of them are.
Principles are fine shortcuts to avoid having to stop and analyze every situation, but some people use them as crutches to avoid having to weigh competing values.
Instead of using the Constitution as a reason to oppose some government action, why don't you try the mental exercise of justifying your position on the practical impact that the action would have on people's lives. If the Constitution is as unerringly sacred as you believe, it should be easy for you to show that the Constitutional position produces the best results for real people. When you are able to do that, you won't need to use the Constitution as a crutch.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.