Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Tomalak
The importance of shame, and societal stigmatization of improper and immoral conduct, cannot be overstated. It is indeed a vital element in any healthy Society--far more important than any legislation in preserving one's cultural heritage. However, I think that the dichotomy discussed here is slightly off target.

Socialistic Government in the 20th Century not only replaced societal controls with those of Government, it deliberately undermined the societal values that were behind the societal controls. It was not the Libertarians who attacked morality, it was the people whom they opposed.

Take the outrageous New Deal venture that became known as the ADC--Aid To Dependent Children. It was not just an unconstitutional exercise from Washington, supposed to ease the burden of children in a single parent household. Part and parcel with the new approach, was a deliberate decision to outlaw any suggestion of stigmatization of the unwed mother--the clientele of the new program. The result is as well known as it was predictable--an exponential explosion in the American Bastardy rate.

The history of the Twentieth Century cannot be neatly systematized, of course. There were many cross-currents. But the real damage was done not by any traditional philosophic movement. All traditional societies have been under attack by Socialists of one hue or another, bent upon promoting egalitarian nonsense; with most of those proponents also promoting some version of the movement for an undifferentiated humanity. Stigmatizing people for having children out of wedlock did not fit the new Socialist norm, anymore than pride in ancestry was tolerated by the new Socialist norm.

Morality, community homogeneity, community religious sentiments, etc., are all ultimately the targets of those who want to break down any distinctions between peoples. While Libertarians may want to live and let live; they have never been those leading the charge against any community's value system. Quite the contrary.

As a Conservative seeking to preserve what is left of the American heritage, I find no problem with most of the people who label themselves "Libertarian." While some of them may occasionally embrace something ridiculous like liberal immigration, fifty years after our population reached its optimum level, they are not the ones promoting a breakdown of the American cultural identity. And most are easily persuaded that the present situation is very wrong. They are rational people, beset as are American Conservatives, by those who hate everything that America used to stand for.

William Flax Return Of The Gods Web Site

21 posted on 08/01/2002 5:01:50 PM PDT by Ohioan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Ohioan
It was not the Libertarians who attacked morality, it was the people whom they opposed.

You make it sound like either libertarians or the others, but that's not true.

The libertarians defend property rights, the socialists do not. When it comes to personal behavior, however, they are more alike than different.

If you were to look only at what some Hollywood socialist said about say, sexual promiscuity, drugs, homosexuality, or what have you ... and then you looked at a libertarian's comment on the same, you wouldn't find any significant difference.

The difference between them is merely that the socialist will try to remove the consequences of bad actions, whereas the libertarian will not. But the actions themselves? Either one will say "go right ahead, and to hell with those who say you shouldn't."

140 posted on 08/02/2002 2:29:06 PM PDT by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson