Skip to comments.
Ron Paul - What Happened to Conservatives?
House Web Site ^
| 7-14-2003
| Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX)
Posted on 07/14/2003 12:45:44 PM PDT by jmc813
The so-called conservative movement of the last 20 years, starting with the Reagan revolution of the 1980s, followed by the 1994 Gingrich takeover of the House, and culminating in the early 2000s with Republican control of both Congress and the White House, seems a terrible failure today. Republicans have failed utterly to shrink the size of government; instead it is bigger and costlier than ever before. Federal spending spirals out of control, new Great Society social welfare programs have been created, and the national debt is rising by more than a half-trillion dollars per year. Whatever happened to the conservative vision supposedly sweeping the nation?
One thing is certain: those who worked and voted for less government, the very foot soldiers in the conservative revolution, have been deceived. Today, the ideal of limited government has been abandoned by the GOP, and real conservatives find their views no longer matter.
True limited government conservatives have been co-opted by the rise of the neoconservatives in Washington. The neoconservatives- a name they gave themselves- are largely hardworking, talented people who have worked their way into positions of power in Washington. Their views dominate American domestic and foreign policy today, as their ranks include many of the Presidents closest advisors. They have successfully moved the Republican party away from the Goldwater-era platform of frugal government at home and nonintervention abroad, toward a big-government, world empire mentality more reminiscent of Herbert Hoover or Woodrow Wilson. In doing so, they have proven that their ideas are neither new nor conservative.
Modern neoconservatives are not necessarily monolithic in their views, but they generally can be described as follows:
-They agree with Trotskys idea of a permanent revolution; -They identify strongly with the writings of Leo Strauss; -They express no opposition to the welfare state, and will expand it to win votes and power; -They believe in a powerful federal government; -They believe the ends justify the means in politics- that hardball politics is a moral necessity; -They believe lying is necessary for the state to survive; -They believe certain facts should be known only by the political elite, and withheld from the general public; -They believe in preemptive war and the naked use of military force to achieve any desired ends; -They openly endorse the idea of an American empire, and hence unapologetically call for imperialism; -They are very willing to use force to impose American ideals; -They scoff at the Founding Fathers belief in neutrality in foreign affairs; -They believe 9/11 resulted from a lack of foreign entanglements, not from too many; -They are willing to redraw the map of the Middle East by force, while unconditionally supporting Israel and the Likud Party; -They view civil liberties with suspicion, as unnecessary restrictions on the federal government; -They despise libertarians, and dismiss any arguments based on constitutional grounds.
Those who love liberty, oppose unjustified war, and resent big-brother government must identify the philosophy that is influencing policy today. If the neoconservatives are wrong- and I believe they are- we must demonstrate this to the American people, and offer an alternative philosophy that is both morally superior and produces better results in terms of liberty and prosperity. It is time for true conservatives to retake the conservative movement.
TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Front Page News
KEYWORDS: paleo; ronpaul
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 121-126 next last
1
posted on
07/14/2003 12:45:44 PM PDT
by
jmc813
To: jmc813
Ron Paul bump.
2
posted on
07/14/2003 12:55:16 PM PDT
by
jjm2111
To: All
3
posted on
07/14/2003 12:55:22 PM PDT
by
Support Free Republic
(Your support keeps Free Republic going strong!)
To: jmc813
Yeah, but you know, we "won".
4
posted on
07/14/2003 12:55:58 PM PDT
by
Wolfie
To: jmc813
I heard this speech live on C-Span. Ron Paul, once a terrific conservative, has pursued his ever more eccentric 1930s-style "conservatism" all the way around the bend. He is no longer anything but a political curiosity piece. His mind has gone to the Raimondoite, Rockford Institute graveyard. RIP. There was just no ivory.
5
posted on
07/14/2003 12:56:08 PM PDT
by
BlackElk
( Viva Cristo Rey! .)
To: jmc813
offer an alternative philosophy that is both morally superior and produces better results in terms of liberty and prosperity Wellll???
6
posted on
07/14/2003 12:56:54 PM PDT
by
Huck
To: jmc813
A couple of problems here. The Gipper was not a libertarian. And the Gipper's leadership is the main reason so many Reagan Democrats left the Rat party - and became neo-cons.
(My family has been Republican since before the Civil War, but I'll take help wherever I can get it.)
To: jmc813
Voting (on both sides) pretty much just boils down to morality now. The rest of their platforms shake out pretty much the same, so if you're afraid of what people are doing in their bedrooms, you vote Repbublican, if not you vote Democrat. It makes for a nice dog and pony show every 4 years, but we're still headed for an ever-expanding State.
8
posted on
07/14/2003 1:00:01 PM PDT
by
Wolfie
To: colorado tanker
(My family has been Republican since before the Civil War, but I'll take help wherever I can get it.) But how much would one be willing to trade for such help?
9
posted on
07/14/2003 1:01:57 PM PDT
by
joesnuffy
(Moderate Islam Is For Dilettantes)
To: Wolfie
Voting (on both sides) pretty much just boils down to morality now. The rest of their platforms shake out pretty much the same, so if you're afraid of what people are doing in their bedrooms, you vote Repbublican, if not you vote Democrat. It makes for a nice dog and pony show every 4 years, but we're still headed for an ever-expanding State.A single major party? ;-) Hopefully it won't come to that.
To: Wolfie
They express no opposition to the welfare state, and will expand it to win votes and power;I am seeing this too. And I'm not liking it either.
11
posted on
07/14/2003 1:03:39 PM PDT
by
Kudsman
(LETS GET IT ON!!! The price of freedom is vigilance. Tyranny is free of charge.)
To: joesnuffy
But how much would one be willing to trade for such help? Well, for example, unlike Mr. Paul I will not trade parties like old cars and I will not sell out the party of Lincoln for the moral relativism of libertarianism.
To: jmc813
"those who worked and voted for less government, the very foot soldiers in the conservative revolution, have been deceived. Today, the ideal of limited government has been abandoned by the GOP, and real conservatives find their views no longer matter." Amen!
I will not vote for those who decieve me, and will not represent me. The Republican party can kiss my ass.
I know...I know....just wait...I'll see.....
I did.....and, I've seen.
13
posted on
07/14/2003 1:05:56 PM PDT
by
laotzu
To: Jonathon Spectre
sad thing is, he's honest and correct:
"One thing is certain: those who worked and voted for less government, the very foot soldiers in the conservative revolution, have been deceived. Today, the ideal of limited government has been abandoned by the GOP, and real conservatives find their views no longer matter.
True limited government conservatives have been co-opted by the rise of the neoconservatives in Washington. The neoconservatives- a name they gave themselves- are largely hardworking, talented people who have worked their way into positions of power in Washington. Their views dominate American domestic and foreign policy today, as their ranks include many of the Presidents closest advisors. They have successfully moved the Republican party away from the Goldwater-era platform of frugal government at home and nonintervention abroad, toward a big-government, world empire mentality more reminiscent of Herbert Hoover or Woodrow Wilson. In doing so, they have proven that their ideas are neither new nor conservative."
To: Kudsman
He does have a point here. However, I am very wary of the so-called "paleo" conservatives and libertarians too. Many seem to be painting with too broad of brush concerning the "neocons."
15
posted on
07/14/2003 1:07:49 PM PDT
by
Pyro7480
(+ Vive Jesus! (Live Jesus!) +)
To: colorado tanker
You have been deceived, friend. May your toils for Liberty no longer be in vain. Look at what we have "won" with our hard work: more socialism, more welfare state, more government, more regulations, and less freedom. Agreed, it may be slightly better than the Democratic alternative (for now), but is that what we worked so hard for?
For Liberty and the Constitution...
16
posted on
07/14/2003 1:10:59 PM PDT
by
bc2
To: colorado tanker
"moral relativism of libertarianism" Libertarians have no morals.
Republicans want to starve children.
Same broken, sheep-bleeting, B.S. lies.
Maybe if you pointed out how big your herd is compared to theirs. That would have to win them over.
17
posted on
07/14/2003 1:11:50 PM PDT
by
laotzu
To: Gunslingr3
They have successfully moved the Republican party away from the Goldwater-era platform of frugal government at home and nonintervention abroad, toward a big-government, world empire mentality more reminiscent of Herbert Hoover or Woodrow Wilson. In doing so, they have proven that their ideas are neither new nor conservative."
This is where Paul is mistaken. The early debates amongst conservatives in the 1950s and 1960s was about how to respond to the communist threat. Reagan, Goldwater, Meyer, Buckley, Kirk, et al wanted to face the communist threat at home and abroad. So you can't say these conservatives were "noninterventionist." It was people like Rothbard who wanted the U.S. to withdraw from fighting communism. I'm glad the first group ultimately prevailed in the conservative movement.
18
posted on
07/14/2003 1:12:05 PM PDT
by
Pyro7480
(+ Vive Jesus! (Live Jesus!) +)
To: bc2
For Liberty and the Constitution... On that we most definitely agree.
To: colorado tanker
"I will not sell out the party of Lincoln for the moral relativism of libertarianism" And if the party sells you out?!! What then?
20
posted on
07/14/2003 1:16:36 PM PDT
by
laotzu
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 121-126 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson