[Huck]

I've heard of Spooner. He is an obscure 19th century American weirdo dredged up usually by hard core libertarians. These hard core libs overlap with revisionist neorebs--they share common hatreds (The USA, The Constitution, the rule of law) and common heroes (Jefferson, Calhoun, Henry). Therefore it is not surprising to find Spooner mentioned on this thread. If I recall correctly, Spooner was a radical Northeastern brahmin, the type of dude who would have made John Muir seem normal. For GOP Capitalist to quote him, it's like a conservative quoting Alan Deschowitz and saying "see, this is one of your guys, he's waaay out there and even he says such and such. Which is all well and good, except that you would have to know more about Spooner, and the historical context, to have any chance of properly interpreting the information. And since neorebs are no less prone than any other fringe group to mislead and publish things out of context, you simply can't know what you are looking at.

[GOPcapitalist]

I've heard of Spooner. He is an obscure 19th century American weirdo dredged up usually by hard core libertarians. These hard core libs overlap with revisionist neorebs--they share common hatreds (The USA, The Constitution, the rule of law)

Now that's an odd statement for you to make. Spooner always insisted his love for the constitution _so long as it was interpreted and read under its original and true sense_. At a time when other abolitionists like Garrison were burning copies of it to incite public furor and calling the Constitution a "pact with the devil," Spooner became its greatest champion from that movement. Even in his later argument against the document's application, "The constitution of no authority," he made it explicit that his quarrel was not with the document as properly interpreted but rather with the abuse of it exercised by the state. As for the rule of law, Spooner was as strict as one could be in his adherence to the common law that underlies our judicial system.

and common heroes (Jefferson, Calhoun, Henry).

It's odd that you would consider any of those three men "un-american." I have a strong suspicion that the overwhelming majority of this forum would find that proposition, especially in the case of Jefferson, to be an absurdity in itself.

If I recall correctly, Spooner was a radical Northeastern brahmin, the type of dude who would have made John Muir seem normal. For GOP Capitalist to quote him, it's like a conservative quoting Alan Deschowitz and saying "see, this is one of your guys, he's waaay out there and even he says such and such.

You recall incorrectly. Spooner was a New England abolitionist lawyer with strong libertarian view of government in the extreme Jeffersonian sense. He viewed the state as a corrupt institution that was at odds with liberty, was often predicated upon oppression, and accordingly needed to be guarded against by the restraints of consent - a position that most real conservatives today would find agreeable.

Which is all well and good, except that you would have to know more about Spooner, and the historical context, to have any chance of properly interpreting the information.

If you doubt the context of what I posted or believe that I have somehow misrepresented Spooner's words, by all means look him up yourself and prove me wrong. Until then have a nice day.