Conservatives' core duty on WMD

CS Monitor ^ | July 08, 2003 edition | Doug Bandow

[JohnGalt]

Attacking the messenger was easier than dealing with the article I suppose.

[Eva]

Well, I guess that the Libertarians have not done a very good job of projecting a unified image, then.

[af_vet_rr]

That's assuming that the stuff is even still in Iraq and wasn't all transported to Syria during the year-long runup to the war.

You hit the nail on the head. From the beginning of this year, I believed the actual Iraqi WMD were hidden in another country. I believe the administration knows they are in Syria or somewhere else as well.

[eyespysomething]

Most Old Right libertarians of the Rothbard, Austrian school, Southern Jeffersonian liberal.. are closed borders, pro-life, state rightists, and have little in common with the left-libertarians who support interventions abroad and a strong central state to over-ride local laws (the Texas sodomy ruling two weeks ago was an excellent example of the split.)

Whew! Now I know what I am. lol

I didn't know if I was a small 'l' libertarian, a conservative libertarian, a republitarian or a liberpublican.

[Protagoras]

Cato is opposed to corporate welfare. On this issue, are you ignorant or dishonest?

Cato also does not advocate government "free trade" deals over unfettered free trade by individuals. They do advocate "freer" trade than we currently have. If that means saying a free trade agreement is better than the old government command and control tarrifs and trade restrictions on the way to true free trade, they do it.

Then we'll be stuck with the democrats for another 40 years.

No difference as far as I can tell. The slide into oblivion has been even faster under these people.

[Reaganwuzthebest]

Most of the people in this thread avoid the points raised by the article, it seems to me.

Only because it seems strange that an organization who isn't conservative is telling those who are what they should they think and do. It's no different than the DNC doing it to me.

[JohnGalt]

Just tell me what sources led you to believe that your absurd caricature was an accurate description of libertarians-- small 'l' or big 'L'.

[Protagoras]

Well, I guess that the Libertarians have not done a very good job of projecting a unified image, then.

That isn't the goal. Do you even know what a Libertarian is? Or a libertarian?

[Eva]

I'm not going to argue with you. There have been many articles posted that project this image of Libertarians. You have your opinion and I have mine. There seem to be a lot of conservatives on this board who agree with my perceptions.

I maintain that the Libertarians are positioning themselves to be the new Ross Perot. They sure are in the Northwest, anyway.

[Protagoras]

I look at it with a different view. It goes something like this;

Contributor....."Hey, don't you guys believe in my pet issue? (fill in the blank) It naturally follows your main goal of advancing civil society."

Cato......." We do, but we don't currently have the resources to cover every single issue".

Contributor......." What if I give you the money for it?"

Cato...."Cool, we'll do it then".

That's my take.

[Reaganwuzthebest]

Cato is opposed to corporate welfare.

How reassuring. Except that's exactly what free trade deals with third world countries is, or haven't you noticed? Companies dump Americans, move to China, pay workers .20 an hour then flood our markets with those products at the same price as when they were made here. Now's who getting rich thanks to government sanctioned policies?

There was a time not long ago when we would slap tariffs on companies who did that to protect American jobs. Now people like you and the Cato Institute call it "free trade". Sure it is.

[Consort]

Most Americans believe that action against Saddam's Iraq was necessary, justified, and successful; that it was in the best interest to eliminate a safe haven for Al Qaeda and other terrorists; that Saddam was a weapon of mass destruction based on all the mass graves containing the bodies and bones of masses of people who were mass-destructed; that we had to protect a strategic resource (oil); that we should topple another despotic government in addition to the Teliban in response to 9/11; that our long-term interests were better served, etc. It's hard to argue with success.

I think these types of articles are being written cover the butts of individuals and organizations "just in case" it gets out of hand, and to play mind games with Republicans, and especially with Conservatives.

[JohnGalt]

Fair enough, but appreciate that Rothbard disowned the organization he helped to start (Cato) becuase he thought they were getting a little to cozy with certain interests. Jeffersonian libertarians by rule are suspect of anything that goes on in the big city, so call it a cultural difference.

Liberty regards,

[jla]

Sorry - but that's not the same as "is not capable of".

Well no, not if you reason that as a human being he's also 'capable' of punching his mother in the face.
I'm not being a smartass here, I just want to explain my point in an unambiguous way.

No biggie, though. I think he'll be proven correct, ultimately. I sure hope so.

W will be proven correct, I know so.

Keep the faith, Blzbba, because the other side sure won't.

[Protagoras]

I maintain that the Libertarians are positioning themselves to be the new Ross Perot.

Duh! The Libertarian Party (as differing from libertarians) have positioned themselves as an alternative to the other parties long before Perot had the idea. They ARE a political party with the goal of being elected and instituting their policies.

As to your "unified" view, organising libertarians is like herding cats.

[Truthsayer20]

"Can you give an example?"

Paleo-libertarians use ideological arguments based on natural rights all the time. See Lew Rockwell's writings, for example.

"As far as ideology goes, Rothbard's Old Right has a fairly long, consitent intellectual history."

Didn't you just state that paleo-libertarianism is not an ideology?

[Protagoras]

Regards

[jla]

In a free society, Bandow can and rightfully should, hold politicions feet to the fire on any and all issues and processes they find appropriate.

What people like Bandow are doing is more like pouring gasoline on the fire. He should know better, and I believe he does. So what's he looking to gain by subjecting W to this charade?

It's the essence of freedom

Bandow is abusing his essence.

[Eva]

You are spinning, using circle reasoning. The Cato Institute presumes to speak for Libertarians.

[JohnGalt]

Ideology has a meaningful definition, I am not pretending the word does not exist.

Rockwell mostly makes political economic arguments which are based in the study of economics rather than ideology. I rarely see him use the natural right defense unless its part of explaining an intellectual history of the American culture.

As to your second question, paleo-libertarianism relies more on ideology than paleo-conservatism, fair point, however, perhaps it was my misunderstanding for how you were employing the word 'ideology.'