Free Republic

Agreed, though the funny thing is, Goebbels wasn’t even the first to coin that phrase. Vladimir Lenin apparently coined the phrase well before him. And there’s evidence that it came straight from the likes of Voltaire and his ilk.

No, free will is the root of all evil. Money’s merely ONE branch. There have been plenty of evil people who didn’t have money as a motivation at all for their evil nature (like Marquis de Sade, for example).

But I definitely agree those two need to be locked up for life at best.

Voltaire if anything was a key factor in the attempted genocide against Christians during the French Revolution, and his ultimate aim was to destroy God because he can’t stand the latter being smarter than him (basically, compare Voltaire to Lex Luthor from Superman, only in this case, I’d argue Voltaire was even LESS impressive than Lex Luthor. At least the latter made a lot of impressive scientific achievements that had him earn his tatus as having a high intellect, while Voltaire wrote puerile philosophical writings and who’s only real accomplishment beyond his pretentious writings was outright scamming a lottery). So I’d say he’s definitely evil. Not to mention he helped inspire Karl Marx.

And funny thing is, he himself tried to PUSH absurdities. Abbe Barruell more than exposed this, as did Timothy Dwight.

Korea was technically still on-going, so it’s neither a win nor a loss.

As far as Vietnam was concerned, that was closer to a win on our part. We helmed the peace talks, which is usually done by the winner of a conflict. Dennis Prager made that much clear in this video, and we even were going to declare a holiday at the time: Victory in Vietnam Day. What ACTUALLY happened was that the Supermajority of Democrats took advantage of their newfound supermajority as a result of the Watergate scandal and Nixon’s resignation and backed off of our obligation to supply piecemeal aid to the South Vietnamese and thus outright sabotaged their chances. Here’s the video explaining it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7hqYGHZCJwk

And if we count proxy wars where we had indirect involvement, we actually won the Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan and several battles during the 1980s, firmly won (though I’ll acknowledge Afghanistan was pyrrhic due to al Quaeda’s rise).

So, using the Guardian’s logic, Fannie Kaplan and Molotov were pining for the Czar? Despite being huge communists in their own right? Just because they like Putin also made criticisms of Lenin (heck, tried to assassinate Lenin in the case of Fanny)?

And last I checked, the event that Putin called the greatest geopolitical disaster in history was the fall of the USSR, NOT the fall of Czarist Russia (ie, 1917), and he also still had Lenin statues installed in Ukraine, not to mention despite having plenty of opportunities to use his clout to shut down the Lenin Mausoleum and bury him in an unmarked grave at best, he still keeps it open. That sounds like he’s more in favor of Communism than for Imperial Russia.

Unfortunately, I suspect he knew full well what that revolution actually entailed, mostly because he was on-site in France at the time its version of the shot that rang through the world, the Storming of the Bastille, happened. There’s no way he COULDN’T have witnessed the parading of the severed body parts from that riot. It’s also why I don’t nearly have as much respect for him now (had he truly been consistent with his views on liberty, that if anything would have inspired him to be AGAINST the French Revolution, citing John Adams’ handling of the British during the Boston Massacre on WHY he’d be a vocal critic of it, NOT singing praises for it). Only thing I can respect him for is the Louisiana Purchase, the Declaration of Independence, and the United States Navy (and even the Declaration of Independence in particular I’d probably say was a narrowly-dodged bullet ESPECIALLY after his involvement in the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen’s drafting). At least the other Founding Fathers had relative ignorance due to delays in communication at that time as an excuse for why they might have initially supported the French Revolution, Jefferson doesn’t.

As far as Thomas Paine, he shouldn’t have sided with the Jacobins, that much I will say. I also heard that he actually advocated for a progressive tax, showing he completely forgot why we even HAD our revolution (King George III had us undergo a progressive tax system, and that was a major part in why we rebelled. He ought to remember, since he wrote about it).

Not to mention the “Christian” Jefferson had absolutely no problem singing praises to the anti-Christian butchers known as the Jacobin revolutionaries up to and even beyond the September Massacres. Sorry, but if he were Christian, he’d outright CITE their massacres of Christians as a reason NOT to support the Jacobin excesses, not even caring if that implicitly meant he sided with Louis XVI, and even cite John Adams’ handling of the British during the Boston Massacre as a key difference between the Storming of the Bastille and the Boston Massacre. That’s what I would have done in his shoes, not cheerlead for them (and quite frankly, I’m also pretty sure based on his behavior during Korah’s rebellion that God would have been furious with the Jacobins, and even those Christians who turned the other cheek instead of ensuring God’s dominance over the world by slaying the Jacobins when they had a chance).

Correct me if I’m mistaken, but wasn’t the income tax outright legalized by the Sixteenth Amendment, and Thomas Jefferson of all people advocated for it WELL before Theodore Roosevelt and Taft got it passed?

Honestly, those problems existed even BEFORE the Progressive Era, unfortunately, and you have Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine, and Andrew Jackson to blame for that. ESPECIALLY Jefferson and Paine’s shilling for the Jacobins, even AFTER it became apparent they were truly evil people by the time of the September Massacres. Heck, Jefferson if anything knew EXACTLY what they were like after getting a direct witnessing of the Storming of the Bastille. And let’s not forget Horace Mann was ultimately responsible for the public education system we got, the one that was trash even before Dewey went to town on it.

Eh, I wouldn’t call TR the first progressive president. If anything, I’d consider Thomas Jefferson the first ACTUAL progressive president, especially going by Liberty the God that Failed and how he supported progressivism’s ancestor, the Jacobins.

Oh, trust me, even if he DID go out of his way to bash the “old progressives” like Theodore Roosevelt, he’d STILL be off the mark as to where the rot started. You want the actual start? Try Horace Mann. Heck, better yet, try Thomas Jefferson and Thomas Paine, and in fact, Thomas Jefferson was one of the first people to actually PROPOSE a progressive tax system, well before the 16th amendment was a reality. https://www.civicsnation.org/2018/05/23/thomas-jefferson-invented-progressive-taxation/

https://www.theblaze.com/contributions/why-liberals-think-being-educated-means-being-liberal

https://thekeep.eiu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4779&context=theses

Yeah, considering Jefferson alongside Paine ultimately tried to advance the French Enlightenment I really wouldn’t cite him as a reason to retain faith in the Enlightenment. It also doesn’t help that Christopher A. Ferrara made it pretty clear that even John Locke was trying to upchuck Christianity in his book Liberty the God that Failed.

Also, while I definitely agree Rousseau more than made his contribution to the awful French/Contintental Enlightenment, I wouldn’t say he’s the worst of the worst, even if we were to include Julius Evola. Let’s not forget, Voltaire was directly responsible for France throwing out the Jesuits and overall utilizing what would later be known as Cancel Culture, and going by Timothy Dwight and Abbe Barruell, they even created various forgeries with the specific intent of destroying people’s belief in God and distributed them throughout at least France if not the entire world. To put it another way, Voltaire and his buddies tried to do the same thing that Richard Rorty boasted that he did with his students. And he was so successful in that regard that even Conservatives are believing him to be on their side and a defender of freedom of expression/freedom of speech (which he was neither, if anything he outright PERVERTED those concepts, even just cynically use the terms to gain power before eviscerating them once he got power even in the most remote sense, like what Lenin infamously did with Freedom of Speech and his boasting why he did a 180 when asked.). Worse is that unlike Rousseau, who at least had evidence of being mentally ill, Voltaire knew FULL well he was pushing lies. In fact, the progressive movement if anything came directly from the French Enlightenment, which Jefferson even tried to import here with his support of Public Education going by this essay here: https://thekeep.eiu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4779&context=theses

You want to know who ELSE was ferociously left wing? Thomas Jefferson. Left-wing enough to constantly give support to the Jacobins even AFTER the September Massacres had the rest of the Founding Fathers turn against them (oh, and also despite getting a direct witness to the parade of body parts that was the Storming of the Bastille, he praised them, called them little different from the American War of Independence, and even played a direct role in the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen [which was also why he was one of the few founding fathers to NOT be involved in the Constitutional Convention, BTW]. This, BTW, was also why he and John Adams had their big falling out). In fact, I’d even argue Jefferson was a proto-TR in that sense.

Regarding Theodore Roosevelt, all I can say is that there’s plenty of blame to go around regarding who caused the income tax or progressive tax.

I will be quick to point out, however, that pushing for a progressive income tax in American history didn’t start with Roosevelt. In fact, the guy who actually voiced interest in it first was none other than Thomas Paine, and he actually was very contemptuous of the Bill of Rights (I believe he called it a “bill of wrongs”, if I recall correctly). And if Liberty the God that Failed by Christopher A. Ferrara and even Jefferson’s own library is to be believed, Jefferson himself actually pushed similar stuff as well.

Seriously? You call TRUMP a Con Man when you are literally owning a book written by one of the biggest con men of all? I’m serious: Karl Marx was a notorious moocher and didn’t really believe anything he was writing about the working masses (especially when his endgoal was making a bloodier remake of the Reign of Terror, being in love with its nihilistic violence. That guy who shot up the Aurora Colorado theater was definitely a lot more honest about what he actually desired when he did that, even if delusional).

Yes, especially when those same guys shill for Putin, despite Trump repeatedly going against Putin and if anything condemning Merkel for making a deal that benefits Putin (why on earth would he condemn her for that if he’s on Putin’s side?). That bit is also why I quit Conservapedia.

And just so we’re clear, when I say EVERYONE is fearful of breaking the law, I even include myself if I ruled over everyone. Be neurotically terrified even of my breaking the law, much less everyone else doing so. I guess a good comparison is Batman’s One Rule from the Batman franchise (the no killing one). Either that, or Adrian Monk from... well, Monk.

The Enlightenment is PRECISELY what led to this darkness. Or have you forgotten just how big of a role Voltaire, Diderot, Rousseau, and Sade played in the Jacobins’ actions, and ultimately in Karl Marx’s creation of Marxism, and Antonio Gramsci’s creation of Cultural Marxism, and all of that?

I’d argue that anarchy would if anything be more of an end in itself since the Marxists care far more about destruction than in any REAL sense of control. Heck, Lenin if anything outright made any actual law and order illegal when he made the Soviet Union, showing how if anything tyranny was the means to an end with them. I’m doubtful a group would merely view anarchy as a means to an end when their specific endgoal entailed the abolishment of any and all government as well (the state will fade away). Heck, the likes of Karl Marx outright SAID that the entire POINT behind his theories is to make an even bloodier remake of Robespierre’s Reign of Terror. I guess for a good comparison of what Marxists are truly like are the Joker from Batman, particularly the Dark Knight where they are solely interested in causing chaos for its own sake. Just read up Leninthink by Gary Saul Morson for a good idea on what they’re truly aiming for (it certainly isn’t control. I aim for control as well, but I ultimately think control would require that the laws are rigid, absolute, unbinding even to me, much less anyone else, basically we’re reduced to mere machines, and the one pulling the strings isn’t even me, either, and even the ones actually in control are too terrified of breaking the laws they set in place).

And I’ve heard of The Road to Serfdom and am familiar with it, and if anything I think they’ve only got it half-right.

There’s one small problem with your “true political spectrum” theory: Anarchism is also joined at the hip with Marxism (note how Sartre, who specifically considers his philosophy anarchistic, often sides with Marxist tyrants. Not to mention how Karl Marx himself specifically stated one of the endgoals for Communism was the destruction of the state itself, or even how the French Revolutionary Jacobins sought to END any form of governance and have it be a bloodletting event as a result.), so anarchism can’t be on the opposite side either. True true political spectrum would be more adherence to God alone (right wing) and not adhering to God at all (left wing).