Clash of Political Positions
Posted by Martin C. Fox on January 22, 2012
Robert Cogan’s Clash of Political Positions in the current Erie Reader got me to thinking about political tags from a Libertarian viewpoint. Mr. Cogan presents an enlightening comparison of political philosophies, primarily liberal, progressive, conservative and Libertarian. He describes many characteristics of each breed that I agree with. There are many unfortunate similarities also. These groups are not at all what they pretend to be. There are few real conservatives for example, at least not in the paleo-conservative Robert Taft tradition. The neo-conservative is definitely big government . Consider prescription drug programs, patriot act, perpetual war and no child left behind. Gingrich, as you may recall, was behind the contract with America that was to reduce government size and cost. That contract hit the shredder before the ink was dry. Believe nothing he says. Few of today’s conservatives and liberals ever met a war they didn’t like. Republicrats have taken the notion that America’s way is the only way. Polar opposite, multi-thousand year old cultures would be oh so much better as part of our empire…err under our most benevolent guidance. One hundred years (especially after WWI & II) of throwing groups together that hate each others guts and calling them countries , overthrowing rulers and otherwise interfering in things that are none of our business has the Balkans and Middle East in particular hating OUR guts. Bin Laden himself said the reason the US was attacked was because of years of covert and overt meddling in the Middle East’s business and violating sacred ground. It had nothing to do with our (dwindling) freedoms as the idiot W proclaimed. So much for the real conservative philosophy of minding one’s own business and no foreign entanglements. Where is the liberal “tolerance” in escalating drone wars in half a dozen countries that have done us no harm? Why on God’s green earth does the “progressive” Obama station troops in Australia that will only breed China’s antagonism? Would we tolerate China’s troops in the Caribbean? Why would a “progressive” Hillary advocate stationing missiles in Eastern Europe to protect Europe from Iran when real purpose is obvious to Russia? Liberals are the party of peace, right? I often wonder what the Nobel Peace Prize committee thinks of Mr. Obama now.
Mr. Cogan discusses Obama’s label. Is he liberal, socialist, Muslim or what? I see him as corporatist, the Fascist concept of government not owning corporations but controlling them. The government obtained enough of General Motors that it could fire its top level officials and dictate concentration on green hybrid autos. The Volt has since been a sales disaster. Most having to be recalled for auto-igniting batteries. So much for government not being able to take and control private property. Big government efficiency is up to its usual standards. The neo-conservative, liberal and progressive philosophical theories may differ but they are quite similar in practice. Power, money and control over you and me (for our own good, of course).
Mr. Cogan comments on Libertarians also. He makes the surprising statement that Ron Paul could do little because of the “extreme limits on presidential power”. Why am I thinking Patriot Act (George W.) and National Defense Authorization Act (Obama)? Paul, the antithesis of these gentlemen, may not be able to do all he wants if elected but his real goal is to bring his concerns to light. He has certainly put the spotlight on the abomination that is the Federal Reserve. Ignore the “isolationist” comments. It is an impossible concept in the modern world, unless you live in a country that makes you eat tree bark. Mr. Cogan describes Libertarians as “min anarchists”. Maybe so. One definition in my dictionary is government replaced by voluntary co-operative groups. Please Google Michael Rozeff and Panarchism. Libertarians are the third largest party in terms of appointed and elected officials. Yet there are few, if any, in high, powerful office. I have no doubt about Ron Paul’s commitment but the real question is if Libertarians (or pick your party) come to power, how long will they last before succumbing to the temptations of that foul serpent Washington?
This entry was posted on January 22, 2012 at 9:25 am and is filed under Political Philosophy. Tagged: Bin Laden, Corporatist, Libertarian, National Defense Authorization Act, Panarchism, patriot act, progressive, Robert Cogan, Ron Paul. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.