Tuesday, October 6, 2009

Conservatives and Libertarians: Friends of Necessity

Together At Last!

This is certainly not an original thought, but as I've been pondering the recent political landscape one thing seems clear to me: Libertarians and Conservatives have more in common than they do not, and need each other in order for reason to once again rule Washington, DC.

It was very apparent to me shortly after iWon's inauguration that the political right had fractured into its thousand tiny little sects, each claiming had their brand of politics been adhered, the White House would never have been lost. The truth is the political right is as varied as the individuals that make it up. The reason for it's diversity is that in order to be on the right, you must be able to think for yourself. As Limbaugh is repeatedly saying, 'Conservatism is an intellectual persuit...' It takes nothing more than 'feelings' in order to be a liberal. All one must do is let their heart lead them in matters to know what being a liberal is all about. Unfortunately, what the heart desires is hardly ever what is best for anyone.

The right, naturally breaks down into multiple small interest groups congregating around which ever conservative principles they deem most important. Unfortunately, following an elector defeat, the party out of power turns inward upon itself blaming other sects of the same ideology for the defeats. Most recently I've witnessed a very bitter battle brewing between the self proclaimed 'Libertarians' and 'Neocons.' Now, as we all know, the Necons must be stopped. Libertarians, just like most other sects on the right, believe that they have the magic formula for ultimate happiness and peace and harmony and political power. Yes mom, I realize that was a run on sentence. Stick with me. As most political sects do, Libertarians have rallied around a leader which they believe best speaks for their movement. That charismatic (read loony) leader is Ron Paul. Paulnuts have targeted another conservative leader for their ire and disdain. That charismatic (read loony) leader is Glenn Beck. Hilarity ensues, or not:

By the way, the unedited, uncorrected title of that Video on YouTube is as follows:
Glenn Beck is a Neocon Not a Libertarian And he never supported Dr Ron Paul true constitutionalist Glenn is trying to infest a true grass roots people with his pretender fairytales
Now, here's the deal... Ron Paul is dead on about some things, and batshit crazy about others. Let's start with the good. I am all for (as are most on the right) returning this country to it's founding principles, and to taking a much more originalist interpretation of the Constitution. I am also all for the government staying the hell out of my personal life. He's a little off on Tax policy, advocating no income taxes what-so-ever, but I'd much rather have his tax system than our current one. However, to insinuate that the United States was somehow responsible for what happened in Manhattan on 9/11/01 makes the man certifiable. His isolationist policies make him a perfect candidate for Congress... in 1911. To somehow believe that the economic and security interests of the United States can be served, while simultaneously closing all military bases in every foriegn country is naive at best. Also, to even consider going back to the Gold Standard is novel idea, but no where near pragmatic. From the Wikipedia:

The total value of all gold ever mined would be US$4.78 trillion

Last year's GDP: $14.2 Trillion

Anyone see the problem with going back onto the gold standard? Here's a hint: $4.7 Trillion < $14.2 Trillion. Now, as to Beck... Where to begin? Beck has been right in intent and poor in execution. His recent program on Communist symbology in the artwork at the Rockefeller Plaza in New York made 9/11 truthers look sane by comparison. However, he seems to be the only 'major media figure' inquiring about corruption within the appointments of the Obama Administration. Many today would have no idea who Van Jones is, were it not for Beck's investigations, and 'asking reasonable questions.' Here's the dirty little secret, though... we all need eachother. True story. We need those on the right who advocate for originalist interpretation of the Constitution, who shed light on the inner workings (both good and bad) of the government, who understand governments place in our lives a la the founders intent. We need all these views, together. The fact is Libertarians and the rest of the Conservative movement need each other to succeed. Let's reclaim the White House, Capitol Hill, and get a Conservative bench, then we can fuss over legalizing pot, mmkay?

For the record, I consider both Ron Paul and Glenn Beck conservatives. They are both to be found on the right side of the political spectrum, however, they both self identify as Libertarians. I am not insinuating, as Paul supporters do, that Beck is a Neocon and not a Libertarian.

Ron Paul, not for President 2012.

Please take the time to comment!

5 People Have Had Their Say:

paul mitchell on October 7, 2009 at 5:48 AM said...

I agree about a couple of Paul's ideas, and he has only twice voted for spending bills since he has been in Congress, but yes, he is a fruitcake.

Can we let the Libertarians in, but ignore their screeching need for weed? Dude, go smoke your weed and shut the fuck up. Can you imagine how bad government approved weed would have to be?

classicaliberal on October 7, 2009 at 1:51 PM said...

I am willing to have a debate about the legalization of marijuwanna, AFTER we've retaken the House the Senate and the White House. Until then it is meaningless noise. Let's focus on electing small government, fiscally conservative candidates, then deal with that other junk later.

Skunkfeathers on October 7, 2009 at 3:55 PM said...

Hell, if we can retake the House in '10 and the White House in '12, I'll take up smoking alfalfa.

ChristinaJade on October 7, 2009 at 9:46 PM said...

Dang, Skunk...I think dried banana peels would be better than that. And that's NASTY! (hush, like no one else did that in the 7th grade)

CL, it seems to me that conservatives of all types are beginning to put petty differences aside for the greater good, so to speak. Last night I heard a man say that Glenn was nothing but a liberal who just so happened to be patriotic. Needless to say, I spent 30 minutes tossing some facts and figures around and explaining why "liberal patriot" is pretty much an oxymoron.

Long story short, you're right. (lookie! a pun!) We do all need each other to get 'er done in '10 and '12.

matt on May 15, 2010 at 7:01 PM said...

The debate for legalizing weed is included in the libertarian viewpoint of a more standard constitutional interpretation. The 18th amendment had to be created to prohibit alcohol distribution, and the 23rd to repeal the 18th amendment and get its distribution legal again. This was not done for marijuana or any controlled substance for this matter. Because of this the supreme court has never taken up the case, because they know it could result in all prohibitory drug laws instantly being nullified. Its very convenient that the supreme court only takes about 1% of submitted cases and it is up to them which cases they take. So basically stfu about weed and focus on a more standard interpretation of the constitution as it is more likely to get somewhere. FWIW I think all drugs should be legal and the gov's responsibility to inform people of known facts about them, why should one human have the right to saw what another does with his body if hes informed and it only hurts himself?


I Am Classicaliberal And You Should, Too!. Copyright 2009-2010 All Rights Reserved Revolution Two Church theme by Brian Gardner Converted into Blogger Template by Bloganol dot com Background Image Courtesy bama287