Bidinotto teaches Conservatives how to "Get Real"


Recommended Posts

I found this article a few weeks ago, pulled it down, printed it, passed it around to friends while waiting for permission from the New Individualist to send it out electronically. Today, watching Fox and the announcement just came that the Dems have the votes needed to pass this Health Reform bill.

If Rush was right and "we are talking philosophy here folks", then it will be the ideas formulated by the defenders of liberty that will eventually make the re-founding possible. The Republicans have absolutely got to understand the basic principles of Objectivism, and therefore the basic principles of individualism and capitalism if they are to be able to help even just one little iota. I am mailing out copies of this article along with other articles to my Senator and others at both the federal level and the local level.

http://objectivistcenter.org/ct-1876-Up_from.aspx

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Rush was right and "we are talking philosophy here folks", then it will be the ideas formulated by the defenders of liberty that will eventually make the re-founding possible. The Republicans have absolutely got to understand the basic principles of Objectivism, and therefore the basic principles of individualism and capitalism if they are to be able to help even just one little iota. I am mailing out copies of this article along with other articles to my Senator and others at both the federal level and the local level.

Don't hold your breath. The Republicans were Statists from the git-go. The first Republican president, Abraham Lincoln oversaw the dismantling of the original Federal system.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where did someone get the idea that the Republican Party cares one whit about individual liberty or a free market? Did I miss a meeting or something?

JR

I think from some of its members' and supporters' rhetoric... But in that vein, if one selectively read some Democratic Party material, one might come to the same mistaken conclusion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Rush was right and "we are talking philosophy here folks", then it will be the ideas formulated by the defenders of liberty that will eventually make the re-founding possible. The Republicans have absolutely got to understand the basic principles of Objectivism, and therefore the basic principles of individualism and capitalism if they are to be able to help even just one little iota. I am mailing out copies of this article along with other articles to my Senator and others at both the federal level and the local level.

Don't hold your breath. The Republicans were Statists from the git-go. The first Republican president, Abraham Lincoln oversaw the dismantling of the original Federal system.

Ba'al Chatzaf

True! And the Republican Party has maintained the tradition of supporting big government to this day. The funny thing is, though, they tend to get praised or damned for lowering taxes, cutting government, de-regulation, and supporting free markets. (Granted, there are individual Republican Party members that go against the general trend, but they tend to be isolated and have almost no impact -- especially when that party is in power.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I watched the house speeches before the vote, and every Republican said the same thing...that we needed to reform the health care system. No one said that the programs we already have are the problem. If you concede the main point what does it matter if you draw the line halfway between where the other side wants to be...they just keep asking for more and more till they get what they want. Give up on the Republicans: they will never never fight against government..they are a big part of the problem and not the solution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I watched the house speeches before the vote, and every Republican said the same thing...that we needed to reform the health care system. No one said that the programs we already have are the problem. If you concede the main point what does it matter if you draw the line halfway between where the other side wants to be...they just keep asking for more and more till they get what they want. Give up on the Republicans: they will never never fight against government..they are a big part of the problem and not the solution.

I agree. Trying to change the Republican Party seems to result in so much wasted effort, in my view. That effort could be expended elsewhere and would, in my opinion, have a bigger impact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The GOP is only legislative opposition in the country.

They need more philosophical education. Ayn Rand made this point almost 50 years ago.

We should encourage people to vote against senior GOP Congressmen in the primaries and replace them with people who understand good ideas. I would except people from the above like Paul Ryan and Ron Paul.

When candidates forums are held make the point that it is America's wars that are the biggest part of our debt. Don't forget to include the so-called war on "drugs".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The GOP is only legislative opposition in the country.

They need more philosophical education. Ayn Rand made this point almost 50 years ago.

We should encourage people to vote against senior GOP Congressmen in the primaries and replace them with people who understand good ideas. I would except people from the above like Paul Ryan and Ron Paul.

When candidates forums are held make the point that it is America's wars that are the biggest part of our debt. Don't forget to include the so-called war on "drugs".

The problem with your first sentence is it's assuming the GOP is a fertile ground for this. In fact, historically and today, the GOP is a statist party with a core philosophy that's all the things Rand otherwise would have ranted against: collectivism, economic interventionism, and a big dose of faith-based stuff.

That said, I don't mean these people can never ever change, but it does make me think it'd be a harder sell for them than either trying the same with others.

I agree with talking about the "War on Drugs," though my approach would be to mention, too, that this is a freedom issue -- that people have a right to use whatever drugs they want to -- rather than merely a fiscal one -- as if the only problem here were we just can't afford to violate people's rights, so we have to pick and choose. In fact, this issue highlights why the GOP is, at its very roots, statist and part of the problem: the GOP has a history of being rabidly anti-freedom in this area and has initiated much of the anti-drug policy we have today. Nixon and Reagan -- the latter is an icon for Republicans today -- both put into place much of the "War on Drugs" apparatus we have now, including the virtual erasure of the Fourth Amendment and the Gestapo-style police raids that are all too common in a supposedly free country. All the GOP talk about liberty and individualism evaporates once the topic turns to things like allowing people to smoke pot. Then the true fascist mentality evinces itself for most of them.

Finally, as George H. Smith pointed out (and he's not alone here), the GOP has a history of both sounding very libertarian or pro-market when it's in the opposition and of using up anti-statists and individualists. As soon as it's back in power, all the pro-liberty and pro-market rhetoric is cast aside and the anti-liberty and anti-market policies are put into practice. And the process repeats. The sad part of this is two-fold. Time and again: pro-libertry and pro-market people are duped into supporting the GOP and others, fooled by GOP rhetoric, come to see GOP policies as freedom in action -- and freedom and free markets takes the blame for the failures of GOP-style statism.

So why get on the GOP merry-go-round again? Why do you think that this time it will be different -- as opposed to all the other times? Why do you think you're in a much better position today to change things that people in former decades who believed basically the same as you and felt they had a fine chance also that they could change? Why do you think you'll succeed now in somehow transforming a basically statist political party that's been around since the mid-19th century (and statist from its start) into some sort of wildly pro-market, anti-government party? Why do you believe that the GOP elite won't merely use you for its ends and chuck you into the bin once it's back in office -- as it's done time and again?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Dan; The GOP is not going to go away.

People in the GOP need to talk about legalizing drugs. It will not be received well at the first go around but if it is not talked about it will go no where.

With some people talking about the cost of the war on "drugs" may be the only way to get them to think about the issue at all.

Sadly we are not going to change the country with a third party. Third party don't do well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dan; The GOP is not going to go away.

People in the GOP need to talk about legalizing drugs. It will not be received well at the first go around but if it is not talked about it will go no where.

With some people talking about the cost of the war on "drugs" may be the only way to get them to think about the issue at all.

Sadly we are not going to change the country with a third party. Third party don't do well.

The GOP, like any other organization, is not some immutable law of nature. It can, indeed, go away. There was, as you should know, a time before there was a GOP. There's likely to be a time after too. Or do you believe it's immortal?

Regarding talking to people about legalizing drugs, I wouldn't limit this to people in the GOP. I would talk to anyone who will listen and who is likely to change their minds to the correct position on this issue: individuals should have the right to ingest whatever they please without outside interference and any group, including a government, that stops this should be considered a pariah and dealt with accordingly. (My guess is statists -- including those who happen to make up the GOP at present -- will not agree with that position. After all, it tramples underfoot their God, the state.)

The cost case for elimination drug prohibition, while it may get your foot in the door, still leaves the moral case outside. It makes it sound as if, "Gee, if we could only afford to oppress people more, it'd be the right thing to do, but, sadly, we only have so much money, so we'll have to oppress them a little bit less." In other words, you're compromising core principles in hopes of gaining some political traction. Hasn't that been tried before?

As for a third party, I don't know. A good point, however, is not all change happens at the ballot box or because of political parties. In fact, my guess is if most people in the world decided that drug prohibition was wrong and openly disobeyed the laws on this -- including disrupting an efforts to enforce drug prohibition -- then drug prohibition would fall regardless of whether the various political parties or elites wanted it. Of course, that kind of change usually takes longer, but it also usually lasts longer because it's not a gift of some politicians.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Dan; The GOP is not going to go away.

People in the GOP need to talk about legalizing drugs. It will not be received well at the first go around but if it is not talked about it will go no where.

With some people talking about the cost of the war on "drugs" may be the only way to get them to think about the issue at all.

Sadly we are not going to change the country with a third party. Third party don't do well.

The GOP, like any other organization, is not some immutable law of nature. It can, indeed, go away. There was, as you should know, a time before there was a GOP. There's likely to be a time after too. Or do you believe it's immortal?

Regarding talking to people about legalizing drugs, I wouldn't limit this to people in the GOP. I would talk to anyone who will listen and who is likely to change their minds to the correct position on this issue: individuals should have the right to ingest whatever they please without outside interference and any group, including a government, that stops this should be considered a pariah and dealt with accordingly. (My guess is statists -- including those who happen to make up the GOP at present -- will not agree with that position. After all, it tramples underfoot their God, the state.)

The cost case for elimination drug prohibition, while it may get your foot in the door, still leaves the moral case outside. It makes it sound as if, "Gee, if we could only afford to oppress people more, it'd be the right thing to do, but, sadly, we only have so much money, so we'll have to oppress them a little bit less." In other words, you're compromising core principles in hopes of gaining some political traction. Hasn't that been tried before?

As for a third party, I don't know. A good point, however, is not all change happens at the ballot box or because of political parties. In fact, my guess is if most people in the world decided that drug prohibition was wrong and openly disobeyed the laws on this -- including disrupting an efforts to enforce drug prohibition -- then drug prohibition would fall regardless of whether the various political parties or elites wanted it. Of course, that kind of change usually takes longer, but it also usually lasts longer because it's not a gift of some politicians.

Exactly Chris. And what men have made of the GOP can be remade by the Egoists and Capitalists who want to help Nathanel and Barbara Branden, Yaron Brook and Bidinotto "save this country." The original Republicans were the founding fathers who hated Democracy. So, it's the Republican party that I am hoping to change. I'm a delegate to the convention for the Iowa 3rd District convention coming up this Saturday. I may not be able to affect anything. But I'm going to try. And if at first you don't succeed, try, try again.

Here's the essence of the problem that is threatening our very lives:

Capitalism + Egoism versus Collectivism + Altruism

Edited by Mary Lee Harsha
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now