Sign in to follow this  
Ed Hudgins

Yes, Sen. Harkin. It's A Civil War!

Recommended Posts

September 27, 2013 – Iowa Democratic Sen. Tom Harkin, in a speech about raising the debt ceiling, said, “We are at one of the most dangerous points in our history right now. Every bit as dangerous as the break-up of the Union before the Civil War.”

On this point, he is absolutely right! But it is Harkin and his ilk, led by President Obama, who are tearing apart the Republic.

Harkin aimed his remarks at Texas Republican Sen. Ted Cruz, who filibustered against the implementation of Obamacare, and against Cruz’s Tea Party allies.

Harkin complained about “a small group of willful men and women who have a certain ideology.” He continued, “Since they can't get their way, they're going to create this confusion and discourse and hope that the public will be so mixed up in who is to blame for this, that they'll blame both sides.”

But there is no confusion. Pandering power-hungry paternalist politicians like Harkin are to blame!

I have been writing for some years that “America is drifting toward civil war … the conflict is between producers, those who work to earn their own way and prosper through their own efforts, and expropriators, those who survive by taking from others with governments as their agents.”

Today, the contradictions of the welfare state—exacerbated by Obamacare, which gives the feds control over one-sixth of the economy—have reached crisis levels. As government entitlements and spending grow, deficits grow and governments seek more revenues from already over-taxed and over-regulated wealth-creators, further stifling wealth creation and creating yet more demands for government assistance.

Right now the federal government borrows 40 cents for every dollar it spends. The national debt under Obama has gone from $10 trillion to $18.2 trillion, equal to the country’s GDP. And yet Obama, Harkin, and their cronies seek an increase in the debt ceiling so they can further bankrupt the country.

Worse, such politicians, in their lust to loot, have spent their political lives fanning the flames of envy, damning prosperous individuals for the “sin” of prospering through their own efforts, and then demanding that they produce even more for the politicians to expropriate. And, too often, producers have been guilt-tripped into apologizing for being productive and prosperous, for their virtues.

It is the paternalist politicians who have rebelled against the principles of individual liberty—“a certain ideology”—on which this country was founded: that we each have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and that government should be limited to protecting those rights. It is these politicians who seek to make us all servile, to keep us dependent on their largess as they feed off a shrinking number of victims.

But now the producers are waking up and standing up against the likes of Obama and Harking. Atlas is shrugging. And a civil war will only be avoided if productive individuals and those who have been made dependent on government by such politicians reclaim their liberty and dignity.
----
Hudgins is director of advocacy and a senior scholar at The Atlas Society.

For further information:

“Edward Hudgins, "Producers vs. Expropriators: America's Coming Civil War.” April 13, 2010.

*Edward Hudgins, “America's ‘Civil War’ Debt Battle.” August 3, 2011.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most dangerous point in history my ass. Politicians need to learn how to keep their damn hyperbole to themselves.

Points in our history that actually were dangerous:

  • The War of 1812 since it was a land invasion by the British (plus the Canadians).
  • The Civil War since the tensions were actually a damn bit higher than they are now.
  • World War II since we were attacked and had to enter the sequel to the Great War.
  • The Cuban missile crisis since we came within an inch of initiating a nuclear holocaust.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to agree with this list - but we would have been gentle with you if we had continued our conquest in 1812 - honest.

Ed may be referring to the Republicans' empty threat to shut down the government and cause chaos "on principle". but the threat was always empty and everybody knew it.

He may be harking back to the Buchanan "culture wars" rallying cry.

I am sure he is sincere and expects the train to crash in the tunnel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Civil War: interesting term. It means that two or more groups are claiming to represent the nation, attempting to seize or hold the capital and the other offices of government. Lacking control of the central city, they may hold an outlying city or province and declare themselves the provisional government. Gang warfare as between Mafia families or drug cartels is not civil war. Resistance to the government - even massive demonstrations and battles in the streets are not civil war. Gandhi in India, civil rights in America, or the anti-globalist anti-GTO protests, Occupy, the Freetown Christiana neighborhood of Copenhagen, or the many other similar conflicts are not civil wars.

John Galt's strike was not a civil war -- and we are talking strike here: "Atlas is shrugging," Ed Hutchins said.

As for the War of 1812 - myself, I look to the Hartford Convention. When the "war" actually took place is arguable, perhaps 1809 at the start until the unfortunate Battle of New Orleans and the Treaty of Ghent 1815. All in all, for all the unnecessary bloodshed it was little more than a schoolyard scrap among nations in the same family.

Likewise the real Civil War civil war might have begun with John Brown's Raid on Harper's Ferry... and might not actually be over yet...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to agree with this list - but we would have been gentle with you if we had continued our conquest in 1812 - honest.

Ed may be referring to the Republicans' empty threat to shut down the government and cause chaos "on principle". but the threat was always empty and everybody knew it.

He may be harking back to the Buchanan "culture wars" rallying cry.

I am sure he is sincere and expects the train to crash in the tunnel.

The proverbial train will crash in the tunnel if we keep borrowing 40 cents on the dollar and doubling our debt every 8 years.

These are mathematical facts, and quips won't make them go away. And the Republicans are almost as much to blame for this as anybody else.

Apparently, most people in charge of the train in this country don't care to think about what will happen to the innocent folks sleeping in their beds when it happens.

I believe Rand called this blank-out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PDS is on the mark. The Dems as well as a number of Republicans can hide their heads in the sand but objective reality will bite them in the butt.

I’ll add concerning some other comments that the country is deeply polarized. A Gallup poll in 2012 found some 86 percent of Democrats approved of Obama’s performance compared to only 10 percent of Republicans, a 76 point difference that tied the spread concerning George W. Bush’s performance in 2004.

Until recent decades I argue that most liberal Democratic Party officeholders tended to favor the system of private ownership of the means of production with economic decisions—what wages paid, what prices charged—determined in the market. Individuals had the principal responsibility to look after themselves and their families. But liberals also advocated a government social safety net to make sure no one ended up destitute, and government tweaking of the market.

Today, liberals favor a cradle-to-grave welfare state with government controlling every aspect of life. That is what’s different from the past and why we’re in such perilous shape.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK. But as often as mathematical facts have succeeding in explaining past economic disasters, they have failed to predict future ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No. But, you can't keep punishing production by stealing from producers, then borrowing or printing money forever and get away with it. That's the math to say nothing of the morality of the matter.

Manifestations and timing of collapse will differ from country to country. But we see in America, for example, businesses sitting on $1 trillion or more in capital because they don't want to expose it to Obama's ravenous ghouls. With the right policies America can be pulled back from the brink, but right now we're not on the brink of such a pullback.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ed,

Am I correct in understanding that the Atlas Society has allied with the Students For Liberty?

I know that the Young Americans For Liberty is also part of the pro individual freedom "network" so I assume the Atlas Society has a similar alliance with YAL too.

I gather that both SFL and YAL members are essentially student activists who not only recruit others to "join the party" but also educate and enlighten themselves by reading a variety of books.

I wonder just what actions or advice the Atlas Society engages in with regard to its alliance with both groups?

Are there certain books that every member of both organizations is encouraged to read?

I find on the YALiberty site that they claim to have 125,000 student activists already. Have you any idea how long it is taking for the number of activists to double!?

Do you agree with me that this movement has the potential to grow exponentially in a relatively short time?

Do you predict that this movement will become publically visible and influential in the near future?

Please share with us your thoughts about the future of these organizations if they are likely to realize their potential.

I do support both of them with donations and knowing they exist helps me to sleep at night.

Thanks for your efforts in our cause.

gg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But we see in America, for example, businesses sitting on $1 trillion or more in capital because they don't want to expose it to Obama's ravenous ghouls. With the right policies America can be pulled back from the brink, but right now we're not on the brink of such a pullback.

I had not heard that before. So I searched.
Google search for "businesses trillions unused capital"
Businesses sit on piles of cash while individuals struggle ...
usatoday30.usatoday.com/.../2010-08-31-1Anationaldebt31_CV...‎
by John Waggoner
Aug 30, 2010 - Non-financial companies have $10.9 trillion in debt outstanding. For large, creditworthy corporations, making payments is no problem: The ...
More Money Than They Know What to Do With - NYTimes.com
dealbook.nytimes.com/.../more-money-than-they-know-what-to-do-with...‎
Oct 1, 2012 - It is a $1 trillion game: Use It or Lose It. ... likely result in too much capital chasing too few deals throughout 2012,” according to Mr. MacArthur. ... buying companies from each other rather than buying businesses from the public ...
Idle corporate cash piles up | David Cay Johnston - Reuters
blogs.reuters.com/david-cay-johnston/.../idle-corporate-cash-piles-up/‎
Jul 16, 2012 - Dividends, wages and capital expenditures all grew less than profits, while ... Want to motivate companies to put some of those trillions of dollars of idle cash to work ..... So it sits there unused until the economy gets better.
Bank Deposits Surge $2 Trillion More Than Loans: Credit Markets ...
www.bloomberg.com/.../bank-deposits-surge-2-trillion-more-than-loans-...‎
Dec 18, 2012 - That outpaced a 3.7 percent gain in loan assets to $7.17 trillion. ... Companies with access to capital markets, from medical-device maker ...
However, the matter is complicated as similar hits came up about Europe and Vietnam, as well. It seems to be a global problem. And yet, some people complain that those other nations now outpace the USA in entrepreneurship. So, how can Europeans be more productive than we are, given their greater levels of regulation and intervention?
America Falls Behind in Creating Rich Entrepreneurs
Published: Monday, 17 Jun 2013 | 1:03 PM ET
By: Robert Frank | CNBC Reporter and Editor
I do not know what the answer is; and there may not be "an" answer. It is a principle of Austrian economics that entrepreneurship is ineffable. Many communities attempted to create "technology incubators" with partnerships between universities and businesses. I know of none that succeeded. It is true that cities such as Austin do thrive from such a mix, but it seems that this is an accident of history, not a magic formula.
Similarly, tax rates seem unrelated to economic health. Denmark has a 60% burden. University education is free. Healthcare is socialized, of course. Yet, their standard of living is high. They are not collapsing into chaos. On the other hand, Greece has not been a good place to live since the Romans invaded in 188 BCE. Their current problems are only a continuation of their long, sad history. Cultures are complicated.
Progressives have been trying to create an American national identify for over 100 years. The national anthem, the pledge of allegiance, limitations on immigration, public schooling, and three or four wars, all were intended to galvanize us with a coating of culture. But American culture already existed and continues today, but in ways that they do not like.
Individualism is not just a political philosophy, though that aspect is important. So, "European" programs are not successful here because they run contrary to the inherent expectations of most people. Or, at least, they were not successful. Cultures do change. Such changes are easy to explain, but difficult to predict.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, Ayn Rand knew about Oswald Spengler - in The Fountainhead, I think it was Wynand who said in passing that a civilization has a "spirit" - but she never even touched on any kind of historicism. Historical patterns like that would be contrary to the rational choice theory of human events.

[Arnold Joseph Toynbee] is best known for his 12-volume A Study of History (1934–61), through which he examined the rise and fall of 26 civilizations in the course of human history, and he concluded that they rose by responding successfully to challenges under the leadership of creative minorities composed of elite leaders.
[...]
According to Toynbee, civilizations declined when their leaders stopped responding creatively, and the civilizations then sank owing to the sins of nationalism, militarism, and the tyranny of a despotic minority. Unlike Spengler in his The Decline of the West, Toynbee did not regard the death of a civilization as inevitable, for it may or may not continue to respond to successive challenges. Unlike Karl Marx, he saw history as shaped by spiritual, not economic forces.
(The Wikipedia biography of Toynbee cites the Encyclopedia Britannica for both paragraphs above.)

Just to say, you know, no one got up in the morning, looked at the clock and said, "Hey, the Golden Age of Athens starts today! Let's get going!!" Pericles lived from 495 to 429 BCE. He did not live to see Socrates condemned. But he did die as a result of a plague brought to the overcrowded city during the Peloponnesian War, which destroyed Athens internally. And Athens was just one city and not the prime mover, either. For that, I look to Ionia. Thales of Miletus, Pythagoras of Samos, Anaxagoras of Lampsacus. What we call "the Socratic method" they called "the Milesian Way" and it was brought by Aspasia of Miletos who made Perikles her lover.

Also, by "Greece" we must understand more than the mainlaind. The Hellenaide encompassed the Crimea, Spain, and North Africa. What we call "Marseilles" they called "Marsala" and it was from there that Pytheas sailed to Britain. What we call "Benghazi" they called "Berenike" and it was a mere suburb of Cyrene, which is now lost to the sands, but from which came Eratosthenes the Librarian of Alexandria 236 BCE. And when the Ptolemys no longer could afford librarians, they set them free. They took their learning to any city that would have them bringing a bit of a renaissance before the Roman onslaught killed what was left of Hellenic civilization. We are talking hundreds of years here, lifetimes. For the people who lived the times, any "decline" was not evident. The "birth" of a civilization also was not obvious -- until 1776.

I think that t American founders had a unique perspective. They knew their history, the full broad sweep of it, and they knew that they were making a new civilization. It was always their intention from 1620 to build "a city on a hill." We do not perceive that long arc. You must know the Pine Tree Shillings of Massachusetts.

Issuing coins was a royal prerogative. These coins were dated 1652 - no king on the throne - but produced for 30 years. Consider also, how Maine became part of Massachusetts. Massachusetts seized it from France. Massachusetts also invaded New Hampshire but was forced to give it back. Those are the acts of a nation, not a colony.

Also, it is not clear that a "leadership" must be self-defined, but clearly the Continental Congresses, the signings of Great Documents certainly did let them see themselves in that role. Again, though the Albany Plan of Union was an indication of what was to come, but it was not the first such inter-colonial compact.

And here we are... where? ...

Will Atlas Shrugged Part 3 galvanize the capitalists? Are you prepared to stop working - and stop paying taxes - and stop obeying immoral laws?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, Ayn Rand knew about Oswald Spengler - in The Fountainhead, I think it was Wynand who said in passing that a civilization has a "spirit" - but she never even touched on any kind of historicism. Historical patterns like that would be contrary to the rational choice theory of human events.

[Arnold Joseph Toynbee] is best known for his 12-volume A Study of History (1934–61), through which he examined the rise and fall of 26 civilizations in the course of human history, and he concluded that they rose by responding successfully to challenges under the leadership of creative minorities composed of elite leaders.

[...]

According to Toynbee, civilizations declined when their leaders stopped responding creatively, and the civilizations then sank owing to the sins of nationalism, militarism, and the tyranny of a despotic minority. Unlike Spengler in his The Decline of the West, Toynbee did not regard the death of a civilization as inevitable, for it may or may not continue to respond to successive challenges. Unlike Karl Marx, he saw history as shaped by spiritual, not economic forces.

(The Wikipedia biography of Toynbee cites the Encyclopedia Britannica for both paragraphs above.)

Just to say, you know, no one got up in the morning, looked at the clock and said, "Hey, the Golden Age of Athens starts today! Let's get going!!" Pericles lived from 495 to 429 BCE. He did not live to see Socrates condemned. But he did die as a result of a plague brought to the overcrowded city during the Peloponnesian War, which destroyed Athens internally. And Athens was just one city and not the prime mover, either. For that, I look to Ionia. Thales of Miletus, Pythagoras of Samos, Anaxagoras of Lampsacus. What we call "the Socratic method" they called "the Milesian Way" and it was brought by Aspasia of Miletos who made Perikles her lover.

Also, by "Greece" we must understand more than the mainlaind. The Hellenaide encompassed the Crimea, Spain, and North Africa. What we call "Marseilles" they called "Marsala" and it was from there that Pytheas sailed to Britain. What we call "Benghazi" they called "Berenike" and it was a mere suburb of Cyrene, which is now lost to the sands, but from which came Eratosthenes the Librarian of Alexandria 236 BCE. And when the Ptolemys no longer could afford librarians, they set them free. They took their learning to any city that would have them bringing a bit of a renaissance before the Roman onslaught killed what was left of Hellenic civilization. We are talking hundreds of years here, lifetimes. For the people who lived the times, any "decline" was not evident. The "birth" of a civilization also was not obvious -- until 1776.

I think that t American founders had a unique perspective. They knew their history, the full broad sweep of it, and they knew that they were making a new civilization. It was always their intention from 1620 to build "a city on a hill." We do not perceive that long arc. You must know the Pine Tree Shillings of Massachusetts.

Issuing coins was a royal prerogative. These coins were dated 1652 - no king on the throne - but produced for 30 years. Consider also, how Maine became part of Massachusetts. Massachusetts seized it from France. Massachusetts also invaded New Hampshire but was forced to give it back. Those are the acts of a nation, not a colony.

Also, it is not clear that a "leadership" must be self-defined, but clearly the Continental Congresses, the signings of Great Documents certainly did let them see themselves in that role. Again, though the Albany Plan of Union was an indication of what was to come, but it was not the first such inter-colonial compact.

And here we are... where? ...

Will Atlas Shrugged Part 3 galvanize the capitalists? Are you prepared to stop working - and stop paying taxes - and stop obeying immoral laws?

Bah! Historicism is garbage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A clash of politics. That is a dispute, not a civil war.

Genuine war filled with disease, blood, shot and steel with 620,000 dead and 1.5 million maimed in a country with a population of 30 million. Now THAT'S a civil war.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A clash of politics. That is a dispute, not a civil war.

Genuine war filled with disease, blood, shot and steel with 620,000 dead and 1.5 million maimed in a country with a population of 30 million. Now THAT'S a civil war.

There ain't nuthin civil about war.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A clash of politics. That is a dispute, not a civil war.

Genuine war filled with disease, blood, shot and steel with 620,000 dead and 1.5 million maimed in a country with a population of 30 million. Now THAT'S a civil war.

There ain't nuthin civil about war.

Or intelligent about military intelligence.

Or scientific about politics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gulch8 -

I’ve been involved with SFL since the beginning. I’ve been at every international conference, often speaking, and David Kelley, Will Thomas, and Alexander Cohen have spoken there as well. I’ve also spoken at least three times at the regional conference in Philadelphia. This year, I’m speaking in Denton, Texas and at Berkeley, and Kelley and Thomas are speaking at events as well.

We have a formal relationship with SFL by which TAS provides materials to interested students and campus groups.

SFL is an excellent group, which went from a handful of folks less than seven years ago to an international conference that attracts at least 1,200. This is one of the bright lights on a dark cultural landscape!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ed,

Although you didn't answer some of my perhaps unanswerable questions, I appreciate your response and the fact that you are doing what you can to help enlighten those involved as the SFL grows. All I was asking was your speculations on the future of these two organizations of young college groups. I certainly wish they grow exponentially into the tens and hundreds of millions but that is probably unrealistic just a dream and wishful thinking on my part.

Just knowing that the antidote is known is both uplifting and frustrating.

This evening I met a former attorney general at a meeting of a GOP aspirant to replace a non entity in the Congress. We spoke about the antitrust laws and I mentioned Ayn Rand's article in the first Objectivist Newsletter about the irrationality of those laws. He had not read Rand at all so I mentioned how she had grown up in St Petersburg and overheard her mother read a story by Victor Hugo Ninety Three in which a man behaved in a heroic way. Rand as a young girl was so impressed that she thought about that vision of man as a heroic being and asked questions which led her to identify the prevailing ethic of Altruism in which the apparent choice was to either sacrifice oneself for the benefit of others or sacrifice others to oneself. How Ayn Rand realized that both choices rested on the premise that humans beings are by nature sacrificial animals with the question who is to be sacrificed to whom, and rejected that premise, instead holding that each human being has the right to exist for his or her own sake, with no one being sacrificed in the process of human production or interaction.

A look of a new awareness came over his face so maybe a light went on in his mind. He teaches ethics in one of the law schools.

I also met a young man who is bright and enjoys thinking and reading and in our conversation he responded to an opportunity I had to mention that Existence exists by saying that he loved that idea. I told him it was the basis of Ayn Rand's philosophy.

A staff person introducing a candidate at a meeting mentioned carelessly, our democracy, so later I approached him to remind him that we live in a Republic although the politicians in power act as if it is a democracy where all they need is the votes. He said he had slipped as he did know the difference.

I am sure you enjoy making others aware in your position. Please offer me a job.

GG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You might be in with a chance, Gulch. In response to his latest oped, Ed was asked on Solo what action he would recommend to those who wish to carry out the message, and he replied that he had invited Sen Ted Cruz to speak, as he has good connections with him. The Senator could not make it but I think you would be a good fill-in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I got home from the meeting where the gentleman who aspires to become the GOP nominee to take the MA 5th Congressional seat once held by Markey. I had spoken with him briefly trying to persuade him to take a stand to abolish the Fed and he had said he would go so far as to advocate an audit only as the other would be contrary to mainstream support for the Fed!?

I didn't have the chance to make the fuller case so I emailed him this hopefully more convincing argument:

<<<"

<galtgulch9@gmail.com>
9:59 PM (1 hour ago)
cleardot.gif
cleardot.gif
cleardot.gif
to Mike
cleardot.gif
If you agree with me that counterfeiting is a crime and an evil act then you will understand why I think it is important to take the position to abolish the Federal Reserve System altogether!
If a citizen does not have the right to take an action then it is logical that he cannot delegate or empower the government to take that action in principle.
Every dollar created by the Fed reduces the purchasing power of every dollar earned by hardworking citizens.
You can see why those in power justify the creation of this currency which comes their way as payment for purchase by the Fed of US Treasury Bonds, bills or notes from the Treasury.
The Treasury prints us the Bonds, lending legitimacy to the process, and auctions them off where they are purchased by a variety of bond holders, foreign governments, Funds, individuals, banks or the like. Whoever buys the bonds pays for them thus funding the government enabling those monies to be used to buy votes.
A kind of money laundering takes place in that some of the bonds are paid for with existing currency obtained by contributions to retirement funds for example. In the case of the bonds bought by the Fed the payment is made by creation of new currency authorized to be printed by the mint in the process.
The fact that the Federal Reserve System was created by an act of Congress in 1913, in which a private banking cartel was authorized to be the sole creator of the nation's currency, does not make the Fed constitutional, as there is no such authorization to be found in Article 1 Section 8 where all the enumerated powers are to be found.
By way of contrast I refer you to the Crash Course by Chris Martenson to be found at
In fact I urge you to take the few minutes to watch this portion of the Crash Course with the confidence that once you watch it you will be motivated to watch the entire thing.
To simply advocate an audit of the Fed is not enough.
If you come to appreciate that the euphemistically entitled Quantitative Easing is actually the act of inflating the currency which is causing the debasement of the dollar as the purchasing power of each dollar in existence is reduced, you will see the importance of abolishing the Fed.
Or else the dollar will be destroyed altogether eventually and all the savings of everyone will be reduced to nothing.
For you to adopt the position that only an audit of the Fed is appropriate actually demonstrates your failure to appreciate just what it is that the Fed is doing. In effect you will be lending your own moral approval to the actions of the Fed. You will be acknowledging the existence of something which is an evil which should not exist at all.
It is analogous to human slavery in which the proper position to take was that of the abolishonists. Slavery was and always is an evil, immoral condition just as the creation of a fiat paper currency, unbacked by gold or silver, is always and everywhere an evil, immoral act.
People have chosen gold and silver coins to be money for several thousand years and every attempt to substitute precious metal coins with unredeemable paper have failed after a period of irresistible inflation of the currency.
If you take a "moderate" "main stream" position on the issue of the existence of the Fed you will be remembered in history as one who didn't understand the nature of inflation.
Please take the trouble to obtain a copy of G. Edward Griffin's book, The Creature From Jekyll Island and read The Case Against The Fed by Murray Rothbard.
The bankers advocated and propagandized in favor of the creation of a central bank for decades before the Fed was created in 1913. The banker Rothchild said: "Give me control of a nation's currency and I care not who makes its laws!"
The Fed is a private banking cartel which prints the currency at virtually no cost and lets the government borrow the billions and trillions of paper currency it prints up. It has every incentive to continue to loan "money" to the government which has to pay interest on the principle and not enough "money" exists to repay the loan in full. It is also a hidden tax as purchasing power is reduced from every dollar already in existence.
The process will lead to the eventual complete destruction of the dollar unless it is stopped altogether and replaced by a gold or silver backed currency such as recommended in legislation proposed by Ron Paul.
I heard mention of conservative values tonight although none were mentioned explicitly. That may be enough to satisfy those in the conservative camp already but will not persuade anyone who does not know just what you are talking about. I know you don't want to alienate anyone by being explicit about certain issues such as a woman's right to choose or for same sex marriage or for abolition of the drug war.
A rational position on any of those issues will immediately draw new supporters while horrifying those already supporting anyone who advocates status quo in the conservative side who want to impose their own personal beliefs on others in a Republic which is not a theocracy nor a democracy.
I hope you choose to try to persuade those who support you already to let you focus on economic issues such as reducing taxes and government interventions in the marketplace such as Obamacare which is so destructive of the medical profession, medical research, pharmaceutical research and the doctor patient relationship.
I wish you would address the fact that the Founders were wise to grant only certain powers to the central government and that the Democrats have violated their oath of office by expanding the power of the central government with their social programs which are not among the powers granted and are leading to bankruptcy of the nation.

Let me know what you may think of this.">>>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gulch8 – Sorry I forgot to mention Young Americans for Liberty. We have a similar partnership with them, though we’ve been more active with SFL.

We obviously encourage students to read Atlas Shrugged and Rand’s other works. We also direct them to the wealth of materials on our website. Of special note, we have a relatively new Atlas University project that is producing videos on Objectivism. Check it out here: http://www.atlassociety.org/atlas-university

We also have regular webinars open to anyone, but especially aimed at students. Here’s the link: http://www.atlassociety.org/objectivism_online_courses

We’ll be launching a designed version of the website that should make it even easier for students to find materials.

Hope you enjoy the material!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the links. I am glad that I kept pestering you as your responses are so worthwhile. I will add them to the list of books and links I hand out to those who show an interest in learning more about Objectivism and the Austrian school of economics.

Still wonder if I am being realistic in my expectation that both SFL and YAL have the potential to keep growing. My impression from their websites is that these are intelligent, motivated young college students who understand the situation and appreciate the fact that they are part of a movement which must grow in order for the country to survive.

Thank you for your efforts. I know that you have children hence concern about the future.

gg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this