In the video below, LTC Allen West makes a point that "different rules" apply to Left and Right. This is why "freedom" fails--there is no control to prevent this, and the people are too stupid to clearly see it and too selfish to even care. Yet somehow, libertarians believe that MORE freedom ("liberty") is the answer. If they are sincere (though few are), they are blind to the continuing state of human nature and oblivious to the changes in the situation brought by technology since our Founders' generation. We simply cannot afford the freedom they want.
Now, that's about the SINCERE libertarians. Most libertarians are what I would term, "agendists". That is, they are libertarian--even if in name only--solely to gain a particular goal. One Paultard I know calls himself a "libertarian nationalist." This is, of course, a contradiction, since libertarians put the individual above any larger entity (the "state" being simply the organized expression of a nation or national grouping). (This goes to why one cannot be both a libertarian and a patriot.) In truth, he is a borderline fascist who only says he's libertarian because his hero Ron Paul is a libertarian.
Others--and the aforementioned Paultard laps a bit into this group--have specific policy issues about which they are so upset at the status quo that they will contribute to destroying the country in order to resolve them. The big one now is Affirmative Action/"civil rights." These people believe that it's necessary to remove government from everything in order to prevent them from acting against the White majority. With no "government" involvement, there's no "Action." This is part of that aforementioned Paultard's thinking.
Now, these types will ignorantly--and often deceptively--blur the definition of their term, "government." In one sentence or clause, it will mean any level of government, and in the next refer to the "federal" government. This comes from a lack of sophisticated thinking and higher, liberal arts education. They are so self-absorbed in their own little corner that they don't realize that philosophical principles aren't tied to whether a country is federal, unitary, or a confederation. Morally speaking, government is government, and the roles and functions and statuses of different levels are simply matters of politics and culture.
However, one matter that unites all libertarians (except, ironically, the classic, party-member, capital-L "Libertarians"--or as I simply call them: "druggies") is a belief in some sort of conspiracy theory. ALL libertarians (noting the exception) believe that hidden forces actually control the country, and that our republic or democracy is a facade. Libertarians have to believe these theories because they have to explain why, with the increasing levels of democracy, people keep voting in people like Obama and Pelosi. Oh, it can't be that conservatives are lazy--that is, individualists like the libertarians--while liberals are actually committed to their agenda. No! It has to be something behind the scenes keeping the people's voice silent. If they admit that the real problem is indeed with "the People," the basis and justification for libertarianism completely falls.
As for their conspiracy theories themselves, ultimately they are the "ZOG" theory. Though different libertarians may parse it differently, it boils down to the same people and the same structure. Libertarians, then, believe that by destroying the power of the government (and hence, the country), they will destroy the power of ZOG. This is why libertarians love to see American military defeats and foreign policy failures. To them, it's not "America" which is being defeated and run down, it's ZOG.
A funny result of this involved the aforementioned Paultard. When America killed bin Laden and Al-Wacky, he was not happy. He thought the bin Laden hit should have been done covertly, rather than us taking credit. He SAID his thinking was that if we had not announced responsibility, we could have exploited intelligence gathered from the hit for months. Indeed, some idiots have said that. However, that is ridiculous. Rest assured, any hit taking out bin Laden would have been known and spread around the globe literally in minutes, and the intel no more useful than it was the way we did do it. My friend is forgetting about modern technology's impact.
On Al-Wacky, he sent me an email saying in one line (paraphrasing), "The government can't go around murdering its own citizens," and in literally the very next line, "I have no problem with hitting [Al-Wacky]." I pointed out the contradiction, and his response was that "sometimes you have to do the wrong thing" (which I do not believe--save the "Basic Training" exception allowing lying, cheating, and stealing to survive). His point was that the government should do such things "covertly."
The upshot of his idea, then, is that a Ron Paul administration would publicly say we're "non-interventionist" and won't interfere with worldwide Jihad, so they will leave us alone, when in fact, his administration is actually running far more covert operations than ever imagined. This makes the libertarian foreign policy a facade (much like they believe the current system is) for extreme, secret actions.
Two problems arise from this: 1. I don't believe Ron Paul would take the route this Paultard and others try to suggest he would; and 2. It would fail miserably. To explain 2: Covert operations require conventional infrastructure. We would need bases in the area, and under a libertarian approach we would alienate every ally and withdraw from every overseas base. Also, we would need conventional forces, both to facilitate the action and to be strong enough to enable us to say, if discovered, "Yeah, we did it. Whatcha gonna do about it?" Libertarians, of course, would decimate our conventional forces faster than Obama in his wildest dreams.
As stated above, and I pointed this out to the Paultard, covert operations sometimes get exposed. Under libertarianism (if it's sincere), the liberal media would be free to do so. Indeed, Ron Paul called Bradley Manning a "hero" who should receive legal protection. This means that all these operations WOULD be exposed, and the whole administration and "the war effort" would be discredited.
When I mentioned this to the Paultard, he honestly seemed happy with that. This goes to the lack of sophisticated thinking on the part of "conservatives". He was so accustomed to LIKING American failures because it actually hurt ZOG that he forgot that in the scenario discussed, it was HIS OWN PEOPLE in charge, not ZOG. Self-defeating, and he doesn't even realize it.
Now, of course, for many "libertarians," the whole thing is a ruse. Few who call themselves that actually are. In fact, most are nearly as "fascist" as I am. They simply want to use a libertarian approach to gain their goals. They actually would repress the very liberties they claim to champion. For instance, they would have to put strong "covert" controls on the press to keep their covert operations secret. Individual speech would have to be controlled, lest someone propose a popular law like, say, speed limits around schools and create a slippery-slope assault on libertarian philosophy. But at the same time, covert efforts would be needed to keep people from driving so fast in those areas. The list of such actions go on and on, but the upshot is that while people like me are forthright and say, "Let's put in speed limits. Let's punish sedition. Let's indoctrinate people in patriotism," these people--if they are to be taken seriously--would do such things illegally and covertly (with a strange twist on the patriotism part). People would be in far MORE fear, even as they are told they live in freedom. It would be very much like those old Communist countries with names like "People's Democratic Republic of..." whatever--the more they have to insist they are free, the less free they actually are.
On another plane, the whole approach of libertarianism is patently immoral in that it denies the role given it by the Christian God to enforce righteousness as best it can (see Romans 13, et al), and in fact institutes in culture a complete disregard for the concept of right and wrong. Not only does this break down national identity, the morality of future generations, it also harms the individual who seeks to do righteousness. Such things as "peer pressure" exert much influence over anybody (cf. I Corinthians 15:33-34). Libertarians would eliminate structural pressure to do what is right (e.g., eliminating drug and speed laws) and make the work of moral people like me all the more difficult. Thus, it actually constitutes a violation of the Christian provision of caring for one's brother (note I'm not talking about anything financial, yet that is EXACTLY where you're mind went). And for the irony of it all, libertarians will acknowledge that their stated system requires that vast bulk of people to do the right thing, even as they make that harder and harder for the few people in society who actually do that. So, though the libertarian might say that the inability of someone to resist peer pressure is a problem with an individual, it's a problem that the traditional God of our people lays a responsibility for on them, and which impacts on their whole agenda. (This goes to why one cannot be both a libertarian and a Christian.)
All of this, of course, leads to the question of just how genuinely not-so-agendist libertarians (though there are few of these) believe their rubbish. For some, these ideas are only intended as a disingenuous counter to liberal/Left ideas. They are not to be taken seriously. While I freely acknowledge that "the People" are as a whole idiots and need to be led, I do not favor the wholesale deception that is the libertarian platform. This is because ultimately the lies are exposed, the fallacies debunked, and the whole of the conservative/Right discredited. Hence it fails in the end, with the result being the destruction of many good elements of our public life and the handing of political victory to the very movement it seeks to combat.
To destroy the country to end Affirmative Action is like burning down ones house to get rid of bad furniture. To use disingenuous libertarian arguments as a political foil against liberalism only serves to aid the liberals by tearing down the formal underpinnings of social tradition and dividing the conservative/Right. To destroy public standards and structure in the name of "individual liberty" is so patently immoral as to virtually warrant the rebellion some libertarian hope occurs. (Yes, people will rise up and demand "MORE GOVERNMENT!")
Libertarianism is literally the worst way to structure a society. Yes, even worse than Communism, because Communism in its methodology at least acknowledges the need to change human nature. Libertarianism demands immediate change to a system completely vulnerable to human nature (unless, of course, it's the disingenuous kind, which only proves my point.)
So, to the libertarians out there, instead of trying destroy the country in order to save it, try actually engaging the issues. Try countering PC by supporting one another, even if it costs you something as an individual. Try putting principles ahead of personal profit. Try sacrificing. In other words, stop being the self-focused conservative types and start being self-sacrificing reactionaries. Stop blaming some conspiracy, and start blaming the idiot people around us, and then work to minimize their negative impact. And please, stop with the lies and disingenuousness. If you want to end Affirmative Action, say it's because you're White and disapprove of being discriminated against in the country which your people founded and in which has graciously allowed other races to live. And a hundred other things like that. In short, repent of your own sin of selfishness, then lead others to do so, then lead to country back to righteousness. Accept it will take time, and that your grandchildren's children might still be working to restore it. That is the reality. It took centuries to get this bad, and it will take awhile to get things back. Don't be so selfish.
That's all!
----- Forwarded Message -----
From: YouTube <noreply@youtube.com>
To: TommygunNG <ltw03y@yahoo.com>
Sent: Friday, August 10, 2012 8:04 AM
Subject: AllenWestForCongress just uploaded a video
From: YouTube <noreply@youtube.com>
To: TommygunNG <ltw03y@yahoo.com>
Sent: Friday, August 10, 2012 8:04 AM
Subject: AllenWestForCongress just uploaded a video
 | Help Center | Email Preferences |
| AllenWestForCongress just uploaded a video: Help Allen fight the liberal smears. Visit https://www.allenwestforcongress.com/contribute/ to contribute $100, $50 or $25. More You can unsubscribe from notifications for this user by visiting My Subscriptions. | |
| © 2012 YouTube, LLC 901 Cherry Ave, San Bruno, CA 94066 | |
