Frum to RepubliCons: Quit Whining!
Whether you agree with Frum’s underlying premise or not, this is truth:
It is also to act and look like sore losers. If America has been sliding gently but irresistibly into soft despotism, where were all the valiant defenders of liberty before November of 2008? Soft despotism begins to look less like a profound sociological trend, more like undulations of the sine curve: It’s despotism when we lose, freedom when we win. We should have more confidence in the people and the country than this. We should also have more charity to our political opponents – who after all are contending with hideous problems bequeathed to them by … by … well suddenly we Republicans cannot seem to remember who preceded Barack Obama in office. To listen to us, you’d think that the bailouts and takeovers started on January 20, 2009, not the previous March. You’d never know that TARP was supported by almost every Republican commentator, including the editors of National Review. Or that Vice President Cheney argued urgently in favor of the rescue of the Detroit automakers. Or that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac enjoyed the backing of Republican as well as Democratic lawmakers.
One bad election converts us from ardent admirers of the American people to glum declinists who can see only a miserable moldering of a once great nation. I should have thought that conservative patriotism was made of stronger stuff.
They’ll have him turn in his Conservative membership card and decoder ring, and change the secret handshake the minute he is out the door. There is no room for this type of descension in the ranks…ask Arlen Specter.
“To listen to us, you’d think that the bailouts and takeovers started on January 20, 2009, not the previous March. You’d never know that TARP was supported by almost every Republican commentator, including the editors of National Review. Or that Vice President Cheney argued urgently in favor of the rescue of the Detroit automakers. Or that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac enjoyed the backing of Republican as well as Democratic lawmakers.” Frum is right there’s no political differnce between Bush and Obama just degrees of implementation. Bush started it then Obama did more of it. Can’t imagine there was anyone around who was pointing all this out prior to the election. Frum is trying to justify all the above nonsense becuse he actually thinks it’s a good idea….so …If Republicans did it and all these tool orginizations that Republicans work for did it then it must be great ..we should all toe the line and willingly throw ourselves on the collective bon fire for the good of the country. Der Stadt is alles du bist nicht. Yikes.
Frum obviously has a fluid set of values while at the same time attempting to marginalize many people who are principled and have been consistently voicing opposition to “soft despotism”. His thinking is just another manifestation of the politicking that preserves the self-serving 2 party system.
[...] Buffalo Pundit posted a link to a piece by David Frum on the New Majority called Quit Whining. [...]
[...] Buffalo Pundit posted a link to a piece by David Frum on the New Majority called Quit Whining. [...]
@Jackstraw and @MikeinWNY – You two guys are hilarious.
@Pete, we might be “hilarious” but at least we can see past the dog-n-pony show.
Interesting considering Sandy Beach’s whole show today was about how much worse this country will be int he future vs. the way it has been. He gratuitously drew the Obama/Hitler paralell that he and Bauerle are so fond of: This time insisting that gov’t, with all it’s dietary and smoking warnings and regs is trying ti build a master race of perfect people. Is the man just STUPID, or is he just playing to the dumb masses that make up most of his audience? Here’s a guy old enough to know that Hitler wanted a master race at the expense of all other races, which he wanted exterminated or enslaved. Our gov’t generally makes regs or warnings for the sake of helping people improve their health. Is it overreaching and sometimes annoying? Yes. Does it deserve the Hitler comparison? Only if you’re ignorant of history and lack common snese.
The problem is when you look at the results of the government programs. They do no accomplish the stated goals, usually make things worse than they need to be and usurp liberties in the process. I guess the Hitler analogy, in some cases, could be relevant when trying to figure out the motivation of our government.. The question would be, is the government purposely abusing power or is it just stupid and we are subjected to unintended consequences? Either way, the end result is utter failure at our expense and that is unacceptable. I would much rather have my freedom and make my own mistakes instead of having mistakes mandated by threat of force.
@ Brian: Hitler never smoked anything and hated tobacco. Obama smoked anything and smokes cigarettes.
The only parallel I see is the desire to create a master race of government nanny’s that can’t mind their own F*$!%^#G BUSINESS.
The single most dominant characteristic of Hitler was his fondess for EXTREMINATING those who were not Aryan. To compare lesser traits is disingenuous to say the least, since Hitler is only Hitler because of his “resettlement” arrangements.
@Mike In WNY – Yeah, dog and pony show. I guess the question I have is, if things are so bad here, why don’t you move off to some Libertarian fantasy island? Oh yeah, because there isn’t one. If your system is so great, why isn’t there a functioning model someplace?
The Hitler comparisons are disgusting and there certainly is no patriotism in any person that would make it. Bauerle is a dumbass and although I had more respect for Sandy Beach, if he is spouting that crap then he is garbage too.
@Pete, if you have some substantive criticism of my views, I’ll be happy to reply. Nothing you said has any bearing on whether or not libertarian policies would be better.
@Brian, Obama is doing a pretty good job exterminating children and innocent civilians in the Middle East with drone planes. The scale might not be as large as the Hitler’s, but murder is murder.
I dunno, normally, I wouldn’t think Obama and Hitler had a lot in common but now that this lady agrees with you guys, I mean, how can we deny it…
http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/229691/july-28-2009/womb-raiders—orly-taitz
Mike:
The exterminating of people in the mideast is the one thing Obama’s doing that Republican conservatives approve of!
Now THERE’S irony!
@Mike In WNY – Sunstantive criticism
1. If it is such a great system, why is it not in practice somewhere…anywhere in the world?
2. Libertarianism cannot work, like unabated free markets, because there are a lot of bad people. Bad people make it necessary for government involvement because laws have to be passed to keep them from doing bad things.
3. Libertarianism and free markets probably cannot exist TOGETHER for exactly the reason stated in number 2. Government has to regulate when things like predatory lending, unnecessary risk taking by investment houses, and exploitation of employees (65 hour work weeks, poor safety conditions, etc.) occur.
4. There are certain places that free markets/free enterprise cannot work to provide necessary services – Police, Firefighting, private ownership of roads, and in my opinion education.
Many theories are based on a perfect world – Free markets, Libertarianism, even Communism are predicate on the idea that everyone is intelligent, hard working, ETHICAL…and if everyone was ALL OF THOSE things, those systems might work. But because people are not all of those things, there needs to be regulation. In your Libertarian paradise of unabated free markets, the people of lower intelligence and/or skill would end up working in dirty factories for $2.00 an hour, 65 hours a week, AND the consumers would support that business model, LIKE WE DO NOW EVERYTIME SOMEONE SHOPS AT WALMART, you know them…the world’s largest retailer.
You talk about the freedoms of Libertarianism. What about the people who would end up in an existence like that ? Are they really free? They get to slave for a corporation, and they get to keep more of their pittence, but there is no quality of life. Freedom.
Hard to convince me this wouldn’t happen in your Libertarian paradise, because it is happening now. In the interest of making more money, American corporations are dropping $10 an hour workers and offshoring where they can get it for a whole lot cheaper. $10 per hour is only $20K per year. Yep, Mike, there is defnitely sustantive criticism to be said of the unregulated society.
@Pete
#1 is not a substantive argument, it is an unsupported supposition.
#2 people would be free not to deal with or associate with “bad people” in a system based on free choice.
#3 predatory lending is a figment of your imagination unless someone holds a gun to someone and forces them to borrow money. Government policies causing the housing bubble is a real danger, not some illusory concept politicians make up to make themselves look good.
Freedom includes the opportunity to make your own mistakes and learning from them. When the government makes your mistakes for you, you have lost your freedom.
If people of “lower skill/intelligence” ended up working for $2.00/hour, they would learn a skills that lead to better employment. Now they are either unemployed, on welfare or homeless because minimum wage laws rob them of the opportunity to better their lives. Companies to compete for employees, that alone prevents slavery. We are slaves now to the government. Every time you are forced to pay for something you do not want, you are ensconced in slavery.
You’ll have to tell me why police, firefighting and roads can’t be handled by the private sector, that sounds like just another unfounded assertion. As a compromise, I would be happy to see government services limited to just those activities, and an army strictly for protecting our natural borders.
@MikeInWNY – Redirect
1. Not an unsupported supposition, a valid question….I’ll rephrase…is your Libertarian model in practice in any place on Earth?
2. The “free markets” only purpose is to make money. Bad people make money by exploiting those of lesser knowledge/intelligence. Of course you would not freely assocuiate with those bad people. Bad people contributed to the recent crash of the financial systems, by using unethical, ultrarisky methods that they knew would make money for themselves in the short term while putting their customers at risk. MAybe after that happened once and people saw them for what they were people would not associate with them again, but tell the poor old lady down the street who lost everything that she should not associate with the guy who now owns a beach house on the Mediterrian. Oh yeah, she made her mistake and should learn from that. She can just start over with her new found knowledge and spend another 60 years building up her nest egg.
3. Bad people can convince people of lesser intelligence/knowledge that they can afford things that they can’t when they use tricks like adjustable rate mortgages. The bad person gets their commission check and the person who did not completely understand things gets their pass to foreclosure. You assume everyone is well learned and intelligent as you.
4. Profit based Police, Fire and Roads would not work for exactly the reason that Steel (I think) said earlier…..”I’m sorry, Mrs. Jones, we can’t send someone out to extinguish that fire as your bill is past due. If you have a credit card handy we can take care of that right now.” (You can substitute police and fire for that)….How do we pay for roads. Do I buy minutes? A season pass? Or pass through a toll booth at every intersection when the roads change from Jones Road Systems Inc. to Smith Streets and Roads Inc. ?
I guess my final statement on your …. you are a slave when you are forced to pay for something you don’t want statement is…..there is a certain amount of that in life. I agree that our system is not perfect, but there are none that are. You can’t please all of the people all of the time. On any team there are shared sacrifices and shared rewards… people have to put aside their individal needs/wishes in some cases for the good of the whole. In my opinion the Libertarian movement is very selfish. I want everything that is mine and I do not want to do one thing to contribute to the society as a whole. I do not want to give up anything that is mine for anybody else.
Even if it were doable, which I do not believe it is, for a host of reasons, it really doesn’t sound all that great to me.
@Pete, you just don’t get it. The free markets purpose is to provide equal footing for everyone for voluntary relationships. It provides the setting for the profit motive to lead to innovation and cost control through competition. Government monopolies and regulations eliminate that, cause inferior services and escalating, uncheckable costs.
Your number 3 retort is a hoot. Substitute “government” for “bad people” and you are have an accurate statement describing where we are now. Government doesn’t give bad people or good people a choice, that is far worse than any short comings in any ideas I’ve proposed.
Your system ensures that people will be too stupid to think for or care for themselves, because they won’t have to and because it will be an exercise in futility.
And once again, I have never claimed to advocate the perfect system, just the one that best respects our freedom and humanity.
My number 3 is accurate as is, Mike. You didn’t like the term predatory lending, but that’s what it was. Greedy mortgage brokers (not all mortgage brokers, I am not saying that) sought out people that they knew they could sell with low payments, no doc mortgages, and ARM’s. Many of those people fell for it hook, line and sinker.
I am not blaming the collapse of housing and financial on them. There are plenty of other people who knew they couldn’t afford it and took it anyway. And there are plenty of people who saw there home values rise and then used their home as an ATM machine by putting a home equity on the thing for tons of money before the fall. Predatory lending did happen, and your statement about holding a gun to their head also assumes that they are as educated and intelliegent as you are.
Maybe in theory the free markets “should” do what you say…but they don’t in practice.
Lastly, I fail to see the humanity in your system, anything but, actually.
But, we are repeating the same points over and over. Guess we will just have to disagree. I guess the world is coming to an end so I’ll be out back digging my bomb shelter and stacking the cans of tuna.
The government created artificially low interest rates to increase housing sales and also pressured banks to make mortgage loans to people who wouldn’t normally qualify. If the FED didn’t screw around with the rates, the housing bubble wouldn’t have occurred.
Humanity is grounded in our ability to make choices, take that away and our humanity is diminished. Simple logic.
BTW, freeze-dried foods are the way to go, skip the tuna.
Pete — Where is the humanity in a system that gave ordinary people the false notion that they could afford the homes being purchased through the bubble. What your dancing around is the fact that none of this could have occured without the assistance and actual encouagement of the people you claim to be saving us from the free market. Yes encouragement, it is a well known fact that Krugman and most other establishment were in favor of creating a housing bubble after the dot com crash( the other government enduced bubble) Let’s get one thing clear what your talking about is not the free market. You even allude to this in point one. It was presicely the Federal Reserve (Quasi-Governmental orginization) lowering interest rates that sent the message to the market that there was more capital to lend then there actually was. Coupled with the assistance of a fractional reserve banking system (an institution that could not occur in a free market because it’s fraud) the market was distorted by government action. That would not happen in a free market because as you point out the free market is about profit. In a free market firms would fail and people would go belly up if they invested in non profitable ventures. Firms would not continue to have loose lending practices if they believed it would wipe them out in the future. It was also the Government through the combined actions of the Treasury, Community reinvestment act, Freddie Mac, Fannie Mac the SEC, FASB, Sarbanes Oxley that created the conditions necessary for the bubble to exist. Now because a bunch of do gooders who think they know how to run the finanical world “for the better of mankind” people are losing their homes, investments are wiped out, unemployment is almost at 10% looks like 11% at the end of the year, the children of this country just got saddled with 14 trillion give or take a trillion. It was the folks in the government who created the conditions for your so called “predatory leanding”. Where is the humanity in this? God help us from anymore of your “help”.
Mike- Pete’s already been given the info on private roads but refuses to consider anything that’s not from establishment sources. Of course this means that he’ll never get an answer to private roads because the establishment needs to keep up apperences and he can pretend to believe there’s no serious argument in favour of private roads. I think I refered to this on PCD as “intentional evasion of facts”. Case in point.
I can’t help it this one is so full of nonsense I had to comment—–2. Libertarianism cannot work, like unabated free markets(Unabated free markets? What’s an abated free market…a free market that your forced to participate in …a forced free market that’s good!) , because there are a lot of bad people( Free markets can’t work becasue of bad people? Sorry guy but it’s because bad people exist that free markets are advocated in other words why give bad people rule over you? Who do you think aspires to these positions?) . Bad people make it necessary for government involvement because laws have to be passed to keep them from doing bad things. ( But what happens when the bad people make the laws? Which is exactly who these people are. Why is making crime systematic better than having it a rare and isolated event) The government steals, kills and creates general havoc on the citizenry everyday. Stick up guys do it once in a while and they don’t come back and badger you that it’s for your own good.)
@Jackstraw and MikeinWNY – Is there a functioning example of yout Libertarian model anywhere in the world?
And there was silence…………
No but what’s the point. If there was I wouldn’t be on here bitching everyday. But the lack of an exisiting libertarian society does not negate the validity of the ideas. There was silence becuse the rest of us who support you tax consumers have to work outside the 9 to 5 world. Oh wait your probobly doing this at work on my dime go figure.
@jackstraw – 1. Why is there no functioning model of libertarianism? And if these great ideas can’t be put into practice, how good are they? Kind of like travelling at the speed of light. Looks good in Star Trek, but probably ain’t gonna happen.
2. No I wasn’t doing it at work, and even if I was, it wasn’t your dime. I work for a private school, not one of the public ones you loathe.
Pete- II’m not following you why these ideas can’t be put into practice. They can. The reason that there is no functioning model of libertarianism is that it is not a culturaly dominent ideology that’s elementary. However, it does not follow that because there is no existing society that operates under libertarian ideas that the ideas are not practicable. That a society would have to exist for the ideas to be valid would mean that no change in society is possible. Were the ideas of republican government invalid until the French Revolution or the American Revolution occured ? Most schools including your private school get government tax breaks, special pension plan programs 403b, subsidies to some degree that I don’t get and I have to pay for. So yes yer still existing on my dime and I’m not to keen on most of the private ones either.
@Jackstraw – I guess my point is that if the ideas were all that good SOMEONE……SOMEWHERE would put them into practice, and they would have way more traction here in the USA than they do. It’s a relatively tiny movement. Your response to me in my disbelief of your ideals is that I am just another can’t think for himself drone that blindly goes along with the propaganda that the government feeds to the failure public school system. When you act like a zealot, and insinuate that those who don’t believe what you do, it certainly doesn’ add legitimacy to your movement. Makes you look like fringe whack jobs., at which point, people don’t give you the respect on your ideals that you would like. The respect that you will need in order for your movement to gain traction.
Pete – Most libertarians are comfortable being considered “fringe”. By definition we are. We always come off as condesending zelots who scoff at those who “don’t get it”. Not that we really are it’s just that when you spend time challenging some very ingrained presuppositions, fundamentals to be exact, it ruffles feathers and most people get miffed. Especially when they feel like idiots because they thought they were so smart and here comes someone who points out they have no idea what their talking about. It hurts. Respect is not what I believe will get the movement moving. Libertarians disagree alot on this issue but what I think is that the way human beings work is that when things get real ugly is when people begin to look for new ways and actually think about the fundamentals. During the good times why bother things are good. But when the stuff hits the fan people ask questions. I just hope to be there to provide some alternative answers to people who are actually looking.
Modern libertarianism evolved out of the classical liberal movements of the 17th, and 18th Centuries, starting with The Levellers during the English Civil War of 1642-1648 and later with the radical English Whigs, The focus of these movements was to bring about individual liberty in all aspects of life—economic, religious, political and social.
To accomplish these goals the state must necessarily be small and have only one major function, to protect the natural rights of each individual. No group rights, no aristocratic ruling caste, no state monopolies in economic affairs, no state religions, and no military empires. Although only partially successful in England, it was the American Revolution that created something that was the closest thing to a true Classical liberal/Libertarian society, although stained by slavery, corporate welfare, central banks ect…, There are always those who want to be enriched by the old ways of power and privilege provided by law under bigger government.
Well Pete, contrary to your beliefs “SOMEONE……SOMEWHERE” did put libertarian principles into action. Whatever individual liberties you cherish that haven’t yet been trampled on, you can thank those old time “fringe whack jobs”, the classical liberals/libertarians for it.
“Especially when they feel like idiots because they thought they were so smart and here comes someone who points out they have no idea what their talking about”
That’d be my point, brother. It might be you that has no idea what you are talking about. You have some theories that look good on paper, but have NEVER been tried on a grand scale ANYWHERE in the world. You’re right, that doesn’t mean the ideas won’t work, but it also doesn’t mean that they will.
So, Ray – you’re saying there is a functioning Libertarian society of scale somewhere? And if not, you are saying that there was a functioning Libertarian society at one point in time, but it is not functioning on any large scale now? Your history lesson was nice, but a little hard to follow. Help me out.
Pete…are you trying to play games with me or are you just dense? Seriously.
I must be dense. I’ll go with that.
ANd if your point was, that after the Revolution the US had something close to the Libertarian model in practice, why wasn’t it sustainable if it was such a good system?
And by the way, my point wasn’t that that all Libertarians were fringe whack jobs, but that the ones that run around telling the rest of the country that they are stupid for not seeing this enlightened path are the FWJ’s. Jackstraw doesn’t believe that respect will bring traction to the movement. I disagree. Lack of respect makes people believe all the more that the people beating their drum and insulting others are what makes up the movement and thus discredits the ideals of the movement because they appear to be beiing espoused by nuts.
My point was your individual rights, at least those that you still retain after being trampled on and convoluted by the left and the right for so long were brought to you by libertarians who tenaciously insisted upon them being carved into stone in the law. Their opponents thought them unnecessary or an annoying impediment to government power. (they still do)
Can you not admit that you have benefited from what those libertarians sustained for you?
You keep asking the same question in different words about libertarian theory, “if these great ideas can’t be put into practice, how good are they?” or “why wasn’t it sustainable if it was such a good system?”
Do you honestly believe that societies though some kind of collective wisdom cast aside ideas that are considered unsustainable and evolve into something better, more perfect? History is strewn with the bloody and wrecked corpses of countries and empires that took the course of what they thought wrongly was more wise and sustainable. It always systematically involves the growth of government and the arbitrary power that comes with it, at the expense individual liberty until ruin comes through conquering armies, financial collapse, civil war, or secession. That’s what Jefferson was getting at when he wrote, “The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases.”
In part, the theories of classical liberals and libertarians are based on learning from the mistakes of the past and avoiding repeating them. What exactly are the theories of progressivism or neo-conservatism based on these days since they are the predominant, more popular ideologies, and of course considered more wise by their adherents? Repeating the failures of the past it seems to me.
@Ray – I do understand all that you are saying (now). But I think my questions and statements are valid as well. I don’t particulalry feel like I lack liberty because I pay taxes, and that seems to be the overall argument of most Libertarians. I also have made it clear that I do not think an unregulated free market will work. I think on paper it looks good, but it does not take into account the bad things people will do to others in order to make a buck. Laws, for the most part are for stupid people and bad people. Is everyone had common sense and ethics/morality, we wouldn’t need them. I work at a school and I tell the kids that all the time….every rule on our books is in direct response to something that someone in the student body did. That’s reality, where I think Libertarianism is theory, for the most part.
You are right about one thing, we keep repeating the same things over and over again, and you aren’t buying my argument any more than I am buying yours. Different philosophies….a liberty that this country was based on.