Author Topic: Rothbards idiotic defense of libertarianism (Read 5406 times)

Capt McQuigg · « **Reply #5 on:** July 28, 2013, 09:03:37 PM »

Quote from: Traditional Guy 20

Quote from: Capt McQuigg
Trad Guy,

Which portion of the article do you disagree with?

Well let's see here; pretty much everything.

His idiotic defense of free trade; his disgraceful support of social liberalism; his anarchism; his pacifism; his support of unregulated capitalism; his support of a world of no borders; his sympathy for immigrants and those of other races, etc.

Let's face it Captain McQuigg libertarianism is contrary to any form of Catholic theology and this shows by Rothbard himself bragging that children should murder their parents so that they will "no longer be opressed."

Narrow it down. It's a long article. Which portion do you find most offensive?

claudel · « **Reply #6 on:** July 29, 2013, 12:49:49 AM »

Rothbard favored genuine free trade, not the "managed trade" caricature of it that the neocons, whom he denounced and detested, have clearly convinced you is the genuine article. That, I fear, is one of several misapprehensions to which you adhere. Real free markets, real free trade, not only better befit human dignity but leave economic decisions in the hands of those making them, not in those of a cryptocratic elite. Remember something else Rothbard said: in a true free market, no one is making you buy anything. The decision what to get—and for what reasons to get it—is yours and yours alone.

You can denounce Rothbard's libertarianism and philosophical anarchism until you are blue in the face. Yet the plain fact is that we, in these benighted United States of America, are not now living nor ever have lived in a Christian kingdom presided over by Saint Louis IX. In other words, instead of setting up a straw man of isms to rail against, look at the profoundly evil unitary tyranny of the government we've got—and had, albeit in an arguably less advanced form of the disease, even twenty-five-odd years ago, when Rothbard wrote this article—and then face the fact that an anarcho-syndicalist USA, whilst obviously not signaling the impending Reign of Christ, would be a place where the True Faith would have immeasurably greater potential for getting a hearing and hence making converts. (I seem to recall some farewell remarks of Our Lord before the Ascension to the effect that that's what the Apostles were to get down to doing posthaste. Their successors, alas, seem quite content to be bought off by Jєωιѕн money and to clear everything they say with one of Abe Foxman's junior henchmen.)

Those who dwell here live and have lived under a Judaic dictatorship, amidst an utterly deluded populace that believes that it's the true ruler of this land simply because its Tribal masters allow its members to go to the polls from time to time to choose one from among several stooges that those masters have picked for this rigged game, this biennial farce. Rothbard, whatever his failings—those failings were real, they were many, and they were large, and not the least of them was his reluctance to name his fellow Jews as the ultimate villains of the drama of life—saw the mind-numbing venality of the American people and their society and the cardboard nature of their heroes, Reagan being the one who is the object of the lengthy polemic you wish us to cluck over.

Count me out. Complain of Rothbard's prescriptions all you want; he remains a first-class diagnostician, probably the best these shores have seen since Tocqueville 180 years ago.

Traditional Guy 20 · « **Reply #7 on:** July 29, 2013, 06:54:31 PM »

Quote from: claudel

Rothbard favored genuine free trade, not the "managed trade" caricature of it that the neocons, whom he denounced and detested, have clearly convinced you is the genuine article. That, I fear, is one of several misapprehensions to which you adhere. Real free markets, real free trade, not only better befit human dignity but leave economic decisions in the hands of those making them, not in those of a cryptocratic elite. Remember something else Rothbard said: in a true free market, no one is making you buy anything. The decision what to get—and for what reasons to get it—is yours and yours alone.

Here's something Rothbard and you other libertarians don't understand. Economics in the nation is not for the benefit of the individual but for the national body and the nation's greatness. Your form of economics and Rothbard's I might add is absolutely horrible for the worker and only helps the rich and the corporations. Protectionism leads to the nation having an advantage over those nations that do not have the same standards that we do. Even the free market left unbridled leads to the degradation of the worker and him being paid miserable wages. Your form of liberalism comes right out of the Enlightenment and the French Revolution. One cannot disdain the ex-Trotskyist and Social Democratic neoconservatives and go over to another left-wing ideology. Rothbard himself did nothing except sit in a college classroom lecturing about economics, which is why he supported a system of economics which is catastrophic for the worker, as he thought he was better than his fellow man, like most intellectuals.

Quote

You can denounce Rothbard's libertarianism and philosophical anarchism until you are blue in the face. Yet the plain fact is that we, in these benighted United States of America, are not now living nor ever have lived in a Christian kingdom presided over by Saint Louis IX. In other words, instead of setting up a straw man of isms to rail against, look at the profoundly evil unitary tyranny of the government we've got—and had, albeit in an arguably less advanced form of the disease, even twenty-five-odd years ago, when Rothbard wrote this article—and then face the fact that an anarcho-syndicalist USA, whilst obviously not signaling the impending Reign of Christ, would be a place where the True Faith would have immeasurably greater potential for getting a hearing and hence making converts. (I seem to recall some farewell remarks of Our Lord before the Ascension to the effect that that's what the Apostles were to get down to doing posthaste. Their successors, alas, seem quite content to be bought off by Jєωιѕн money and to clear everything they say with one of Abe Foxman's junior henchmen.)

The point of the matter is that anarchism and Rothbard's economic theories would be disasterous for a nation in question. What tyranny does Rothbard moan and graon about? No sympathy for abortionists, women who have abortions and sodomites? Do you support him saying that? No sympathy for immigrants? How about that? Like Bastiat Rothbard supports open borders. Do you agree with that? Do you think we should make drugs legal huh? Do you think war is evil? What part of Rothbard's article is good?

Quote

Those who dwell here live and have lived under a Judaic dictatorship, amidst an utterly deluded populace that believes that it's the true ruler of this land simply because its Tribal masters allow its members to go to the polls from time to time to choose one from among several stooges that those masters have picked for this rigged game, this biennial farce. Rothbard, whatever his failings—those failings were real, they were many, and they were large, and not the least of them was his reluctance to name his fellow Jews as the ultimate villains of the drama of life—saw the mind-numbing venality of the American people and their society and the cardboard nature of their heroes, Reagan being the one who is the object of the lengthy polemic you wish us to cluck over.

Sure Reagan made plenty of mistakes but that is not the subject of this article. By the way have you ever considered that Rothbard never named Jews because he was one!

Quote

Count me out. Complain of Rothbard's prescriptions all you want; he remains a first-class diagnostician, probably the best these shores have seen since Tocqueville 180 years ago.

On the contary I am glad Rothbard's ideas have never succeeded. What the hell do libertarianis have to complain about? The GOP is all for libertarian ideology and corporate interests. The GOP supports free trade just like libertarians. I guess the only thing is that the GOP is not pacifist like libertarians are.

Traditional Guy 20 · « **Reply #8 on:** July 29, 2013, 10:37:14 PM »

Quote from: Capt McQuigg

Narrow it down. It's a long article. Which portion do you find most offensive?

THIS:

"And in the bedroom, too, if Ronnie has his way. Although abortion
is not yet illegal, it is not for lack of effort by the Reagan
Administration. The relentless Reaganite drive to conservatize
the judiciary will likely recriminalize abortion soon, making
criminals out of millions of American women each year. George
Bush, for less than twenty-four glorious hours, was moved to take
a consistent position: if abortion is murder, then all women who
engage in abortion are murderers. But it took only a day for his
handlers to pull George back from the abyss of logic, and to advocate
only criminalizing the doctors, the hired hands of the women who
get abortions.

Perhaps the Gipper cannot be directly blamed – but certainly he has
set the moral climate – for the increasingly savage Puritanism
of the 1980s: the virtual outlawry of smoking, the escalating
prohibition of pornography, even the partial bringing back of
Prohibition (outlawing drunken driving, raising the legal drinking
age to 21, making bartenders – or friendly hosts – legally
responsible for someone else's drunken driving, etc.)."

Hatchc · « **Reply #9 on:** July 29, 2013, 10:53:19 PM »

Rothbard's a good example of why there is no such thing as a good Jew. He says 99 things that agree with Catholics, but then he slips in that 1 thing that represents the spirit of the anti-Christ.