Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Disarming Republican Anarchists

Over the last five years, the Republican Party has veered to the far right and, in the process, been taken over by anarchists, Tea Party extremists who do not believe in centralized government. As University of California linguistics professor George Lakoff observed, "[ultra conservatives] believe that Democracy gives them the liberty to seek their own self-interests by exercising personal responsibility, without having responsibility for anyone else or anyone else having responsibility for them." Republican anarchists reject the founders' morality, the sentiments that produced the Declaration of Independence and U.S. Constitution. These ultra conservatives don't believe in the common good or the notion that Americans have a moral responsibility to care for each other. But they do venerate the second amendment to the Constitution, "the right of the people to keep and bear arms."

Yellow journalism from the Huffington Compost.

Posted

Huffpo is indeed abominable.  The discussion boards are the worst, it's like a giant contest to see who can be meaner to each other while trying to shut conversations down.

 

Over at Pat Buchanan's TheAmericanConservative, anarachists are taking over.  Both Tom Woods and Robert Murphy are now on staff as Republicans.  Although they typically just complain about the military and talk austro ecomics instead of bragging about how they don't like to care for each other.

Posted

 

Huffpo is indeed abominable.  The discussion boards are the worst, it's like a giant contest to see who can be meaner to each other while trying to shut conversations down.

 

 

The comments I read all said "The author doesn't have a clue what anarchism is."

He also doesn't know the difference between NCIS and NCIC.

Posted

Yea, when I talk to socialists or people who refer to people as "right wing" I like to tell them no no no no. I am not right wing I am a guy on the ground trying to shoot down the bird. Republicans suscribe to a collective ethic which is substantivly different than a rejection of that ethic intirely (although we might agree in some places). Its ok though, hopefully when this movement grows and people actually know a few voluntaryists they won't be able to get away with such rank ignorence of voluntaryist thought. 

Posted

"Its ok though, hopefully when this movement grows and people actually know a few voluntaryists they won't be able to get away with such rank ignorence of voluntaryist thought. "

 

 I would be hesitant to assume ignorance on the part of someone writing about anarchism. No doubt there is some ignorance but, the larger likelihood is that the mischaracterizations are intentional.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.