"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

"Stuart & Kathryn Fields" wrote in message
...

"John R. Carroll" wrote in message
...
Ed Huntress wrote:
"Hawke" wrote in message
...


That's categorically different from the libertarian program as it
stands
today. Libertarianism, as an intellectual conservative would
define it, is a
form of radicalism (and intellectual conservatives recognize that
their opposites are radicals, not liberals). When Stuart says you
need an agreement on some fundamental principles to avoid chaos,
he's surely talking
about some things that are not part of the Libertarian platform,
because
those things aren't there. In fact, he's almost certainly talking
about the
kinds of principle upon which conservatism is founded, as
explained in detail by Edmund Burke.

I can tell that I don't have the historical or political depth of
information that you do, Ed, so I'll just bow out here.

I think I got carried away. I'll relax now. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress


Hey, way to go Ed. You sat on a Libertarian and made him give, you
bully. I
think that's a first. The fact that he agreed to bow to your logic
was a real triumph. Usually when you give a Libertarian/Conservative
a thumping by
argument all they do is go away mad, start a fight, or call you some
names,
like Gunner would. You also nailed Libertarianism. It's not
realistic. It's
for complainers. They don't like the way things are now; with that
we can all agree. But instead of coming up with real and feasible
ways of making concrete changes all they can come up with is to
throw out the baby with the
bath water. But that explains why that party will never be anything
more than a blip on the radar. As long as it can't come up with real
alternatives
to the status quo that might actually work it'll stay irrelevant.
However, as Americans we all have at least some measure of
Libertarian in us though it may be really, really small.

Hawke

Now, don't get carried away. The impulse behind libertarianism is a
perfectly good one. It's the thought that's lacking.

Thoughtless impulse is an apt description of Libertarians. It also
applies
to teenagers.

--

John R. Carroll
www.machiningsolution.com

Yes John it is the result of the careful thinking of the Republicans and
Democrats that have led us to the world of deficit spending and debts to
China we probably will never pay without devaluing the dollar.

Deficit spending and "debts to China" are two separate issues. The first
is the result of the "starve the beast" policies created by Reagan and his
budget director Stockman, and of which Dick Cheney convinced George Bush.
The debts to China are the result of free-trade globalization, promoted by
Milton Friedman and practiced by conservative economists, who have had the
ear of the last four presidents.

Yes the thoughtful thinking that had us in Viet Nam and now in Iraq and
though we are setting on large oil reserves captives of OPEC. We have
governmental incompetencies to rival just about anything I've ever heard
of.

That's philosophy for you. They read too much Friedrich August von Hayek
and too little John Kenneth Galbraith. Galbraith had a good eye for people
who would screw you if given half a chance. Hayek was a philosopher.
Enough said.

Ed seems to favor the dictatorship where we don't use a code of ethics or
are guided by principles or a working philosophy.

What a nutty thing to say. What I favor is a government of, by, and for
the people. So, we screw up sometimes. That's the cost of a democratic
republic. At least it's *our* screw-ups.

He seems to prefer a government run on the basis of "Attitudes".

'Beats the hell out of a government by philosophers. See Hayek, Friedrich,
and Ancient Greece, Collapse of. When you're done, see _Reflections on the
Revolution in France_, by Edmund Burke.

I have a hard time deciding whether the current ill defined attitudes
are something that I support. He also seems to think that we either are
moving in a positive direction or that somehow magically we will return
to some some more sensible, stable, and productivie society.

Who said "sensible"? Who said "stable"? Those are the words of
conservatives. I'm all for the messy, but generally effective way it
actually works.

This in spite of the downward spiral in our history.

Jesus Christ, Stu. What "downward spiral"? Put some numbers on it. If
you're going to tell me that it's not a question of numbers, then just
come out with it and admit you're a moralist who doesn't like other
peoples' moral judgments.

You would have thought that with this great group of thinkers that deny
the libertarians membership, we could have avoided much of the current
problems.

The question is, how would libertarians have improved the situation? With
their position on less government regulation, it looks like they just
would have made it worse.

The Iraq farce was forecast by a large number of "ignored" non-thinkers.
Thoughtless impulse seems to describe one our Democrat Presidents as much
as any Libertarian that I know of.

Well, here's a reality check for you. Go back in the Google archives a few
years and see how many of the self-proclaimed libertarians here opposed
the Iraq war. They were among its biggest supporters -- some of them still
are. Then come back and we can talk seriously, OK?

--
Ed Huntress
Naw This is just a waste of time and keystrokes. I haven't learned anything
new and I would bet a bunch neither have you. All this energy with no yield
is definitely a waste of time.

Stu