You know, it has always puzzled me that so many "liberals" and some Democrats seem to like to characterize the Replublican Party as anti civil liberties and facist.
Although I could name some examples of Republicans not acting in the best interests of freedom and liberty one thing sticks out in my mind...over the course of our nation's history the Democrats have been more repressive of individual civil liberties than the Republicans. The two largest examples that I can provide without even straining my sleepy brain are the continuation of Slavery prior to and during the US Civil War and the internment of citizens of Japanese ancestry during the Second World War. A lot of people like to bash the President for his "fear mongering" and "heavy-handed" practices during the "war on terror" but, on balance, I think that the two examples I've mentioned make his efforts look mighty weak.

 

Jeff, Palm, Everyone

No, no. Both of you are taking this way to personal. I'm not talking about Bush or Kerry, I'm not even talking about Democrats or Republicans (of liberals or conservatives). I'm talking about the tone and temper of the times. I'm talking about the mood and attitude in general.

 

Interesting that your question came up the day before I read the following article:

Not for the first time in world history, US voters on November 2 faced a choice between two varieties of statism, two forms of central planning, two types of duplicity, two approaches to rule by the central state. One won, one lost.

In this, our times are not unlike the 1930s, when during a crisis just about everyone believed that there were only two political options worth pursuing. You were either some variety of communist (a.k.a. socialist, Bolshevik, Trotskyite, etc.) or some variety of fascist (a.k.a. corporativist, national socialist, new dealer, etc.). To reject the idea of government control and centralization, it was believed, was to stand outside the main current of history.

In the presidential election, one central plan wanted to soak the rich, the other wanted to spend now and pay later. One had a plan for national life at home, and the other had a plan for the whole world. One emphasized bread and the other circuses, one wanted unilateral war while one wanted lots of consultations and more troops before doing the same thing, but neither knew or cared anything for the great tradition of thought which gave birth to this nation or which built the prosperity of our times.

The missing piece in all of this is the forgotten liberal tradition, which affirms the dignity of all human life, believes in the rights of all, and fights for freedom against the never-ending attempts by government, all government everywhere, to restrict and destroy it.

The liberal tradition believes that individuals and society can work out their own problems in the absence of top-down management. It denies to government any role in managing the nation or the world. It embraces private property, cherishes freedom of association, and sees peace as the mother of civilization.

The great intellectual strain of this liberal tradition spans 500 years and longer, and has survived every onslaught from left and right, and will continue to do so. It is the liberal tradition to which we owe the world's prosperity and well-being, all technological innovations, and improvements in health, housing, nutrition, and information distribution. The liberal tradition will continue to thrive, but with no help from the elites in power.

That this tradition is not represented as a political option is not particularly surprising. As Mises wrote in 1929, "government is essentially the negation of liberty." This is why "A liberal government is a contradictio in adjecto. Governments must be forced into adopting liberalism by the power of the unanimous opinion of the people; that they could voluntarily become liberal is not to be expected."

But elections such as this one present an opportunity for learning. We learn, for example, who the true friends of liberty are, and how to distinguish them from the partisan hacks who are glad to sell out in exchange for getting and staying close to those in power.



(Remember that at the time perioed referred to in the article, the word 'liberal' meant 'libertarian'.)

The rest can be read at: http://www.lewrockwell.com/rockwell/liberty-lives.html

It's also a pretty good summary as to why people like me feel very left out of the political debates in this country.

JonasM

 

This exchange of views has given me more insight, but still begs the question:

Is there any way to overcome the divergent moves of two 'polar opposite' political parties....and return to a balanced attack on the many problems of the American society

 

for me... and this is my opinion only, Iraq in many ways can be compared to Nazi Germany and the Holocaust. The are mass murders, mass graves, genocide, the weak and children murdered etc all caused by one evil dictators perverted view on what a perfect society should be. And once again the U.S. steps in and puts a end to it. God Bless the USA and it's military, let freedom ring! for it shall spread thru that region making the world and the U.S. safer and a better place because of it.

 

It's all a great idea....just like in Vietnam, right? Luckily, there was no First Exec Top Gun there....to fly in and prematurely declare "Mission Accomplished".

And then there's the question about NO action in Sudan; those 2 little countries west of Uganda, etc. Oh yeah....no oil there

 

^^^^^^^to quote Rob who started this thread:

(Please, this can be an interesting discussion. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and view. No flames, no finger pointing and no name calling. This is the Vintage forum. Thanks.)

try and stay focused... thanks

 

[QUOTE=charlie,Nov 7 2004, 08:38 PM] for me... and this is my opinion only, Iraq in many ways can be compared to Nazi Germany and the Holocaust. The are mass murders, mass graves, genocide, the weak and children murdered etc all caused by one evil dictators perverted view on what

 

Rather than try to think up a parallel, let me be a contrarian and say I don't think this time is similar to others in the past. In fact, it is because things are so different that we are not sure what is the right or wrong course of action.

We all grew up in a time when Super Powers ruled the earth and we were engaged in a great battle either with fascists or communists for the future of the world. Those two problems seem to have passed. We are now engaged in a political/religeous dispute that we do not want to be involved in. Who among us care about the degree to which others follow Jesus, Moses, Buddah or Allah? I know I don't. But our involvment in world politics has brought us to the point where we are deeply involved with the daily lives of those who follow the teachings of Mohammed and Moses. But that is only part of it. Yes, oil is an important resource and issue, but we are involved around the globe in small, regional disputes that threaten to disrupt world trade and economics. And we are the only Super Power left standing. We seem to be the only parent in a single parent home.

These are important times. Does humanity break down along ethnic and religeous lines and Balkanize back to the times before WWI? Or do we move forward and build on our similarities rather than our differences? what is the best way to achieve the latter if that is the goal? What part does Europe and Russia play? They do not seem to want to get involved. Are they correct, or simply playing the role of the lesser countries that do not have the power to get involved?

Rob, some might actually suggest that if there were a time in history similar to this, it would be the time of the crusades when England and Europe tried to conquer the muslim world. That was a terrible failure. While we are not trying to conquer the muslim world, we are trying to change it. Can we? Should we? I wonder if we can instead work with the muslim world in a cooperative fashion, or if they must simply be "left alone" for another thousand years? To leave them alone would mean that we abandon Isreal. I don't think America is willing to do that.

I don't think this time is similar to any other time Rob. That may be our problem.

 

Bill,

Some very interesting points. You may be right, I'm not sure.