The Nail in the Coffin of "The Right"

re: The Nail in the Coffin of "The Right"

Brainpolice — Sun, 27 Apr 2008 04:33:16 GMT

"We've had this argument on the forum before; leftist policies are infinitely harder to undo, both electorally (they create millions of perpetual votes) and logistically (cutting off millions of people's main source of income is messy; re-privatizing nationalized industries is also extremely difficult to do fairly)."

But the problem is that your concept of "left" seems like a package deal. There are segments of the "left" who don't support welfare states. And I see no reason why the policies of the "right" necessarily have grown the state any less than most democrats. In recent times, often "rightist" adminstrations have actually far out-grew the state in comprison to "leftist" ones. I see no reason why a huge military, "national security", immigration and police apparatus is "easy to undo".

re: The Nail in the Coffin of "The Right"

Brainpolice — Sun, 27 Apr 2008 04:25:26 GMT

I agree that Tucker or Spooner style individualist anarchism is superior to both the communists and the various factions of conservatives. If only they would have been informed about time preferance, then their position is virtually identical to more contemporary market anarchism.

re: The Nail in the Coffin of "The Right"

Nitroadict — Sat, 26 Apr 2008 23:42:05 GMT

Just because they, The Right, are (supposedly) less evil than the Left, which is based on some very vauge relations concerning free market rhetoric & limited government, does not make them a less of a threat; especially since they spout nothing but double-speak while co-opting Libertarianism's principles for their own political gain.

Does anyone remember the absolute "brilliant" plan of The Right concerning communists? The one where teaming up with Fascists seemed like a "good idea"? Or how about Reagan, the neo-co-, I mean, the "conservative messiah"? Two of many examples that easily prove The Right has as much blood on it's hands as The Left does. I know I won't forget their most recent example of the past near-decade or so under King George. Many a future-grandchild will be horrified at my ghost stories.

Quite honestly, the effects of both the Left & Right make things much more of mess by way of both sides constantly hijacking terms & blurring meanings, while spouting rhetoric both filled to the brim with uses of anti-concepts, and even *mis-uses* of anti-concepts. Throw in some good Orwellian double-speak, & pandering to the masses in the name of the common good (one of many ingredients, obviously, but theres too much to list), and this is what we have currently: politics being reduced to a sports game, instead of something that must be dealt with in everyday life to prevent such a mess from occurring.

The bickering alone is enough to make one slam their heads against a wall, hoping to rid themselves of the awareness of such debacles, as both the Left & Right, and possibly the entire political process towards change, for that matter, is constantly building a road to nowhere. Contract With America? Stand For Change? More like Contract With Hoffa, and Beg For $.Change.

The Right should get no sympathy whatsoever from libertarians at all, and the sooner this is realized, the faster we can move towards actually cleaning up the mis-use of terms, the anti-conceptual garbage, and the economic ignorance people living in the state have to endure

The only reason I can see anyone bothering with such, is if they believed that The Old Right (which was actually conservative) provided a long lost balance that helped the 2 Party system remain "stable".

This is of course assuming that they believe in political means. This is also assuming that such an idea were true; in reality, such an idea only serves to legitimize The State (there's stability as long as there are opposing forces, and if that remains, more of the 'right' people will get into power to run things right for us), and it would be speculative at best.

The only reason I read up on the controversy on the old right is because it helps highlight the history old hijacking of terms, and the inevitable processes in which political means for change eventually sputter & fade into other counter-movements that quickly leave past reforms, warnings, & progress in the dust. Libertarian's would be instrumental in helping to illustrate the power of words (and subsequently, propaganda), distortion of history, use of classes against each other (rich vs. poor, intellectuals vs. the layman, democrats vs. republicans, them vs. us).

A haunting example (one of many) of this would be Eisenhower warning us of the military industrial complex, which, despite said intention, was already well under way when he issued such a warning.

The Nail In The Coffin couldn't get here soon enough; it will be our job to keep it lodged in there.

re: The Nail in the Coffin of "The Right"

Ego — Sat, 26 Apr 2008 17:18:57 GMT

We've had this argument on the forum before; leftist policies are infinitely harder to undo, both electorally (they create millions of perpetual votes) and logistically (cutting off millions of people's main source of income is messy; re-privatizing nationalized industries is also extremely difficult to do fairly).

re: The Nail in the Coffin of "The Right"

Cork — Sat, 26 Apr 2008 09:24:06 GMT

I agree that the right sucks, for the most part. The thing is, the radical left is far worse than any sky-pixie chasing paleoconservative. RevLeft.com is downright despicable, and so are the rotten "social anarchist"/"social democrat" creatures who live there. Their anti-individualist, anti-market, anti-freedom philosophy makes me want to vomit.

The Tucker-Spooner "left" is superior to both the commie left and the right, in my book.