DiLorenzo did general enlightenment a huge favor by popping the hagiographic bubbles of Lincoln and Hamilton. I really hope FDR will be the next target of his iconoclasm. I am so sick of almost everyone in America unquestioningly accepting the public school propaganda that he saved us from the Great Depression and from fascism. We desperately need this lie to be exposed for what it is, because its serving as cover for Obama's new New Deal and all the ruinous policies that have been pursued for the past several months.
Austrian Theory of the Business Cycle in 9 steps (Soliciting comments)
Daniel J. Sanchez: DiLorenzo did general enlightenment a huge favor by popping the hagiographic bubbles of Lincoln and Hamilton. I really hope FDR will be the next target of his iconoclasm. I am so sick of almost everyone in America unquestioningly accepting the public school propaganda that he saved us from the Great Depression and from fascism. We desperately need this lie to be exposed for what it is, because its serving as cover for Obama's new New Deal and all the ruinous policies that have been pursued for the past several months.
For a second I thought you were talking about Stefan Molyneux's podcast. That would be hilarious.
But I agree. From what I've read in "The Roosevelt Myth" and other places he definitely needs some revision. So does Churchill.
If you want to see FDR taken to the woodshed, go to the book Bye-Bye Sweet Liberty, by jwthinkwright, and read Chapter 19, Heaven, an update.
I'd like to see Churchill taken to the woodshed more than anyone. The right wing has been worshipping him for years!
"As long as there are sovereign nations possessing great power, war is inevitable."
ama gi: I'd like to see Churchill taken to the woodshed more than anyone. The right wing has been worshipping him for years!
I thought Pat Buchanan did that already in Churchill Hitler and the Unnecessary War.
If you find something evil that wobbles, push it. - Gary North
Daniel J. Sanchez:DiLorenzo did general enlightenment a huge favor by popping the hagiographic bubbles of Lincoln and Hamilton.
DiLorenzo did do the world a huge favor. In fact, most fairly open-minded people who give it a fair chance are likely to change their opinions of these two much admired men. But to say that he did "general enlightenment" would in my mind imply that the intelligent lay public has changed it's mind. It hasn't. That's not DiLorenzo's fault. There's so much more work to do. Not to belittle DiLorenzo, but, to put it mildly at any given time those liberty-loving factions are down several runs in the bottom of the ninth. Now, there is always a chance that we can knock it out and DiLorenzo certainly got us to second base, but to extend the analogy further, it's necessary to keep on hitting. The hagiographic bubble is not popped. More fawning books about these two will come out from influential academics in the next few years. The average person will still call the pro-seccessionist a racist.
Daniel J. Sanchez:I really hope FDR will be the next target of his iconoclasm.
DiLorenzo's scholarship has been trailbrazing before. Why should he spend his time attack FDR, who libertarians have spent gallons of ink and reams of paper attacking, when he could find somebody who no one else is working on? That seems to be his M.O. Similar to being the first libertarian to truly give Lincoln a bloody nose I'm sure there is a hundred other people he can shred. May I suggest JFK? Just because he's nearly a saint.
I would suggest reading DiLorenzo's "How Capitalism Saved America". He has several great chapters on Hoover and FDR.
I agreed with Liberty Student regarding Churchill. I am almost through reading Pat Buchanan's "Churchill, Hitler, and the Unnecessary War". It casts Churchill as the warmonger that he was.
He should definitely do JFK but churchill and reagan would be pretty great too. And another opinion -why not do Thomas Jefferson, I know he's been part of libertarian canon for decades but he was the guy who cut off almost all trade to europe and expanded the empire across louisiana. Perhaps some clarification on James K Polk would be instore too?
"DiLorenzo's scholarship has been trailbrazing before. Why should he spend his time attack FDR, who libertarians have spent gallons of ink and reams of paper attacking, when he could find somebody who no one else is working on? That seems to be his M.O. Similar to being the first libertarian to truly give Lincoln a bloody nose I'm sure there is a hundred other people he can shred. May I suggest JFK? Just because he's nearly a saint."
FDR bashing is old hat; Republicans were still doing it almost 10 years after his death. Ditto JFK. Heck you can hear critiques of both men on Rush Limbaugh's show, and you cannot get any more mainstream than that.
Semper Fidelis
Definately JFK, I havn't even seen much of a critique (let alone Libertarian critique) of him to date.
I am becoming a Burkean Whig.
- F.A. Hayek
fakename:And another opinion -why not do Thomas Jefferson, I know he's been part of libertarian canon for decades but he was the guy who cut off almost all trade to europe
Somebody who believes in "free trade with all nations, entangling alliances with none" will do strange things when U.S. ships are being directly attacked by a foreign superstate.
fakename:and expanded the empire across louisiana.
You think peacefully purchasing land just on your border is "expanding the empire"???! And keep in mind that there were French and Spanish troops in New Orleans, which could have been a threat to the American republic.
This is the same Tom Jefferson who risked his neck with his signature on the Declaration of Independence, affirming the sovereign authority of the people over the State. The same Jefferson who took on British imperialism not once, but twice: first the revolution, and then again in the years just before the War of 1812. He has been "part of the libertarian canon" not for decades, but centuries, and he's here to stay.
liberty student: ama gi: I'd like to see Churchill taken to the woodshed more than anyone. The right wing has been worshipping him for years! I thought Pat Buchanan did that already in Churchill Hitler and the Unnecessary War.
And Raico.
"You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows"
Bob Dylan
sicsempertyrannis: FDR bashing is old hat; Republicans were still doing it almost 10 years after his death. Ditto JFK. Heck you can hear critiques of both men on Rush Limbaugh's show, and you cannot get any more mainstream than that.
On days when Walter Williams is on? I think Limbaugh as he gets older tip-toes a lot more. Back in the day he made fun of both Bush I & Clinton equally and supported Buchanan. Compared to Rush the Bushevik that Limbaugh was much more interesting. From what I've heard of the conservative mainstream they tend to tiptoe around JFK because of his untimely demise. Also these are the very same types of people who say that Truman and Roosevelt are reallly "conservative", whatever that means now days.
Nerditarian: . Also these are the very same types of people who say that Truman and Roosevelt are reallly "conservative", whatever that means now days.
. Also these are the very same types of people who say that Truman and Roosevelt are reallly "conservative", whatever that means now days.
It seems the only prerequisite for being a "conservative" these days is relentless interventionism, and unbriddled militarism . Thank-you Bill Buckley Jr..
laminustacitus: It seems the only prerequisite for being a "conservative" these days is relentless interventionism, and unbriddled militarism . Thank-you Bill Buckley Jr..
Precisely.
How about Regan? I'd love to read a good libertarian critique of the beloved republican icon (remember the GOP debates?). Has anyone ever done one of these?
.
lidphi: How about Regan? I'd love to read a good libertarian critique of the beloved republican icon (remember the GOP debates?). Has anyone ever done one of these?
Though there would be much relevance to such a book, I am of the opinion that more time should pass before a such a critique to both see how Reagan influences the Repulbican strategy after their 2008 defeat and to let more documents and evidence about Reagan surface
I think a better ideo for DiLorenzo, would be to write about the 'progressive era' in genearal. Covering the economics of Teddy Roosevelt, Wilson, and finally the New Deal. Make it more about economics of an era, as opposed to one man
do we get free cheezeburger in socielism?
Wringing hands and gnashing teeth over FDR and JFK doesn't advance the cause of Liberty. What does advance the cause is to call out lies and liars wherever and whenever they are encountered. We also have to practice strong morals. Liberty is not for people who prey on each other. Liberty can only flourish in an atmosphere of truth and honesty.
Agreed.
Ludwig von Mises Institute | 518 West Magnolia Avenue | Auburn, Alabama 36832-4528
Phone: 334.321.2100 · Fax: 334.321.2119
contact@Mises.org | webmaster | AOL-IM MainMises
Mises.org sitemap