I have always had a libertarian streak. When I was researching I came across the following from Ron Paul about neo-cons.
-----link-----
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4df1soW7Dho
---------------
I respect his strict constitutional views. So I’m perplexed by why he did not name Newt Gingrich as one of the neo-cons. Newt’s a favorite of mine so I realized that he should of made Ron’s list. I started to do some digging.
Googling Gingrich and Neo-cons there seemed an abundance of material out there to link Newt to the cause. I assume Ron Paul would consider Newt as a neo-con. I would agree. Perhaps you are getting to see the quandary I’m finding myself in. I like both these intelligent people. Ron Paul and his followers claim that neo-cons rule by fear. If there wasn’t anything to fear they would manufacture it. That is where the most radical of that persuasion come up with the conspiracy theories about 9/11, claiming the whole thing was staged by the neo-cons. I view that as just their way of manufacturing fear in their own way. Ron Paul I’m sure does not believe this, let me be clear on that.
Newt Gingrich for those that read my blog will know that I’ve been quite impressed with him since his GOPAC days. He seems to be the only one now who is working towards change in any type of systematic concrete way. His book Real Change lays out a workable blueprint to retake the government from big government hands. I admire his organizational and leadership skills. How he can set up the networks for political change almost single handedly. The scope of his online presence is astounding. Go to the link below to see the range of his talents.
-----link-----
http://newt.org/
---------------
The man is tireless and ever doing. He is a true genius at what he does. I believe he genuinely wants government to work. Be sure to see the bottom of his site for other sites. He has a you tube channel, the guy never runs out of energy.
I especially like to revisit this site to help me get fired up politically.
-----link-----
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfvl6vWZ9FA&feature=user
---------------
The last three minutes are instructive.
I must at this point say that I’ve come up with my answer to my quandary. Perhaps not to yours. Just thinking quietly for a few minutes let me see the obvious. Ron Paul is of the philosophical end of my political spectrum. Newt is of the practical end. To keep those ideas separate I constantly go back to Thomas Sowell and his wonderful book. “A Conflict of Visions” which delineates the two opposing basic ideas of life that humans have. He further shows how those two opposing views find common ground and find ways to survive together to further their causes short of war when they can. The writing and acceptance of the Constitution he uses as a prime example. This is the seminal book in how I look at politics. I have to go back to it often to help me compromise my ideals with those having opposing ideals in order to get something done.
I think Ron Paul would not mind me stating that I am a free man and that pursuing that freedom will enhance the freedom of all. I will also take from him the desire to be more free from government. I do want government however, the amount is what is in question. If I act as a truly free person then I can keep government more as a slave to me than vice versa. Once that mental compromise is done with, I will learn from Newt how better to organize my efforts to create the outcomes I want.
The danger as always throughout history has been for people like myself to fall into the “cult of personality” trap. I and others leaning towards either end of the spectrum seem to be particularly good at that. That compromise Thomas Sowell describes in “A Conflict of Visions” helps me to get over my proclivity to invest perfection into someone so I don’t have to worry about it. I must do some of the work. I must also stay fluid in my pragmatism, while rigidly paying dues to my beliefs. I must firmly believe in something strongly enough to be willing to compromise in order to move my beliefs forward. I believe that to do other wise out of stubborn belief is to go against the very logic and reasoning of the Constitution.
As you probably well know the “devil is in the details”. I have decided that in order for me to advance what I feel is necessary, I must not only compromise but first and above all I must get involved. Let that involvement shape the compromise. This is why I have two blogs. This one is for my philosophical side, the other is for my practical, get involved side. The hard part is knowing that the two will never meet. Again Thomas Sowell’s book tells me that admitting that is what makes me a Conservative or as he calls it having a “Constrained Vision”. And as in my post about the Two Brooks, David and Arthur obliquely accept that axiom by pointing out that conservatives are happier by the acceptance, then going about doing what they can. While those having the “Unconstrained Vision” believing that perfection can be achieved can never be happy until that is achieved, whether that can happen or not it seems to be a long way off.
-----link-----
http://conservativeinmuskegon.blogspot.com/2008/05/two-brooks-emerging-river.html
--------------
I notice now that both sides “constrained” and “unconstrained” have the same basic choices as far as how they will try to change things. I compare them to the Jesus way, the way of ultimate love vs. the other I’ll call the tyrants way. Here I don’t necessarily mean by saying the Jesus way to imply the necessity of religion. Just as by saying tyrants I don’t mean specific ones. Both sides have plenty of each. The point I’m trying to make is that the common ground necessary in order for civilization to exist is found in these. The type of civilization formed is found in which of the two is favored.
Well now I feel I better get back to my other blog so I can practice what I preach to see if the proof in the pudding tastes good. Hopefully the next serving here will reflect subtle changes I’ve made in the recipe of my offering from the never ending assortment of spices found in real life.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
PSIn my quest today within the sphere of the web, I’ve come across someone, who I’m not sure how has affected me and what I blogged today. I’ve linked her under my “Old Standby Links” under Neo-neocon on my side bar. The name seems to me misleading. Give it a shot and judge for yourself. For those in Rio Linda, the link is below.
-----link-----
http://neoneocon.com/
--------------
It may be that I liked it because she likes baseball. lol
Showing posts with label neo-con. Show all posts
Showing posts with label neo-con. Show all posts
Thursday, June 5, 2008
Wednesday, June 4, 2008
A Real Fistful of Truth, I missed yesterday
I usually don’t post again this quickly, but I missed McCain’s speech in New Orleans, yesterday.
-----link-----
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/06/mccains_speech_in_new_orleans_1.html
--------------
Looks like John has decided to come out swinging. I can’t help but relate what my previous post was about to this speech. The idea that truth is such a novel idea recently in politics. More to the point John McCain is telling it like it is. While he lacks that certain finesse and nuance the pundits go ga ga over, I get the feeling he is shooting from the hip. The real tenor of his campaign and his soul has been put out there. The gauntlet thrown down. Not just for the other side but for the Republican leadership as well. I believe he is saying this is the campaign, this is what I‘m going after, what I believe in. Join with me, and we can win this thing. He has held his water well and if this speech is a portent of the things to come he has used his time well, while the Dems had their catfight.
John McCain has a chance here to lay out a new conservative agenda, by the sounds of his speech he has kept his ear to the ground and is using the best of the British Conservative and the Newt Gingrich models. The message he has had, but the delivery is where he has learned.
-----quote from speech------
“The right change recognizes that many of the policies and institutions of our government have failed. They have failed to keep up with the challenges of our time because many of these policies were designed for the problems and opportunities of the mid to late 20th Century, before the end of the Cold War; before the revolution in information technology and rise of the global economy. The right kind of change will initiate widespread and innovative reforms in almost every area of government policy -- health care, energy, the environment, the tax code, our public schools, our transportation system, disaster relief, government spending and regulation, diplomacy, the military and intelligence services. Serious and far-reaching reforms are needed in so many areas of government to meet our own challenges in our own time.”
-----------------------------------
Wishful thinking abounds after reading the speech. I realize I’m making connections where none probably exist, but what the hey. Here they come.
The obvious connection to the “new modern conservatism” being created in England, see my side bar (Updates Across the Pond) In the same side bar I recently noted that the marketing guru for Cameron’s conservative message is coming to the US for 6 months, coincidence?
This kick off speech was given in New Orleans La. Is that too a coincidence? Bobby Jindal the young, confident, get things done, “Bottom up Politics” kind of guy from the British model happens to be Governor of Louisiana ! Also happened to be invited to visit John McCain and rumored to be on his short list for VP! Below a link to what I posted about Bobby before.
-----link-----
http://conservativeinmuskegon.blogspot.com/2008/05/bobby-jindal-who-is-that.html
--------------
Newt Gingrich has also been tirelessly preaching in his own way the same kind of change in his book Real Change and a long time before that in many other efforts. If you check out his American Solutions web site and from there his others, you will see he has been doing more than preaching.
My real wishful thinking concept is that the leadership of the Republicans whole heartedly get behind this message and that John McCain does also. Mainly I’m afraid of the message not getting out. For this to work, look at Britain. It works there because they have a strong leader, who LET the message go to his head.! Also a bunch of young turks willing to work at it.
Sen. Obama and the Dems by trying to link President Bush to John McCain, have given John the opportunity the opening needed to show the obvious to the world. It has been obviously clear to most the differences. In the Media’s hatred for Bush they have praised McCain for all the times he has gone against “his” President and party for that matter.
He has been praised for his fight against earmarks. For his bipartisan efforts from Immigration to global warming. The Media is already hard at it to cover their tracks. It is also as obvious from Obama’s short record that he is the most liberal, pro big government senator in the Senate. John McCain points this out by saying the big government idea doesn’t work and he is the only one who has actually been fighting it. Not just talking about it. It doesn’t much matter where he picked up those ideas, what matters is that the gloves are coming off, what also matters is that the truth is plain to see. Lucky for Obama that he has so much money, he will need to remain lucky, for he will not win on words alone.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
-----link-----
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/06/mccains_speech_in_new_orleans_1.html
--------------
Looks like John has decided to come out swinging. I can’t help but relate what my previous post was about to this speech. The idea that truth is such a novel idea recently in politics. More to the point John McCain is telling it like it is. While he lacks that certain finesse and nuance the pundits go ga ga over, I get the feeling he is shooting from the hip. The real tenor of his campaign and his soul has been put out there. The gauntlet thrown down. Not just for the other side but for the Republican leadership as well. I believe he is saying this is the campaign, this is what I‘m going after, what I believe in. Join with me, and we can win this thing. He has held his water well and if this speech is a portent of the things to come he has used his time well, while the Dems had their catfight.
John McCain has a chance here to lay out a new conservative agenda, by the sounds of his speech he has kept his ear to the ground and is using the best of the British Conservative and the Newt Gingrich models. The message he has had, but the delivery is where he has learned.
-----quote from speech------
“The right change recognizes that many of the policies and institutions of our government have failed. They have failed to keep up with the challenges of our time because many of these policies were designed for the problems and opportunities of the mid to late 20th Century, before the end of the Cold War; before the revolution in information technology and rise of the global economy. The right kind of change will initiate widespread and innovative reforms in almost every area of government policy -- health care, energy, the environment, the tax code, our public schools, our transportation system, disaster relief, government spending and regulation, diplomacy, the military and intelligence services. Serious and far-reaching reforms are needed in so many areas of government to meet our own challenges in our own time.”
-----------------------------------
Wishful thinking abounds after reading the speech. I realize I’m making connections where none probably exist, but what the hey. Here they come.
The obvious connection to the “new modern conservatism” being created in England, see my side bar (Updates Across the Pond) In the same side bar I recently noted that the marketing guru for Cameron’s conservative message is coming to the US for 6 months, coincidence?
This kick off speech was given in New Orleans La. Is that too a coincidence? Bobby Jindal the young, confident, get things done, “Bottom up Politics” kind of guy from the British model happens to be Governor of Louisiana ! Also happened to be invited to visit John McCain and rumored to be on his short list for VP! Below a link to what I posted about Bobby before.
-----link-----
http://conservativeinmuskegon.blogspot.com/2008/05/bobby-jindal-who-is-that.html
--------------
Newt Gingrich has also been tirelessly preaching in his own way the same kind of change in his book Real Change and a long time before that in many other efforts. If you check out his American Solutions web site and from there his others, you will see he has been doing more than preaching.
My real wishful thinking concept is that the leadership of the Republicans whole heartedly get behind this message and that John McCain does also. Mainly I’m afraid of the message not getting out. For this to work, look at Britain. It works there because they have a strong leader, who LET the message go to his head.! Also a bunch of young turks willing to work at it.
Sen. Obama and the Dems by trying to link President Bush to John McCain, have given John the opportunity the opening needed to show the obvious to the world. It has been obviously clear to most the differences. In the Media’s hatred for Bush they have praised McCain for all the times he has gone against “his” President and party for that matter.
He has been praised for his fight against earmarks. For his bipartisan efforts from Immigration to global warming. The Media is already hard at it to cover their tracks. It is also as obvious from Obama’s short record that he is the most liberal, pro big government senator in the Senate. John McCain points this out by saying the big government idea doesn’t work and he is the only one who has actually been fighting it. Not just talking about it. It doesn’t much matter where he picked up those ideas, what matters is that the gloves are coming off, what also matters is that the truth is plain to see. Lucky for Obama that he has so much money, he will need to remain lucky, for he will not win on words alone.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
Tuesday, June 3, 2008
What I Have In Common With The Left
What I have in common with the Left.
Much as the left, I look for inspiration to people and concepts from foreign and exotic places.
The 1930’s saw the rise of communism as a theoretically pure expression of the hope of mankind. Equality for all, (in American words) the freedom to pursue happiness. In their words to work at what you were best suited to. As is always the case it was sad to see human nature creep in and destroy the theory. Stalin comes to mind, as do relocation and reeducation camps. Purges and mass killings and mass graves. The left at first fell in love with the theory, they tended to dismiss the atrocities committed under the Red Banner. They would not fall into that trap they were different. They could make it work.
As a conservative I too have a theory. It is as lofty in it’s aims and claims as the left‘s theory. In fact we both claim to want the same ultimate goals. The happiness and well being of the individual. My theory when given full power to achieve it’s goals falls far short also. It falls to the iron fist of corruption also. It has resulted in mass killings and all sorts of atrocities also. I too as my left leaning friends do, tend to sweep that thought away as somehow not relevant to the current situation. That’s one thing we have in common, we are sure our paths are right and that we will not make the mistakes of the past.
I would here like to make the case that the one crucial thing our failures have had in common is that when we in our zeal let the power be concentrated in a few hands (to more efficeintly use that power) at the upper level of government that power corrupts whatever system we set up to fulfill our theories. The very concept of concentrated power unchecked looking out for the individual is an oxymoron. I have always struggled back and forth with that issue. In business I always thought that the model of complete control as the most efficient. One decision maker deciding and every body else concentrating on fulfilling that decision. That old philosopher king idea. Business makes that model work, but only with the club of free enterprise. All companies use that model, however only those that produce what the people want to buy succeed. The bottom line is the “bottom up” iron fist of the consumer. Who is after all freely working in the pursuit of their happiness. The business’ that don’t produce what the consumer wants no matter how efficiently they are run, are soon out of business.
In government and it’s people side, politics; the iron fist of the voters in democracies and the “people” in totalitarian regimes through elections or revolution, eventually bubbles from the bottom up to make their wishes known replacing that which is not helping them in their pursuit of happiness.
The point is top down government doesn’t work simply due to human nature. In a democracy when one party concentrates power they start to lose touch with the people that elected them, and become more concerned about keeping that power and the easiest way to do that is to keep enlarging that power.
This is the contradiction inherent in government. Neither side has the ultimate answer because the ultimate answer doesn’t lie in government. It lies in ourselves. Our government is there only to help free us to decide for ourselves what we think we wish to do. They are there to do the mundane things like fix pot holes. Repel invaders. Not to give us happiness. How do they know what will make me happy. I expect them to make it possible for me to do what I think is best for me. Not for them to decide that for me. I forget that for that to happen, I have a responsibility to be a part of that. What that part is, is my struggle. Doing that whatever it is when mixed with all the other peoples decisions simmers and cooks in the cauldren of democracy making the majority better off. Because they are the ones deciding by majority. I may be bitterly dissappointed at times but if I was able to give it my best shot then I can live with it, as I go on to the next battle.
At this point in time when the people are bubbling up their anger at the Republicans for failing prey to the corruption of power, I look to foreign and exotic lands for inspiration. Much as other struggling democracies have looked to us, overlooking our shortcomings to guide their thoughts. The British and their concepts of the Modern Conservative movement is giving me inspiration. The idea of Bottom Up Governing is as old as democracy yet as new young energetic faces behind it in Britain. In the never ending cycle of “power corrupting” that makes “bums” out of our best leaders and ideas, only through democracy do the people have the best chance to throw those “Bums” out.
I thought of changing the title of this blog to “What the Theories of the Left and Right have in common”, I decided not to as I realized that for politics to work it has to be personal. We not only have to realize how our leaders can become corrupted by power, but that we also share their weakness.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative.
PS. Please see my side bar titled "Update Across the Pond" for links to the Bristish Modern Conservative Movement.
Much as the left, I look for inspiration to people and concepts from foreign and exotic places.
The 1930’s saw the rise of communism as a theoretically pure expression of the hope of mankind. Equality for all, (in American words) the freedom to pursue happiness. In their words to work at what you were best suited to. As is always the case it was sad to see human nature creep in and destroy the theory. Stalin comes to mind, as do relocation and reeducation camps. Purges and mass killings and mass graves. The left at first fell in love with the theory, they tended to dismiss the atrocities committed under the Red Banner. They would not fall into that trap they were different. They could make it work.
As a conservative I too have a theory. It is as lofty in it’s aims and claims as the left‘s theory. In fact we both claim to want the same ultimate goals. The happiness and well being of the individual. My theory when given full power to achieve it’s goals falls far short also. It falls to the iron fist of corruption also. It has resulted in mass killings and all sorts of atrocities also. I too as my left leaning friends do, tend to sweep that thought away as somehow not relevant to the current situation. That’s one thing we have in common, we are sure our paths are right and that we will not make the mistakes of the past.
I would here like to make the case that the one crucial thing our failures have had in common is that when we in our zeal let the power be concentrated in a few hands (to more efficeintly use that power) at the upper level of government that power corrupts whatever system we set up to fulfill our theories. The very concept of concentrated power unchecked looking out for the individual is an oxymoron. I have always struggled back and forth with that issue. In business I always thought that the model of complete control as the most efficient. One decision maker deciding and every body else concentrating on fulfilling that decision. That old philosopher king idea. Business makes that model work, but only with the club of free enterprise. All companies use that model, however only those that produce what the people want to buy succeed. The bottom line is the “bottom up” iron fist of the consumer. Who is after all freely working in the pursuit of their happiness. The business’ that don’t produce what the consumer wants no matter how efficiently they are run, are soon out of business.
In government and it’s people side, politics; the iron fist of the voters in democracies and the “people” in totalitarian regimes through elections or revolution, eventually bubbles from the bottom up to make their wishes known replacing that which is not helping them in their pursuit of happiness.
The point is top down government doesn’t work simply due to human nature. In a democracy when one party concentrates power they start to lose touch with the people that elected them, and become more concerned about keeping that power and the easiest way to do that is to keep enlarging that power.
This is the contradiction inherent in government. Neither side has the ultimate answer because the ultimate answer doesn’t lie in government. It lies in ourselves. Our government is there only to help free us to decide for ourselves what we think we wish to do. They are there to do the mundane things like fix pot holes. Repel invaders. Not to give us happiness. How do they know what will make me happy. I expect them to make it possible for me to do what I think is best for me. Not for them to decide that for me. I forget that for that to happen, I have a responsibility to be a part of that. What that part is, is my struggle. Doing that whatever it is when mixed with all the other peoples decisions simmers and cooks in the cauldren of democracy making the majority better off. Because they are the ones deciding by majority. I may be bitterly dissappointed at times but if I was able to give it my best shot then I can live with it, as I go on to the next battle.
At this point in time when the people are bubbling up their anger at the Republicans for failing prey to the corruption of power, I look to foreign and exotic lands for inspiration. Much as other struggling democracies have looked to us, overlooking our shortcomings to guide their thoughts. The British and their concepts of the Modern Conservative movement is giving me inspiration. The idea of Bottom Up Governing is as old as democracy yet as new young energetic faces behind it in Britain. In the never ending cycle of “power corrupting” that makes “bums” out of our best leaders and ideas, only through democracy do the people have the best chance to throw those “Bums” out.
I thought of changing the title of this blog to “What the Theories of the Left and Right have in common”, I decided not to as I realized that for politics to work it has to be personal. We not only have to realize how our leaders can become corrupted by power, but that we also share their weakness.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative.
PS. Please see my side bar titled "Update Across the Pond" for links to the Bristish Modern Conservative Movement.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)