![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
♠
The G.O.P. used to have a sizable libertarian bloc, but I couldn’t see any sign of it at the conference. Stone and Parker said they were rooting for Hillary Clinton in 2008 simply because it would be weird to have her as president. The prevailing sentiment among the rest of the libertarians was that the best outcome this November would be a Democratic majority in the House, because then at least there’d be gridlock.
... Stone and Parker told me they’d previously seen the G.O.P. as a relief from the big-government liberals, particularly the ones preaching to America from Hollywood. “We see these people lying, cheating, whoring,” Stone said. “They’re our friends, but seriously, they’re not people you want to listen to.”
The religious right used to be a better alternative, Parker said. “The Republicans didn’t want the government to run your life, because Jesus should. That was really part of their thing: less government, more Jesus. Now it’s like, how about more government and Jesus?”
-- John Tierney for The NY Times
Today has been a good day for the commentariat's philosphical, ideological struggles within our two-party system. In addition to Mr. Tierney's piece, Robert Tracinski has a deeper, if drier, essay titled "The Secular Right", which deals with his own concerns about the relationship between religion and politics, looking for a stronger libertarian politics.
Personally, while I also disfavor religion in government and policy, I see the issues as revolving around the fundamental question of trying to find a happy balance between liberty and equality, and see that we are not especially close to it, but we are at least on the right track, or at least a good track, in our political and ideological struggles, in contrast to the sort of dysfunctional and despotic regimes of the Muslim Middle East, China, and so on.
( Tierney column )
xXx
The G.O.P. used to have a sizable libertarian bloc, but I couldn’t see any sign of it at the conference. Stone and Parker said they were rooting for Hillary Clinton in 2008 simply because it would be weird to have her as president. The prevailing sentiment among the rest of the libertarians was that the best outcome this November would be a Democratic majority in the House, because then at least there’d be gridlock.
... Stone and Parker told me they’d previously seen the G.O.P. as a relief from the big-government liberals, particularly the ones preaching to America from Hollywood. “We see these people lying, cheating, whoring,” Stone said. “They’re our friends, but seriously, they’re not people you want to listen to.”
The religious right used to be a better alternative, Parker said. “The Republicans didn’t want the government to run your life, because Jesus should. That was really part of their thing: less government, more Jesus. Now it’s like, how about more government and Jesus?”
-- John Tierney for The NY Times
Today has been a good day for the commentariat's philosphical, ideological struggles within our two-party system. In addition to Mr. Tierney's piece, Robert Tracinski has a deeper, if drier, essay titled "The Secular Right", which deals with his own concerns about the relationship between religion and politics, looking for a stronger libertarian politics.
Personally, while I also disfavor religion in government and policy, I see the issues as revolving around the fundamental question of trying to find a happy balance between liberty and equality, and see that we are not especially close to it, but we are at least on the right track, or at least a good track, in our political and ideological struggles, in contrast to the sort of dysfunctional and despotic regimes of the Muslim Middle East, China, and so on.
( Tierney column )
