I'd have to answer that it's probably 50/50. Some of the items below are consistent with the philosophy of the Republican Party view on Federalism, leave it up to the States. Others, like Abortion, I admit are not consistent with the mainstream view of the GOP.
--- In [email protected], "Paul" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Actually no, this does not answer my question. > > Let me refresh your memory. I said your philosophy was not suited for > the Libertarian Party or the libertarian philosophy, and instead was > suited for the Republican Party and Republicanism philosophy. > > You replied by saying... > > "If my philosophy is "Republicanism" how do you explain the fact that > I despise the Religious right, and vehemently Pro-Choice, support drug > legalization, prostitution and gambling, hate seat belt laws, would > end all foreign aid immediately to everyone, oppose the Military draft > and favor allowing 18, 19, and 20 year olds the right to drink beer?" > > Then I asked whether you thought those beliefs you mentioned were > against the philosophical principles of the Republican Party, and if > so why they were. > > You then replied by giving an irrelevant story about your time in the > navy. > > The question is, "Do you think disliking the religious right, being in > favor of pro-choiice for abortion, drinking for those 18 and over, > supporting drug legalization and prostitution and gambling, while > opposing seat belt laws, foreign aid, and a military draft are against > the philosophical principles of the Republican Party? If so, why are > they against those philosphical principles and what are those principles? > > > > > --- In [email protected], "Eric Dondero Rittberg" > <ericdondero@> wrote: > > > > The reason I'm having a hard time answering is because what your > > asking is so convuluuted and obscure. > > > > Ask me a question straight out. > > > > I believe you're asking me why it is I'm not more "philosophical" > > but rather express my libertarianism by "grass roots political > activism," right? And how did I come to that? > > > > I can tell you I had never heard of Mises, Rand, Hazlitt, Hayek, or > > Rothbard until I met Nick Dunbar and Dianne Pilcher straight out of > > the Navy, in Jacksonville, Florida. > > > > I was active in the local ACLU and most especially the local chapter > > of the National Abortion Rights League. Nick met me at an ACLU > > meeting at the Jax Unitarian Church and invited me to a Libertarian > > Party meeting. Of course, I gladly accepted. Told Nick I was > > already a Libertarian cause I voted straight LP absentee while in > > the Persian Gulf in 2002. > > > > (Interesting side story. There were 380 guys on my ship the USS > > Luce - a guided missile destroyer. A Lt. JG was in charge of > > the "Vote Campaign" on the ship. He got a grand total of 2 people, > > himself and little ole' me to vote absentee from the entire ship. > > Not even the friggin' Captain voted!!! in 1982. Is that insane or > > what???) > > > > Well, anyway, I told Nick I considered myself to be a "Pro- Choice > > Republican"; I hated the Religious Right, Pro-Choice was my issue, I > > supported drug legalization, and I hated drinking age laws. On > > Economics I told Nick that I liked Milton Friedman's Free to Choose > > style of economics. On foreign policy I told Nick that I was a > > hardcore Military guy; kick ass and take names. But that I was much > > more concerned with the threat from the Muslims and Arabs than I was > > from the Soviet Union. > > > > He told me that I was "a natural" for the Libertarian Party, and > > handed me a couple Ayn Rand books, Mises, Hayek, Hazlitt, Nozick. > > Read them all in two to three months, then ordered more from Laissez > > Faire Books. > > > > That's my philosophical story. Hope that answers your question. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "mark robert" <colowe@> wrote: > > > > > > Eric, > > > > > > > > > > > > I simply fail to see much continuity from my post to yours. I'm > > > sorry that I'm at such a loss, but I honestly can't see hardly > > > any coherence or libertarianism or logic in your post(s). > > > > > > > > > > > > If you read Mises, how do you come to your views (or lack of) on > > > force and consent? Mises, Rand, Friedman, etc do NOT reinforce > > > them. If you are a meat and potatoes libertarian, how could you > > > have read them? > > > > > > > > > > > > Exactly how did I "hit on" the idea that libertarianism is far > > > too philosophical and dogmatic? The accusation against the > > > movement is also untrue. Libertarian philosophy is the most > > > logical, therefore easy to understand. Most people get it without > > > reading volumes or deep contemplation; which begs even more > > > suspicion about your glaring "meat and potatoes" philosophical > > > deficits. > > > > > > > > > > > > -Mark > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ************ > > > {American jurors have complete Constitutional authority to vote > > > "not guilty" based on nothing more than a disagreement with the > > > case, no matter the evidence - despite the judge's instructions. > > > There is absolutely no obligation to vote "guilty" to arrive at a > > > unanimous verdict. Get on a jury, stand your ground, and fulfill > > > its other main purpose: to counteract abusive government and > > > unjust lawsuits. > > > See www.fija.org > > > [Please adopt this as your own signature.] } > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _____ > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm a meat and potatos advocate of libertarianism. My > > > libertarianism comes instinctively from the gut. > > > > > > Yeah, I've read Mises, Rand, Rothbard, Hayek, Friedman (my > > > favorite), Hazlitt, Nozick, Hospers, you name it. They just > > > serve > > > to reinforce the beliefs that I already have. > > > > > > You've actually hit on something quite brillant. IMHO the > > > biggest > > > problem the libertarian movement has these days is that it's far > > > too > > > philosophical and dogmatic. We can't seem to relate to "meat and > > > > > > potatos libertarianism" like that of the Reform Party/Perotista > > > crowd. > > > > > > As soon as we get a recruit into a more consistent libertarianism > > > and most especially LP ranks, we hit them over the head with > > > ises. "Hey, you gotta read this, you gotta read that..." > > > > > > Why can't we accept that people sympathetic to libertariansim are > > > out there who are not deeply contemplative and there's absolutely > > > no need to turn them on to being book worms. Accept them for who > > > they are. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _____ > > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
