GOP files paperwork to become wholly owned subsidiary of Koch Industries

Started by AllPurposeAtheist, May 27, 2014, 06:48:39 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Jason Harvestdancer

Quote from: Berati on June 02, 2014, 12:48:48 PM
Not only are libertarians presenting taxes as theft
Not only are libertarians in favor of laissez faire capitalism
Not only are libertarians in favour of abolishing all government assistance
(All conservative talking points)

I'm not making the point that conservatives = libertarians but rather that many conservatives have fallen hook line and sinker for the libertarian fantasy that government is always the problem and the government is to blame for whatever is making you unhappy.

Libertarianism is a religion chasing a utopia.
It is no surprise that libertarians will never admit that another party has tried to use some of their central views (like those listed above) but that those failures don't count because they weren't true libertarians.

I notice that you didn't answer my question.  Are you a conservative Republican?

Also I notice you didn't say that any items on my list of disagreements between conservatives and libertarians were wrong.

So to go back to your main point - that conservatives are following a libertarian philosophy about government.  I think I've already disproven that, given my list.  But you simply quoted my list and repeated your assertion.  So let me help you out with your own argument, and try to point out what is the basis of your argument (if you have one other than rooting for your team and bashing the other team).

It is true that at one point in the past the Republicans did like to borrow libertarian rhetoric.  That was in the past, so it doesn't apply today, but it is true that it happened in the past.  The problem was, there was no follow through.  It is well known that Republicans love government, but only when they are in charge of it.  That makes them different from Democrats who love it no matter who is in charge.  But when the Republicans have government all to themselves ... well, to use a sappy metaphor, they dim the lights, put on soft music, and try desperately to get government's bra off.

So they borrowed rhetoric but did not act in accord with the rhetoric.  Remember, though, this was in the past.  We're not talking about right now.  But back in the day when they borrowed rhetoric, libertarians would bang their head against a brick wall saying "but why don't you vote the way you speak?"  They never backed up their rhetoric with votes.

That led to an interesting debate between liberals and libertarians as to how to define conservatives - by their words or by their actions.  Those who are living in the past, the way you appear to be doing, say you define them by their words.  Who are you going to believe, what they say or your lying eyes?  Libertarians would say "but the way they vote..." only to be met with "oh that's just a No True Scotsman."  But remember, that was in the past.

Now, still in the past, let us fast forward to 2000.  Bush Jr.  Starting with Bush Jr, there was no longer even any rhetoric borrowing.  He ended the practice.  There has been no rhetoric borrowing since 2000.  So even if you say that we should judge them by their words instead of their actions, their words show that they are not following any libertarian ideas.

Now let's look at your attempted rebuttal points.  You write "Not only are libertarians in favor of laissez faire capitalism" and "Not only are libertarians in favour of abolishing all government assistance" - exactly!  Conservatives are not in favor of those.  Libertarians are, conservatives are not.  Those are points where libertarians and conservatives disagree.  Libertarians and conservatives do not agree on laissez faire capitalism.  Conservatives believe in government and business working hand in hand, with subsidies, protectionism, and bailouts for the elite.  Libertarians do not believe in that.  Your rebuttal proves MY point, and is exactly what I meant when I wrote "Not only are libertarians opposed to business subsidies", "Not only are libertarians opposed to business bailouts", and "Not only are libertarians opposed to corporate welfare".  What you've just done is tell me that I'm right that libertarians and conservatives do not share economic common ground.  No, laissez faire is not a conservative talking point, and if you favor corporate welfare you don't oppose government assistance.  And the conservative position on taxes is that the top rate should be 36% instead of 39%.  Seriously.  That was the debate.  Do you remember when McCain ran against Obama?   The debate was 36% or 39%.  That's not anti-tax, no matter how much you try to dress it up.

Once you acknowledge that point that conservatives aren't even borrowing libertarian rhetoric anymore, and since 2000 even liberals and progressives have admitted it (except for a few uneducated holdouts), then we can get on to the spurious claim of it being utopian.  But seriously, nobody thinks that Republicans have any use for or any liking of libertarian ideas.  It's been a decade and a half since the last incident of rhetoric borrowing, and even in that bygone era there was no follow through.

So, since you are living in the past, are you a conservative Republican?
White privilege is being a lifelong racist, then being sent to the White House twice because your running mate is a minority.<br /><br />No Biden, no KKK, no Fascist USA!

Berati


Quote from: Jason_Harvestdancer on June 02, 2014, 02:36:36 PM
I notice that you didn't answer my question.  Are you a conservative Republican?
Wouldn’t you like to know?  I post a lot on here, see if you can guess.

QuoteAlso I notice you didn't say that any items on my list of disagreements between conservatives and libertarians were wrong.
Lots are wrong.
QuoteNot only are libertarians opposed to business subsidies...
Not only are libertarians opposed to business bailouts...
Not only are libertarians opposed to corporate welfare...

All supported by multitudes of conservatives.

QuoteNot only do libertarians oppose every single instance of police abuse that libertarians become aware of
This one doesn’t even make sense. Can you show conservatives who are in favor of police abuse?

QuoteSo to go back to your main point - that conservatives are following a libertarian philosophy about government.  I think I've already disproven that, given my list. .
No you didn’t.

My point was” They've swallowed a libertarian fantasy and can't see the harm it's doing.”
That means chasing the fantasy of laissez fair capitalism, chasing the fantasy that any deregulation is good deregulation, chasing the fantasy that any govt. involvement is always bad.
All things conservatives are now chasing after.

So a laundry list of libertarian ideas (Many of which I support) does not even address my point. In fact you have proven my point that even if someone else holds many of the central views of libertarianism and tries to implement them you don’t count those as libertarian because those doing the implementing are not “true libertarians”.
Same as the Scotsman who denies that the other guy is Scotsman because he puts brown sugar on his oatmeal, while forgetting everything else. 

QuoteNow let's look at your attempted rebuttal points.  You write "Not only are libertarians in favor of laissez faire capitalism" and "Not only are libertarians in favour of abolishing all government assistance" - exactly!  Conservatives are not in favor of those.
Sure they are. Conservatives were not always blinded by ideology like libertarians but they have swallowed the libertarian fantasy that govt assistance is always evil, that deregulation is always good, and that market fundamentalism actually makes sense. All primary libertarian views.
We end up with disastrous deregulation of the financial sector and a supreme court that that sees any regulation on money in government as an infringement on freedom.

These are libertarian fantasies (adopted by conservatives) that are harming the country in the present.
Carl Sagan
"It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring."

Jason Harvestdancer

I notice that this time when you actually noticed my list, you said "lots are wrong" and then immediately quoted three points that libertarians and conservatives disagree on.  Three points, all economic, which show a stark contrast and a stark divide between libertarians and conservatives.

How can they "swallow a libertarian fantasy" when they disagree with libertarians on the very things you are most likely to accuse them of agreeing on, the very same things you agreed they disagree on?   You agreed that the conservatives like business subsidies, and then accused them of liking laissez faire, which mean you are contradicting yourself.

Over and over you contradict yourself.  One cannot at the same time support laissez faire on the one hand, and protectionism, subsidies, and bailouts on the other hand.  Supporting laissez faire means opposing protectionism, subsidies, and bailouts.  Conservatives love them, and what is more they always have.

I guess that leads to a different question - do you think that protective tariffs, business subsidies, and business bailouts are laissez faire?  If you do, then we've got much bigger problems than thinking that libertarians who oppose those and conservatives who support those are somehow following the same ideas.

You've agreed over and over that libertarians and conservatives disagree on economic ideas, and then you go ahead and repeat that in spite of all of their disagreements that they somehow have the same vision, and when your own inconsistencies and contradictions are exposed you call it a "No True Scotsman."  Do you even know what the fallacy means?  Based on your posting history, one would have to conclude you don't.

Do you think that protective tariffs, business subsidies, and business bailouts are laissez faire?  Conservatives support those practices, libertarians oppose those practices, so according to you the two have the same vision.

Conservatives that support protective tariffs, business subsidies, and business bailouts are accused by you of thinking that government assistance is always evil.  How can they think that government assistance is always evil when they support and promote government assistance?  Do you think they actively support things they consider evil?  Do you think they consider themselves evil and say "since I think government assistance is evil therefore I will support it?"  Don't you see how absurd your own position is?

Finally, are you a conservative Republican?  Let's see if you have the courage to answer that with a "yes" or "no."  You probably don't.  I'm not interested in guessing, I'm interested in you answering.
White privilege is being a lifelong racist, then being sent to the White House twice because your running mate is a minority.<br /><br />No Biden, no KKK, no Fascist USA!

Berati

Quote from: Jason_Harvestdancer on June 03, 2014, 01:50:39 AM
I notice that this time when you actually noticed my list, you said "lots are wrong" and then immediately quoted three points that libertarians and conservatives disagree on.  Three points, all economic, which show a stark contrast and a stark divide between libertarians and conservatives.
Read it again as you misunderstood what I said.
I said that libertarians and conservatives are on the same side on those issues. “Lots are wrong” refers to your assuming every item on the list is a point of disagreement between libertarians and conservatives.

Multitudes of conservatives are:

opposed to business subsidies...
opposed to business bailouts...
opposed to corporate welfare...

QuoteYou agreed that the conservatives like business subsidies, and then accused them of liking laissez faire, which mean you are contradicting yourself.
No I didn't. You misunderstood what I wrote. Your list was written in a sort of double negative way so it's no biggy that a misunderstanding occurred.

QuoteOver and over you contradict yourself.
I have not contradicted myself once. You misunderstanding what I said in one post is not contradicting myself over and over.

In your list you included some small stuff they disagree about and left out the big things they have in common. These are the fantasies I'm referring to.

Once again, the point is that conservatives are chasing the fantasy of laissez fair capitalism, chasing the fantasy that any deregulation is good deregulation, chasing the fantasy that any govt. involvement is always bad.
These are libertarian fantasies that conservatives are now chasing after to the detriment of the nation.
Carl Sagan
"It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring."

Jason Harvestdancer

Quote from: Berati on June 03, 2014, 01:13:12 PMMultitudes of conservatives are:

opposed to business subsidies...
opposed to business bailouts...
opposed to corporate welfare...

Ah, I see.  You're redefining the word "conservative" in order to prove that your hypothetical conservatives behave in the way you say conservatives do, unlike real world conservatives.

I was right, we've got a much deeper problem here than merely thinking people who disagree on many issues are actually in alignment.  Without redefining the terms, it is perfectly clear that conservatives do indeed like economic intervention, just for their benefit instead of someone elses benefit.

Also, notice we've been discussing the differences in economic ideology.  There are three main categories of policy: economic policy, domestic civil policy, and foreign policy.  Would you care to go for the trifecta and prove that libertine libertarians agree with theocratic conservatives and hawkish conservatives agree with anti-war libertarians?
White privilege is being a lifelong racist, then being sent to the White House twice because your running mate is a minority.<br /><br />No Biden, no KKK, no Fascist USA!

Berati

Quote from: Jason_Harvestdancer on June 03, 2014, 02:54:48 PM
Ah, I see.  You're redefining the word "conservative" in order to prove that your hypothetical conservatives behave in the way you say conservatives do, unlike real world conservatives.
Ever heard of the Tea Party.
Here is how they define themselves:
"Commonsense, Conservative, Constitutional Self-Governance Is Our Mode Of Operation"

From their webpage, here is one of their stated core values:
"Bailout and stimulus plans are illegal." (This covers business subsidies... business bailouts... and corporate welfare..)

QuoteI was right, we've got a much deeper problem here than merely thinking people who disagree on many issues are actually in alignment.
The fact that they disagree on many issues is not a problem for my premise, since my premise was never that they were identical.


QuoteAlso, notice we've been discussing the differences in economic ideology. 
You have, I haven’t.
I've been discussing similarities in economic ideologies. The most damaging of which are now shared by conservatives and libertarians.
Carl Sagan
"It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring."

Hijiri Byakuren

As a libertarian liberal, I don't think either one of you knows what a libertarian is.
Speak when you have something to say, not when you have to say something.

Sargon The Grape - My Youtube Channel

AllPurposeAtheist

You people and your fine little talking points pretending you're the one true patriot or your splinter group of libertarianism is the one true way and none of you stand a chance at real power. Jason,  you're full of shit. Libertarian party is going absolutely nowhere because the Democratic party and the Republican party control the vast majority of all the wealth in the world. Like it or not that's the way it is and it's not going to change in our lives. You can preach it till the cows come home, but in the end unless you vote for one party or the other you're voting to give your vote to someone else.
All hail my new signature!

Admit it. You're secretly green with envy.

Berati

Quote from: AllPurposeAtheist on June 04, 2014, 03:08:03 AM
You people and your fine little talking points pretending you're the one true patriot or your splinter group of libertarianism is the one true way and none of you stand a chance at real power.

I find it amusing that there are a lot of accusations that conservatives or liberals behave differently in office than what they're ideologies say. The implication is that libertarians or whoever is complaining would not fall into that trap. Their ideology is just too strong.
The reality is that when ideology meets money...  money usually wins.

The conservative supreme court has followed a libertarian view when it comes to allowing money into the political process and I can't see any good outcome no matter who gets elected.
The United States now has the best government that money can buy. Yeah freedom  :hang:
                                           
Carl Sagan
"It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring."

Hakurei Reimu

What I find amusing is that Jason thinks Liberitarians can do no wrong because they're Liberitarians, when â€"if they do manage to become a force to be reckoned withâ€" they'll be flooded with money and money-grubbing politicians wanting to bamboozle the increased Liberitarian block, a block that has swelled with voters no more educated than the rank and file Democrat or Republican. And if his fantasy does come to pass and one or both of the major parties are destroyed, where does he think all those former democrats and republicans will go and take their politics with them, and if the money that used to chase them won't follow close behind? Or does he believe those bad men/women will simply stop politicking?
Warning: Don't Tease The Miko!
(she bites!)
Spinny Miko Avatar shamelessly ripped off from Iosys' Neko Miko Reimu

Jason Harvestdancer

Berati, a page ago I wrote about how, once upon a time, conservatives were known for doing one thing and saying another.

You missed that.  I know why you missed it.

So, if a conservatives, say Paul Ryan, were to give a speech about how he wants to slash government spending and services, and then that same Paul Ryan voted yes on TARP, yes on Economic Stimulus HR 5140, yes on $15billion bailout for GM and Chrysler, yes on $192billion additional anti-recession stimulus spending, yes on federalizing rules for drivers licenses to hinder terrorists, yes on making the USAPATRIOT Act permanent, yes on allowing electronic surveillance without a warrant, yes on authorizing military force in Iraq, yes on emergency $78Billion for war in Iraq and Afghanistan, yes on declaring Iraq part of the War on Terror with no exit date,  no on reducing US troops out of Iraq starting in 90 days, yes on limited prescription drug benefit for Medicare recipients, yes on providing $70million on Section 8 Housing vouchers, yes on extending unemployment benefits to 59 weeks, yes on No Child Left Behind, and yes on Head Start Act, where does that position him?

According to those who judge by speeches alone (you) that makes him following a "libertarian" (loosely defined) vision.  According to those who judge by what people actually do, that makes him anything but libertarian (by any definition other than speeches alone).

By the way, we have both been discussing differences in economic ideologies, not similarities in economic ideologies.  The reason that statement is correct instead of your insistence that we have been discussing similarities is because I've been bringing up actual examples of where Republicans act and vote on the issues.  You have yet to do that.

So, are you a conservative Republican?
White privilege is being a lifelong racist, then being sent to the White House twice because your running mate is a minority.<br /><br />No Biden, no KKK, no Fascist USA!

Jason Harvestdancer

Quote from: AllPurposeAtheist on June 04, 2014, 03:08:03 AMYou people and your fine little talking points pretending you're the one true patriot or your splinter group of libertarianism is the one true way and none of you stand a chance at real power. Jason,  you're full of shit. Libertarian party is going absolutely nowhere because the Democratic party and the Republican party control the vast majority of all the wealth in the world. Like it or not that's the way it is and it's not going to change in our lives. You can preach it till the cows come home, but in the end unless you vote for one party or the other you're voting to give your vote to someone else.

None of that has anything to do with our current discussion.  The current discussion is if the Republicans, who are corporatists and not capitalists, are following any sort of extremely loosely defined libertarian vision.


Quote from: Hakurei Reimu on June 04, 2014, 03:17:57 PMWhat I find amusing is that Jason thinks Liberitarians can do no wrong because they're Liberitarians, when â€"if they do manage to become a force to be reckoned withâ€" they'll be flooded with money and money-grubbing politicians wanting to bamboozle the increased Liberitarian block, a block that has swelled with voters no more educated than the rank and file Democrat or Republican. And if his fantasy does come to pass and one or both of the major parties are destroyed, where does he think all those former democrats and republicans will go and take their politics with them, and if the money that used to chase them won't follow close behind? Or does he believe those bad men/women will simply stop politicking?

I am not claiming that an elected libertarian would never get corrupted, but when you have a consistent pattern of behavior stretching over 30 years that shows Republicans consistently vote a certain way in spite of speeches saying they support a different direction, a thinking person would say "I think perhaps their votes indicate what they really feel."  After over 30 years (or more), even a minimally thinking person would say that.

Yet here once again we have someone saying "I don't care what they do, I care about the speeches they make."  Berati refuses to believe his lying eyes.  The evidence contradicts his faith.

Whether or not an elected libertarian would be corrupted, that is a good question.  I don't claim that they would not.  But that has nothing to do with the key question before us:  do you judge Republicans by their words or by their 30 years worth of deeds?
White privilege is being a lifelong racist, then being sent to the White House twice because your running mate is a minority.<br /><br />No Biden, no KKK, no Fascist USA!

zarus tathra

Libertarians want a minimal government. So long as that government is powerless, it'll be hard for it to become corrupted.
?"Belief is always most desired, most pressingly needed, when there is a lack of will." -Friedrich Nietzsche

Ideals are imperfect. Morals are self-serving.

Berati

Quote from: Jason_Harvestdancer on June 05, 2014, 11:10:05 AM
Berati, a page ago I wrote about how, once upon a time, conservatives were known for doing one thing and saying another.

You missed that.  I know why you missed it.
I didn’t miss it, it’s just that it isn’t relevant to what I’ve said.

QuoteAccording to those who judge by speeches alone (you) that makes him following a "libertarian" (loosely defined) vision.  According to those who judge by what people actually do, that makes him anything but libertarian (by any definition other than speeches alone).

By the way, we have both been discussing differences in economic ideologies, not similarities in economic ideologies.  The reason that statement is correct instead of your insistence that we have been discussing similarities is because I've been bringing up actual examples of where Republicans act and vote on the issues.  You have yet to do that.

Again, you focus just on the differences and act like the similarities therefore don’t matter. I’m talking about are the similarities.

Jason, a page ago I wrote about how Conservative judges have made decisions following a libertarian ideology that is going to cause added corruption.
I guess you missed that. 

My original post was:
QuoteThe Liberals used to be more blinded by ideology but now it’s the conservatives. They've swallowed a libertarian fantasy and can't see the harm it’s doing.
The differences are not the issue I'm addressing, it's the similarities.

Conservative judges followed a libertarian ideology in the Citizens United case as well as in the McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission case.
Both are real world examples of conservatives embracing libertarian ideology to the detriment of the Nation. This is not what they've talked about, it’s what they actually have done.

Then there is deregulation for the sake of deregulation. Which has actually occurred. Deregulation can have both positive and negative effects… unless you believe in a Libertarian fantasy that it’s all just positive like many conservatives now believe. (Having bought a Libertarian fantasy)

Tons of deregulatory acts have been passed in the last 40 years. This is not what people just talk about; it’s what has actually been done in pursuit of a laissez fair fantasy.
e.g. the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act of 1994, the Telecommunications Act of 1996, and many others. The most damaging have been the deregulation of the financial sector. Like the Garnâ€"St Germain Depository Institutions Act of 1982 and the the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 which undid the stability that the Glass-Steagall act provided for nearly 70 years.
(Again, I’m not against deregulation, I’m against mindless deregulation)

There is also the fact that conservatives are actively blocking any regulation when it is clearly needed. Again, in the pursuit of libertarian fantasy.

Are you familiar with derivatives, Collateralized Debt Obligations and Credit Default swaps?
The unregulated derivatives market alone could easily destroy the entire global economy. Because it isn’t regulated the exact size of the market is not known but is estimated at around $700 trillion. (no that's not a typo) This is larger than the entire global economy. A burst of this bubble will make the 2008 housing  crisis look a soap bubble in comparison. Warren Buffet refers to derivatives as weapons of financial mass destruction.

So why is no one doing anything about this enormous and unproductive risk? Answer: Libertarian Fantasy.

Conservatives (and even some liberals) have not just been talking about laissez faire capitalism and the destruction of important safety regulations and important regulations controlling money in politics… they have actually implemented legislation to accomplish this.

Just as bad is the failure to act. The unregulated financial instruments I mentioned above are going to come home to roost and when they do we will have the Libertarian daydream to blame.

Carl Sagan
"It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring."

Hakurei Reimu

Quote from: Jason_Harvestdancer on June 05, 2014, 11:17:44 AM
Whether or not an elected libertarian would be corrupted, that is a good question.  I don't claim that they would not.  But that has nothing to do with the key question before us:  do you judge Republicans by their words or by their 30 years worth of deeds?
I judge by their deeds, which is why I have never voted Republican. But I don't vote Libertarian either, because â€"as Berati points outâ€" the most damaging deeds those Republicans commit... are Libertarian-based policy.
Warning: Don't Tease The Miko!
(she bites!)
Spinny Miko Avatar shamelessly ripped off from Iosys' Neko Miko Reimu