Tradition is not the worship of ashes, but the preservation of fire. ― Gustav Mahler
Pretty much everything there is true, he read and knew many liberals like Mises, Hayek, Rothbard who, after FDR hijacked the term liberal, took on the term libertarian. All true. But again absolutely nothing to do with the radical right wing. I think Nancy MacLean is pulling a fast one on you modern liberals because she knows telling you that fib will sell more books. But the fact is other than making the shallow claim she never backs it up and actually says very little about the right. She, for example, leads off with the bold almost trolling claim "Charles Koch, the billionaire philanthropist who’s the source of much of the Right’s “dark money”" but no where in her article backs it up. That money must be very dark, to dark to find.
Are you ever going to get off your ad hom horse and comment on what he says about the history of freedom?
Tradition is not the worship of ashes, but the preservation of fire. ― Gustav Mahler
Captdon (06-17-2018),MisterVeritis (06-14-2018)
FDR hijacked nothing. Secondly, yet again, here is another book that validates what Mcclean wrote: https://www.amazon.com/Dark-Money-Hi.../dp/0307947904
Mcclean used all the writings of the late Buchanan as well as a variety of other primary source material in her book, and as you can see, she is not the only one reporting on this phenomenon; please don't forget "Citizens United" and the invisible influence that vast amounts of money can have on our political system. And again, if you're not willing to read and learn about what is going on you can hardly call "Libertarians" hardly far right-wing, because the evidence say that those in charge of the party are exactly that.
The history of freedom btw has always rested in overcoming the likes of the Koch brothers. Show me an instance where it has not.
FDR certainly did. He was a Progressive but that term had been so sullied by Progressives, he opted for liberal, which up to that time implied classical liberal.
Otherwise you don't really respond to what I posted. Instead you wander off track with yet another book about "Dark Money."
How can I learn when you say nothing? Only point to books you don't really seem to understand.
Explain what you even mean by that. I suspect some misguided view of who the Koches and what libertarianism is.The history of freedom btw has always rested in overcoming the likes of the Koch brothers. Show me an instance where it has not.
You have to say something to engage in discussion.
Tradition is not the worship of ashes, but the preservation of fire. ― Gustav Mahler
Captdon (06-17-2018)
Teddy Roosevelt was a progressive and as police commissioner of New York he used to walk the streets at night and beat people up: what's your point? FDR walked into the worst financial crises that the country and the world had ever seen, he got people up and going and working and led this country to victory over the axis. This right-wing trashing of FDR has always been baseless and silly.
And again, if you're not willing to read, you're never going to learn what's going on around you. So I'll ask once more; do you know what the significance of "primary source documentation" is? You realize that that is how researchers prove their work right? So there's no conjecture in the books I've recommended.
Lastlyand your reply...The history of freedom btw has always rested in overcoming the likes of the Koch brothers. Show me an instance where it has not.Explain what you even mean by that. I suspect some misguided view of who the Koches and what libertarianism is.
See what I mean about not reading? I guess you've never heard of the American Revolution, or The American Civil War, or the French revolution, or WWI, or WWII, or how the Celts sacked Rome, etc etc etc.
So I'll say it again - the history of freedom btw has always rested in overcoming the likes of the Koch brothers. Show me an instance where it has not.
Now show me where that statement is not true. So do you wish to discuss the history of freedom or not?
Last edited by jet57; 06-13-2018 at 05:47 PM.
Yes, TR was a Progressive. But I said nothing about him.
FDR abandoned the progressive label for the liberal label.
If you're not willing to tell us what you've read, what's there to comment on?
I've heard of all those things, I still have no idea what you meant, and you can't seem to explain.
Tradition is not the worship of ashes, but the preservation of fire. ― Gustav Mahler
Teddy Roosevelt was a progressive though wasn't he; the point is that Republicans were progressives too, even though he beat people up...
The word "liberal" to FDR was more descriptive of his politics which is why he chose it.
As for what I read, what would like to know about? The American Revolution? David Mcculogh has a good book on it. An interesting title I have is The Secret History of the American Revolution; 1948 about Benedict Arnold: it's the story of the intelligence game during the war. Saul K Padover wrote Jefferson... I have over 500 volumes in my library, so where would you like to go? The Norman invasion of Sicily? Alexander the Great? Our Civil War andSenator John C Calhoun? Major Problems in American History perhaps; a college text book I had in school...
I have cited several examples of people having to go to war to overcome an oligarchy as we did and as did the French; as we did in our own streets in the 1930s. I have cited credible source material you to validate everything I've said. So if you still don't know what I mean then that's on you. The Koch Brother, Sheldon Adelson and host of others are seeking "economic liberty", you can read about that as well.
So you can read, or you can remain in the dark with respect to the world around you.
The topic IS the history of freedom right? If you know history, then you'll see that we're making that history in this country again right now.
Last edited by jet57; 06-14-2018 at 08:27 AM.