Since the Glenn Beck TV program is ending, what will replace the 5 p.m. ET show? I want Andrew Napolitano to transition from the Fox Business Network to the Fox News Channel so he can get a bigger audience. He has guest hosted for Glenn Beck, so that could help him if he requested to change networks, but I am unsure what his Fox Business contract specifies. I thought about John Stossel doing a daily show, but I prefer his weekly show. He picks a topic, has time to research it, and can make a good show. A daily show is much more time pressure. If Napolitano got on Fox News, he could easily give associates of the Mises Insitute more media exposure by inviting them on as guests.
I think, possibly Beck was the exact caricature that is presented to us from the left. By that, I mean he was a mirror image held up to the lefty kooks.
“I think, possibly Beck was the exact caricature that is presented to us from the left. By that, I mean he was a mirror image held up to the lefty kooks.”
I find it hilarious when people here who supposedly believe in freedom are happy when anyone who isn’t a pure doctrinaire anarcho capitalist happens upon misfortune.
Maybe Beck had a choice in this, maybe he and the network are ‘mutually agreeing’ to go their separate ways. Who knows. And Beck certainly wasn’t on the ball as far as a true, principled argument for a free society, or even a totally coherent picture of libertarianism.
But so what? Some people who watched his show might learn more, may even end up here. What he did, in the end, will likely be a plus for freedom and some here may even enjoy a little more freedom in their lifetimes thanks to Beck and people like him fighting the state. But hey, he ain’t an anarchist, so be glad to see him go. And forget the fact that his poor mixed up soul and his exploits might, just might, lead to some more freedom for some or even all of us, if only for the passion he invoked in his viewers.
Ten years from now, if he proclaims the state isn’t necessary and he is an anarcho capitalist, what then?
Not everyone of good intention ends up agreeing, people. We lead different lives and end up in different places. We have different teachers. All those who fight for and advance the cause of freedom deserve some respect, however imperfectly they go about it at times. And you never know where they may end up. As we all start in different places and have different experiences, we all develop and change too.
I was glad he had G. Edward Griffin on the show the other day, but I’m not really sad to see him go. Sometimes I wondered if he was controlled opposition designed to make libertarians seem crazy.
I find it hilarious when people here who supposedly believe in freedom are happy when anyone who isn’t a pure doctrinaire anarcho capitalist happens upon misfortune.
Beck is a crank and acts like he’s mildly retarded. His show is stupid, full of nonsense and focuses on totally irrelevant and often false ‘issues’ just like all the other news apes. I could care less about his vague political slant, the show is stupid and it sucks. All it’s good for is seeing how much B.S. he can spout in an episode.
But so what? Some people who watched his show might learn more, may even end up here. What he did, in the end, will likely be a plus for freedom and some here may even enjoy a little more freedom in their lifetimes thanks to Beck and people like him fighting the state. But hey, he ain’t an anarchist, so be glad to see him go. And forget the fact that his poor mixed up soul and his exploits might, just might, lead to some more freedom for some or even all of us, if only for the passion he invoked in his viewers.
This is pretty much irrelevant for me for about ten different reasons.
Ten years from now, if he proclaims the state isn’t necessary and he is an anarcho capitalist, what then?
Then he’ll still be a half-retarded crank who believes in impossible conspiracies and caricatured versions of history. Hey, he should fit right in with AnCaps!
Not everyone of good intention ends up agreeing, people. We lead different lives and end up in different places. We have different teachers. All those who fight for and advance the cause of freedom deserve some respect, however imperfectly they go about it at times. And you never know where they may end up. As we all start in different places and have different experiences, we all develop and change too.
Beh, the show sucks and he’s a whackjob. The fact that he might vaguely agree with me on some things (and then get the details horrendously wrong) doesn’t matter; just because Will Wheaton is a libertarian doesn’t change the fact that he’s a bad actor.
Likewise, just because something isn’t libertarian doesn’t mean it’s not cool; and just because something is libertarian doesn’t mean it is. I’d much rather read Caesar wax triumphant about his conquests in Gaul than J. Neil Schulman.
Everytime, I go to LRC, I feel a little guilty, because it’s occasionally seems a website for beer-bellied rednecks. I say this as one who deeply respects Rockwell, Gordon,.etc.
Why?
Cranks talking about how to end your obesity in 10 days, as if mostly obese people visit the site. Elderly folk advertising how they ended the “electricity monopoly”. Discussions of tax havens. Defenses of professional wrestling, with even David Gordon saying, “The elites don’t enjoy professional wrestling, but Kane is smarter than many of them.”
LRC is definitely a mixed bag. The medical nuttery, the weirdo conspiracy theories, anything Gerald Celente writes, etc. are just curiosities to me but I can definitely see a lot of educated people going ‘wtf’ and assuming libertarians are all nutters. Of course, half of us are.
I totally sympathise with Boettke calling himself a Coordination Problem economist in fleeing in terror from us.
One confusion. Lew Rockwell, along with other LRCers, complains about the double standards and abuses towards Mexicans and blacks. Then he will also complain about multiculturalism and political correctness of “liberals”. And say that we need to move beyond worrying about “racism”. WTF?
Well, I would say the sensible way to view this is that sectarians (including racial minorities) are captured by the State apparatus and subverted by it, and then kept in line by force. No one is thinking ‘let’s keep the Mexicans in line’, but when they go after the ‘Hispanic vote’ they produce an underclass which then becomes segregated into communities with the worst police and the most crime. Also, there is a difference between cosmopolitanism - adopting what is good from wherever you can get it - and multiculturalism which is in fact cultural homogenization, i.e the use of exogenous cultures to subvert basic European bourgeousie norms. However I can not say I have ever seen Lew articulate this position, he may just be inconsistent.
“Beck is a crank and acts like he’s mildly retarded. His show is stupid, full of nonsense and focuses on totally irrelevant and often false ‘issues’ just like all the other news apes. I could care less about his vague political slant, the show is stupid and it sucks. All it’s good for is seeing how much B.S. he can spout in an episode.” - Ricky James Moore II
Like Woodrow Wilson being the father of progressivism and getting us involved in a war we should have avoided and starting social programs we likewise should have avoided? But, then again, Beck still worshipped Lincoln. Yeah, he was imperfect. What are you, The Terminator? As for retarded, most people would call his demeanor ‘precious’.
“This is pretty much irrelevant for me for about ten different reasons.”
Good for you. If and when you enjoy some extra freedom because of Beck, be sure to toast yourself and your attitude. I get the feeling you’re the type who would spit on someone who returned your lost wallet to you if he hadn’t cleaned it first.
"Just because I am a free marketer does not mean I have to like or agree with other free marketers.
And just because someone else is a free marketer does not mean he or she has to like me." - Prateek Sanjay
I’m not saying you have to like him. But, analogously, when I used to speak to people about the war on drugs I would sometimes tell them a nice story about a jail cell with two people in it, a steroid user and a weed user. And both thought the other belonged in there, but not himself, oh no. The weed smoker wanted the roid user locked up, the roid user wanted the pot head locked up, and so they both ended up because they were too stupid to realize their own common cause. I wonder what they might accomplish if they worked together instead of cat fighting about the details of their particular favored substances.
“What the heck? They’re cancelling Glenn Beck?! That’s like cancelling apple pie!” - Marko
At least Beck wasn’t always full of crap, and at least was sort of libertarian (he supports drug legalization). He brought on Ron Paul, Napolitano and even Rob Kampia, without attacking like a pitbulll.
While I agree with most of the anti-Beck sentiment here, I will say that I credit him in large part for curing me of my neoconism. There was a time when I listened to, and for the most part agreed with, Limbaugh, Levin, etc (but never Hannity, thank god)… but I turned them off when I realized that they couldn’t for even 5 minutes interrupt their rants against Democrats to even acknowledge the impending economic crash. Of the major conservative hosts, only Beck (and Savage a little bit) ever sounded the alarm. Beck constantly exorted his audience to “read for yourself” and “question boldly”, and as flawed as some of his views are, to me that’s a valuable message to get out. I think it would have taken me longer to find Ron Paul and AE if I hadn’t listened to Beck to bridge the gap.
Now, I will concede that once he went to Fox he changed immensely from “just a dumb guy trying to make sense of the world” to some kind of weird self-styled freedom fighter, at which point I quickly stopped watching him. I don’t care that he’s off the air now and it’s certainly possible that, on net, he has not helped the liberty movement. But I do acknowledge that, at least in my case, he helped me.