This entire forum is filled with embarrassing shit, I’m just glad we can concentrate it.
Anyway, my more recent “rant” has to do with liberals who’ve picked up on right-wing [statist] rhetoric. Before Obamatron, I’d only hear things along the lines of “love it or leave it,” “if you don’t like it, leave,” “support our troops/president,” etc., from the right, but now I gotta hear this shit from liberals who can’t handle someone actually pointing out that Obama is no different than Bush. My first encounter of this coming from someone who believed government spending helped the economy, but that simply showed how little intelligence they had before going into shit about roads and then “if you don’t like it then leave.” Now with Obama on term 2 (or Bush on term 4) it’ll just continue and continue. At least I can have snappy comebacks like simply saying “drone strikes children in the Middle East.”
Really? Who is we in this case? The posters on the LvMI website and everything we say is, directly or not, a representation of the most progressive (in the true sense of the word) organization that I know of. Frankly I think it’s a tad selfish to simply carry on with this and the burdens it entails, when it could easily be transferred to another forum.
Really? Who is we in this case? The posters on the LvMI website and everything we say is, directly or not, a representation of the most progressive (in the true sense of the word) organization that I know of. Frankly I think it’s a tad selfish to simply carry on with this and the burdens it entails, when it could easily be transferred to another forum.
If you search the ENTIRE forum you can find some stuff that I find rather embarrassing to the “opposition” or whatever, but that’s simply how forum’s work. It’s not a perfect archive of discussion. BUT isn’t what the new community that’s proposed supposed to be? A more concentrated collection of substantial discussion? This forum is what it is, why not have a thread like this?
Because this thread would basically be all those threads in a box with a ribbon on top? And I think it would serve it’s purpose better also on other forums, where people could be more comfortable to do they thang.
My rant is against people who want to censor forums in order to protect the reputation of neo-confederate, child labour worshipping websites. Extremely annoying.
Clayton, I was referring to the fact that everything needed to ‘embarrass’ the LvMI is already available in the Literature, Daily, and Blog sections of the website. There’s not really anything that we can add to that, especially since what is published by the actual institute counts for so much more than what we write on its website forum.
@ Fegeldolfy - Exactly! Here’s the University American History line as presented by the High Priests and Priestesses:
Articles of Confederation were too weak, we needed a Constitution.
Counterfeiters were running wild and interestate commerce was all messed up, we needed a National Bank.
Jackson caused a huge recession when he shut down the Bank.
South started the war by attacking fort sumpter.
National Banking Act made the national currency more ‘efficient’.
Gilded Age saw little/no improvement for the lot of the common man. I mean what the fuck. How can it be America’s greatest period of growth but no one’s life improves? Oh yeah it all went to the 1%.
Our economy didn’t make ‘consumer goods’ it only made ‘capital goods’ (oh boy).
Required regulation, monopolies, etc.
It really kills me to sit through class and allow my fellow peers get jammed up with this crap without seeing the other side of things. All this woman does to describe economic legislation is say “it made things more efficient.”
Thanks for the links. I’ve read Woods’s Nullification, so I’m pretty familiar with the arguments. I know a bit about Standard Oil from DiLorenzo’s How Capitalism Saved America, and I’ve also got The Myth of the Robber Barons and Antitrust:The Case for Repeal, which are probably good sources.
In my history class we don’t do out of class essays. Rather, every friday we get a question and must write an essay response. So I can’t spend time researching and bringing up exact data and can only go from memory. On the most recent exam, one of the “short answer” questions was asking how revolutionary was the american revolution, and I said that it was extremely revolutionary, and the relatively liberal government allowed the free market to flourish, which allowed entrepreneurship to prevail, until the progressive era when the original liberals found themselves labeled conservatives, and the “progressives” (conservative means for liberal ends) became the “liberals”. I even brought up Garet Garrett’s comment about how Henry Ford wouldn’t have been able to start Ford Motor Company in the 1950s. Unfortunately, without data, charts, etc. it probably just sounded like a rant to my teacher.
Oh I know. It’s awful. If I have some sort of final essay where I can write whatever I want, I’m just going to use it to debunk as many things as possible.
We also read the first three chapters of Comrade Zinn’s A People’s History of the United States as summer reading.
I looked in my textbook, and it does mention Hayek (“Hayak” in my textbook) and Friedman, although it describes them as conservatives, not libertarians. It also implies that they believe the same stuff since it never bothers to make the distinction that Hayek was teaching a different school than Friedman. It was just “hey they both taught at the u of chicago so they must have been the same hurr durr”.
