3 ms·

"Let's all hope not! I cannot understand this argument, as there seems to be no substance to it. There's a weight of literature on the value of freedom (e.g. Jo

"Let's all hope not! I cannot understand this argument, as there seems to be no substance to it. There's a weight of literature on the value of freedom (e.g. John Locke, Voltaire), and little inquiry in this regard." I mean, if we continually capitulate to those parties and politicians who support anti-democracy, anti-freedom ideas and laws, why wouldn't there be substance to the argument? Where on earth do you see republicans loosening any laws except tax-based ones? Is that really all there is to freedom? Freedom to spend money the way you see fit? Why do we have to twist ourselves into ideological pretzels about freedom when all it takes is "low taxes = true freedom"? Our speech and actions get limited, our freedom of movement is impinged by naked scanners and crotch invasions. I mean, the theory is sound, I agree (Lock, Voltaire, hell go back to Seneca the Younger while we're reminiscing), but the reality doesn't. Not here in the US, not in Europe, not anywhere. It really is a matter of "the system would work great if it weren't for the users". In our case, the user is the electorate. "The vast majority of tea party anxiety over Obama was that he was restricting freedom too much." How, exactly? If anything, he's loosened the reins and widened the locus of control through more open governance. It's the tea party that propose, among other disparate things, placing homeless people in prison barracks, not knowing where in the constitution declared the separation of church and state, and wanting to bring back bartering chickens and other goods for medical care. They are all, of course, almost bombastically fervent about a strong military, and support the wars. The only freedom they were afraid of was freedom from paying high taxes, and I think to a person _no one_ really wants to pay really high taxes. Ask even bleeding hearts like me and I'll say "yeah, I don't really want to pay really high taxes". But, that seriously seems to be the only platform upon which the Tea Party hung their "freedom" watch; else why weren't they gathering in DC against the PATRIOT act and Guantanamo Bay?

scythe 16y ago
>They are all, of course, almost bombastically fervent about a strong military, and support the wars. You know, this is so entirely wrong that it discredits the whole paragraph. You clearly know nothing about the Tea Party movement, or even that it was started in support of Ron Paul, the most anti-war politician there is. >I mean, if we continually capitulate to those parties and politicians who support anti-democracy, anti-freedom ideas and laws, why wouldn't there be substance to the argument? Who's capitulating? There are more democracies in the world today than ever before. Ever.

scythe 16y ago

>They are all, of course, almost bombastically fervent about a strong military, and support the wars. You know, this is so entirely wrong that it discredits the whole paragraph. You clearly know nothing about the Tea Party movement, or even that it was started in support of Ron Paul, the most anti-war politician there is. >I mean, if we continually capitulate to those parties and politicians who support anti-democracy, anti-freedom ideas and laws, why wouldn't there be substance to the argument? Who's capitulating? There are more democracies in the world today than ever before. Ever.