by Scott Creighton
***UPDATE*** – “(Rand) Paul told (Laura) Ingraham. “They seem to have unleashed some of the loony left on me.”" Raw Story - So apparently if you don’t believe that it is ok for all the public schools to be privatized and then allowed to discriminate as they see fit because they are private businesses, then you are part of the “loony left”. If you don’t think its ok for your pharmacist to refuse to fill a prescription for birth control pills or anything else he doesn’t agree with, you are the “loony left”.
——–original————
Rand Paul is a neoliberal scumbag… (just like his daddy)… and he’s looking for his bloated government check and all those life-long benefits and campaign contributions that come along with it (ok then. Take your best shots. I’m not here to win any popularity contests, for those who haven’t figured that out yet.)
The Rand Paul Revolution
Rand’s recent problems reflect a “business first” ideology that is the root of the neoliberal movement in America and at the heart of his political nature. Rand is getting a lot of heat right now because he actually won the republican nomination for a senate seat, so that puts him in the big-time. But let’s face it… no one would have given a crap about yet another doctor looking to cash in on even more money and power by goin’ to congress if his DADDY wasn’t the Libertarian Crusader, Ron Paul (another doctor who decided to go where the real money was). We all know that the offspring of the oligarchs are granted by birthright a chance to suckle at the teet of the only true socialist part of America that is left… the political public service sector; aka “The Public/Private Partnership.
So if no one would have given a shit about what this “business first” Milton Friedmanesque libertarian says, how exactly did he become so popular?
Well, his daddy did the exact same thing Barack Obama did… he lied through his teeth. And we all know where Rand would be now without his daddy and his “money bombs”.
Years ago Ron Paul saw a growing movement and decided to hijack it (much like Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck did with the Tea Party). Ron Paul went on Alex Jones’ show and admitted that there was something seriously wrong with the 9/11 Commission Report and agreed that we needed a new investigation into 9/11.
Well, the Ron Paul Revolution grew off the charts. The Paulites were some of the worst trolls I have ever seen since I have been in the Truth movement. They would come in and hijack every single thread in every single forum. Meet-Up groups that dealt with 9/11 Truth would almost always decay into some Ron Paul fan spouting campaign talking points endlessly as they breathlessly asserted that Paul and his neoliberal “business first” policies would save America from the empire.
Then Ron Paul went on national television and denied the Truth Movement.
But the damage was already done and like those who can’t stop supporting Obama no matter what he does for fear of feeling like an idiot, the Paulites took up the talking point memo, told everyone Paul “had to say that to stay credible” and they continued to beat the Ron Paul drum in every single Truth thread they could find… as they hoped the people there didn’t already know Ron had sold us out for “credibility’s sake”
No, I am not going “democrat” on everyone. I don’t care one way or the other who wins that contest. It doesn’t matter because Rand’s opponent, Jack Conway, is probably just as big a neoliberal scumbag himself.
If you want a clearer indication of the kind of support Rand Paul is receiving, just take a look at his growing list of pro-business endorsements…
Jim Bunning, Jim DeMint, James Dobson, Sarah Palin, Steve Forbes, Right to Life, Concerned Women for America, Freedom Works…
How’s that for an anti-establishment group?
Recently Rand Paul has been running into a little trouble… it seems he thinks its it just fine if BUSINESS wants to discriminate against customers or employees on whatever grounds they choose. He swears up and down that he isn’t a racist and he promises that he would have voted for 90% of the Civil Rights Act, but he says, that pesky little “Federal Government interfering with BUSINESS” is just too, too much.
On Rachel Maddow’s show… god I hate Rachel Maddow… he jumped through one hoop after the other to keep from answering one simple question; DO YOU THINK BUSINESSES HAVE THE RIGHT TO DISCRIMINATE?
He gave Rachel a history lesson that had nothing to do with the question but was obviously written by his PR spin doctors for just such an occasion. After the third time Rachel asked him the question directly, Rand practically started juggling and talking about his goldfish named “Liberty”… anything to squirm out of a basic question…
“What are your allegiances? Who do you really serve? The people or the BUSINESSES?”
Rand Paul’s pathetic attempt at excusing his stance is to repeat the mantra that he doesn’t believe that “government institutions” should discriminate in any way. This leave of course his well-known position unmentioned but still intact… and that is that BUSINESS DOES HAVE THE RIGHT TO DISCRIMINATE
This is a dangerous precedent because it does two things… first it allows for signs like the one pictured above. Businesses can shut their doors to blacks, whites, gays, democrats, libertarians… and the list goes on and on.
The second thing, and this might even be bigger than bringing back situations like the Lunch Counter Protest… what Rand Paul is actually saying is that BUSINESS is out of reach of any government. Talk about no regulation of business. This guy is the ultimate neoliberal scumbag.
When BUSINESS is completely out of reach of any government intrusion except for cashing their massive checks or getting one tax break after the other (and of course having BIG BUSINESS write the laws and fund the campaigns…) what you have is called FASCISM, not ”liberty”.
So there you have it, The Ron Paul oligarchy pimpin’ for the business class once again.
Rand Paul, like most other Libertarians, supports: free trade agreements, open borders to benefit business, removing all regulations on business, privatizing social security, ending Medicare, privatizing school systems, removing all banking regulations, free market only control of industrial pollution (no government regulations), repealing minimum wage laws,…
from the Libertarian website:
- We favor restoring and reviving a free market health care system.
- Retirement planning is the responsibility of the individual, not the government. We favor replacing the current government-sponsored Social Security system with a private voluntary system.
- Economic freedom demands the unrestricted movement of human as well as financial capital across national borders.
- We support the removal of governmental impediments to free trade.
- Education, like any other service, is best provided by the free market, achieving greater quality and efficiency with more diversity of choice.
- We seek to divest government of all functions that can be provided by non-governmental organizations or private individuals.
- We favor free-market banking, with unrestricted competition among banks and depository institutions of all types.
- Free markets and property rights stimulate the technological innovations and behavioral changes required to protect our environment and ecosystems.
- We oppose all controls on wages, prices, rents, profits, production, and interest rates. We advocate the repeal of all laws banning or restricting the advertising of prices, products, or services. We oppose all violations of the right to private property, liberty of contract, and freedom of trade. The right to trade includes the right not to trade — for any reasons whatsoever.
That’s right… remove the minimum wage laws, bring back child labor I suppose, allow completely open borders so that the standard of living for the working class is decimated while the business owners get richer and richer. How much do you think WalMart would pay if that were to happen? A dollar an hour? Less? And this is “good for America”? This is “liberty”?
While you are at it, get rid of OSHA and let the market decide how many miners die each year for $5.00 bucks and hour. Let ‘em get blacklung if “the market” says its ok. Bring on that melomine laced baby formula (bet Rand won’t serve that shit to his kids… but its ok for yours).
Hell, once you privatize the school system then you can freely discriminate and keep them black folks and all those poor whites from getting a real education, right? I mean fuck, “the market” says its ok so why not?
This is Rand Paul’s ideology, and if it sounds a little like the pro-business Powell Memo from 1971, or the Milton Friedman/IMF ideology of neoliberalism, that’s not by accident. In fact, the Libertarians were formed in 1971 as the pro-business and neoliberal agenda party. Then of course they branched out into the neocons and the neoliberals of Clinton’s DLC and New Dems movement. And here we are today.
We got an oil spill brough about by deregulating BP… we got a crushed economy and super wealthy bankers brought about by deregulating the banking industry. We got sweatshops and prison labor industries because we deregulated big business and industry. We got Obama’s “cat food commission” working on ways to take your Social Security and end Medicare. We got NAFTA and GATT and free trade policies that sent our jobs overseas for pennies and hour that condemned their workers and ours while serving to make a few business owners and stock market banks super wealthy.
So far, how is the Libertarian program working out for America?
Are you fucking happy about it?
So congratulation Paul Revolution. Just like the Obamaites you are steadily working hard to elect yet another neoliberal scumbag to the decaying halls of DC.
And just like the Obamaites, you will never have the heart to admit it.
personal note: This is what I think should happen to Rand Paul and all his neoliberal/New Dem/Libertarian/Neocon “business first” crony capitalist prick friends… they should be rounded up, sent to Haiti to work in one of Bill Clinton’s new sweatshops for .68 cents and hour for 12 hours a day and 7 days a week. They should be told that they are never going to be allowed to do anything else for the rest of their lives and they should each be given the opportunity every night after work to take their own lives. They and their corrupt philosophy would be gone within days because not single one of them would have the heart to put up with the kinds of things they subjugate millions of ordinary people too every single day of their political lives.
That’s what I would like to see happen. But what WILL happen?
Rand Paul will suck up to the government payroll, milking hundreds of thousands of dollars in salary and benefits (for “working” 6 months out of the year) for the rest of his life while claiming WalMart needs more liberty and Grandma Janet is ruining the country because she collects the pittance of a social security check that she PAID FOR her entire working life.
Of course, Rand will also be collecting big-time “money bomb” cash from young working Americans who are too ill-informed to realize what he really stands for till its way too late and they have to take a job at WalMart for less than minimum wage and no benefits like those enjoyed by Rand Paul and his daddy, the Libertarians. Of course that job they take at WalMart won’t even begin to pay all those college loans they owe due to Rand’s “for-profit” school system/ banking deregulation … so those Paul Revolution members will also have to take a night job at Burger King just to pay for the deregulated water bill and the mandatory deregulated insurance bill that leave too much of a co-pay for them to actually use. And god bless them, after a lifetime of that shit, they can take pride in knowing that they worked as hard as they could to hand over social security to the Wall Street bankers who, opps…, “lost” every fucking penny of their retirement money and the Wall Street bankers just happened to make a fortune betting that they would.
It’s nice to know that one day, when the business class has used them all up and thrown them out, the Ron Paul Revolution will be living under a bridge somewhere because there is no social safety net while Rand and his kids are “working” in congress making millions each year living like kings, and just at that moment, the Revolution will have an epiphany… “ahhh. I get it.” … as they dig through a garbage can for a meal.
God bless America and all her Rand Paul “Liberty”. Talk about beggars to their own demise…
Filed under: Globalization, Libertarians and Neoliberals, Neocons = Neolibs, Public Private Partnership, Rand Paul, Scott Creighton
Nicely done.
I have never been able to understand a total lack of regulation for business, especially multi-national corporations.
Basically, there are a few points of mutual focus between me and most Libertarians. But the main one that grasps the people’s attention is the anti-war/anti-Imperial rhetoric. People hope to form some mass of citizens that can make stopping this Empire achievable.
I just hope they aren’t willing to totally throw the baby out with the bath water.
True, too, is the fact that unhindered business practices is instrumental in our sufferings today. To take away even MORE regulation and control is certainly asking for even MORE heartaches for normal Americans.
Why doesn’t someone decent run for congress?
where are all the thiinking rebels?
I vote for Willy.. even BeulahMan… I would vote for…
where is our “Castro’?
Great post! What I don’t understand is why do hard working (those that still have jobs) middle class folks continue to vote for the same jerks that screw them over time after time? Do not vote for dems or repugs, there is only one party nowdays. Look for 3rd party or independents who will actually represent we the people. There must be some out there.
They like to call it a ‘Family’ farm business’, and like to say they sell local-grown.
Well, it’s located on family farm ground, but the buildings the family does business out of look like commercial greenhouses, and I’d bet they have people working that ground that aren’t in the family–might even be Illegals to the country.
It’s a year around business, but some of the stuff they sell doesn’t grow there in the off-season–if it even grows there at all.
Somebody’s found an old local “anti-business/protectionism-type” (it’s being called) ordinance that’s might to force that ‘Family’ farm to pay a corporate-type tax rate.
Sounds like the thing is going to federal court. I wonder how that’s going to play out.
r ap
It’s interesting that you think Ron and Rand are neoliberals. So far, it seems that neoliberals like:
*Bailouts
*So-called amnesty
*not auditing the Fed (ie. giving the Fed more power)
*Milton Friedman fiat economics
*Giving gays only the right for a “civil union” and not marriage
*the War on Drugs
*globalism vs. sovereignty
*trampling on the Consitution
So much of the Pauls’ platform flies in the face of the neoliberalist principles.
Yes and of course the neocons are all on record saying they don’t like Rand Paul…
… just like they said they were opposed to the presidency of Barack Obama…
Does Rand Paul support bailouts for the banks? Hmm, well, he does support removing any regulations at all that kept them from destroying our economy for so long.
Is that a neoliberal policy? Well, yes it is.
Rand Paul says he doesn’t support “illegal immigration”, well, who the fuck does? George Bush didn’t either, nor did Dick Cheney. They supported ammenesty for the 12 million who were already here and a strict control of the borders to make sure the flood coming over legally had the right paperwork.
Rand also supports making sure those illegals don’t get any benefits so that they will be even more motivated to work for even less than they do now.
Is that a neoliberal policy? yes it is
Milton Friedman didn’t create fiat economics, that was around long before Milton came into the picture.
Milton was all about forcing IMF style free market reforms on nations and turning them into slave states. Friedman was all about privitization of everything for the good of big business.
Starting to sound familiar?
Is that neoliberal policy? why yes it is
Is that the Libertarian agenda? why YES IT IS..
Is that the root of what Rand Paul was saying? Businesses can discriminate because they should be completely free of any regulation at all?
Yes it was.
So to answer your suggestion that the Paul platform “flies in the face” of neoliberal principles, I think you should take a little closer look.
Well, I didn’t mean to say the Milton “created” fiat economics, but that he supported fiat versus being on the gold standard.
I’m just curious, Willy, do you support any politician in Congress?
Kucinich voted for that bogus health care package.
Sanders weakened the Audit the Fed bill.
Is there anyone left?
Do I support them? no.
Do I understand how they could easily have been threatened, one way or the other, to do what they did (Kucinich and Sanders)? yes.
Though I would hope that I would never have to make a choice like they probably did.
The problem with the Paul Clan is that, they aren’t being threatened to make choices that are against what they stand for… they actually stand for the neoliberal agenda in the first place.
There are in congress that have the right idea sometimes, Ron Paul is certainly one of them.
But at the heart of what he supports is the heart of what is killing this country – business first, hands off business, go fend for yourself politics, and business infusion into the function of government.
and of course, free markets, privitization, liberalization of markets… ect. ect. ect.
Down here in Florida, I don’t think we have a single candidate running that isn’t some kind of big business loving billionaire, who just loves unrestricted free markets and unregulated big business and the privitization of everything businessmen can get their hands on.
Hell, I think that is the platform of the Green Party these days.
So to answer your question, I don’t “support” Sanders or Kucinich anymore because I just don’t believe in them anymore.
The only ones who are actually standing up to this Washington Consensus are the ones kicked out, like Nader and McKinney and a few others who have been weeded out already.
I know that answer is too long. Sorry. My dryer just blew up and I am contemplating a piece of rope and a couple of trees…
Where is this family farm that you speak of, Roy? Is it a local one in your area? Has it been taken over by a large corporation? Or controlled by one?
Sad that a good research blog like this is so hopelessly confused about political principles, freedom etc. But I don’t visit here about the latter.
As a longtime small-l libertarian, I might briefly clear up some things for the readers here. (I don’t hold out hope for the _Death of a Salesman_ namesake.)
1) This stuff about looking for a gov’t paycheck is too sophomoric for words. The ridiculous insinuation is that libertarians oughtn’t seek “public” (or, as many of us libertarians prefer, _government_) office.
2) Of course libertarians aren’t for “business first,” they’re for the tangible freedom that comes with the exercise of property rights. When people exchange property, that’s “business.” (When the coercive agency of _government_ intervenes in the marketplace to benefit some business competitors at the expense of others — and of course at the expense of consumers — this is “mercantilism” or “crony capitalism.” Both the Republican and Democrat elites are up to their eyebrows in that sort of thing, though the Republicans tend to do it with more gusto — the Democrats tend to prefer straight-out government takeover when politically feasible.)
3) Rand Paul, though much better than his Republican Establishment opponent, is enough of an opportunist to have watered down his father’s ideas in the direction of mainstream Republicanism. More than a few libertarians have taken note, e.g.:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/53257.html
http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/57933.html
http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/58023.html
4) Of course in a free society anybody would have the freedom to exercise their freedom to discriminate about whatever. Duh. Only someone indoctrinated by the poisonous government and government-accredited skoolz would imagine it self-evident that government should take coercive action against the peaceful exercise of private property.
5) Most libertarians have nothing to do with the good-for-nothing Libertarian Party. It’s no accident that it promotes nonsense like “open borders,” but that’s probably for the best, since the people attracted to the LP then tend to stay away from the Ron Paul and (pre-GOP co-opted) Tea Party movement.
6) To repeat a theme from above: libertarianism is not to be confused with mercantilism (as in the mercantilist National Chamber of Commerce Powell memo cited) nor the central banking-enthusiast Milton Friedman. (Libertarians are ceaselessly gagging over how their enemies try to identify them with crony capitalists who, for political purposes, hide behind the mask of “free enterprise.”)
7) Nobody in Haiti is coerced into working for low wages. They choose those wages when it’s a better opportunity than what’s available already in Haiti. If coercive laws force employers to hire workers there at higher wages, there will be that much less employment. For a good introduction to economics as pertains to such misconceptions (no, not the Keynesian and quasi-socialist crap that’s served up at most government and government-accredited universities), try Henry Hazlitt’s classic little book, _Economics in One Lesson_.
RP McCosker, do you read the junk you paste?
“If coercive laws force employers to hire workers there at higher wages, there will be that much less employment.”
that is Ok with you for Haiti employees to work for pennies a day?
where do you work?
“Nobody in Haiti is coerced into working for low wages”
you see?
That is the heart of the neoliberal agenda. It’s not NAFTA’s fault… its not the IMF’s fault… its the people’s fault for being poor enough to have to accept slave wages and dangerous unregulated working conditions.
“If coercive laws force employers to hire workers there at higher wages, there will be that much less employment.”
see? little “l” libertarians are much like the big L libertarians it appears…
seems like neither one of them like minimum wage laws…
I guess we can expect that from little “l” libertrian Rand Paul?
We can all work if we all agree to accept a lower wage than the minimum wage, right?
“poisonous government and government-accredited skoolz ”
you know, the more you write the more you sound just like the other, “big L Libertarians”… God Bless that privatized school system right? God Bless the fact that it is a private business and can discriminate against anyone they want to.
You know, the more you write the stronger my case becomes. You just keep making my points for me.
Or am I missing something? Is that my “poisonous gubment skoolz” education showing through?
of course he reads what he writes, Jan. He’s a neoliberal zealot. He believes that. He has too, because if he doesn’t he would one day come to the realization that he is nothing more than a supporter of modern day slavery.
He talks about “liberty”…
“It may seem strange that any men should dare to ask a just God’s assistance in wringing their bread from the sweat of other men’s faces; but let us judge not that we be not judged. ” Lincoln
I saw that report on one of our local news channels, Jan, but I think it’s north of here–Minnesota, maybe.
Way it looks to me, it’s a family farm that wants to get around whatever gets in the way of doing business–their way.
A lady of the family was telling the camera they didn’t feel they should be punished by having two seasons taken away from them. She was talking about the family getting into legal trouble over importing and selling goods that were grown somewhere else, after it got too cold there, when they were supposed to be selling only local-grown stuff.
r ap
Should have been “commercial-type tax rate” up there, in place of ‘corporate-type’, Jan. Sorry for the confusion.
r
Just shows that Americans farmers are being pushed as far from the ‘table’ as possible….. the large grocery store-chains don’t want any competition….
every thing is taxed…. and if you can’t pay it.. seems they can take your homes… that farmer needs to be very careful…..
Jan wrote:
“RP McCosker, do you read the junk you paste?
‘If coercive laws force employers to hire workers there at higher wages, there will be that much less employment.’
that is Ok with you for Haiti employees to work for pennies a day?
where do you work?”
Do I “read the junk [I] paste?” Well, I usually post rather than paste, since I strive to write on my own behalf rather than plagiarize. And, having thusly written, I try to remember to proofread. (Though sometimes I forget, as when recently on this blog I wrote “minimus” instead of “minimum”.)
As to calling what I posted “junk”, I’ll strive to turn the other cheek by not calling what you post here junk. Let’s just say it’s prejudiced, ill-informed, sanctimonious, and leave it there.
What I’d say is that it’s a good thing for people to be able to find work that’s more desirable than what they have already. If the government coercively prevents people from working for 63 cents/hours, then the people who sought that work will be reduced to something less than that. It isn’t rocket science to see that that hurts rather than helps them.
The usual argument for minimum wage laws is that employers in a free market simply dictate wages, which is patently ridiculous and demonstrably untrue. Instead, free market wages (as opposed to government-fiat wages such as are imposed in, say, Cuba) are arrived at by supply and demand. Wages in locations removed from industrial centers and relatively unskilled or illiterate workers will only be hired for smaller wages. But the key thing that motivates employers to hire such workers is the prospect of saving money, which is how a business enterprise survives and prospers.
Of course, polemicists for minimum wage laws typically pose as humanitarians who seek to take from the undeserving rich and redistributing that to the less prosperous. The reality is that such laws cause institutional unemployment for those who can least afford it, and keep the costs of production higher, and thereby the supply of goods lower and the prices higher for everyone. But, for many, a righteous sense of symbolism and class warfare is what counts, the plight of the poor be damned.
I work in the San Francisco Bay Area. (I guess you imagine you’re reprimanding me for not sympathizing enough with Haitian factory workers, not living in some place like Haiti, because if I did I’d surely be nobly motivated to ignore economic principles by seeking laws banning the importation of low-wage Haitian goods. That this would lead to greater impoverishment and suffering among Haitians be damned, since ignorant and counterproductive symbolism is what’s really important in life, isn’t it, Jan?)
R.P
that’s a little out of line, don’t you think?
Jan, you should know that as “liberal” as San fran is supposed to be, it’s actually the Second City of neoliberalism, to the other Second City, Chicago.
That’s some nice mental gymnastics, RP, but that fact remains that if this so called free market model served the interests of the people so well, it wouldn’t be forced on one nation after the other via the World Bank and the IMF at gun-point, now would it?
The fact is, in Haiti, these jobs are the only ones being offered, so in order to avoid starvation, the poor there have to accept them.. and you damn well know that.
But its not only slave/starvation wages that attract the big companies that move on down there, but its also the corrupt puppet regimes who look the other way and the lax regulations that allow these corporations to completely exploit their workers. That’s just as big of a draw as the 68 pennies and hour they pay.
And you can try your best to dazzle readers here with your bullshit, RP but most understand that paying a person a living wage does not mean that others must be unemployed.
The corporate model is growth, sustainable growth, paying a living wage used to be just a cost of business, but now it isn’t is it? That came from free market ideology.
To pay a living wage simply meant that profits were lower, but if they decimated business, then there would have been no businesses that existed before the Reagan Revolution, now would they?
Yet the fabulously wealthy families of the robber barons were still thriving during the post FDR days, weren’t they? They still made millions, but now they make billions.
Its a matter of greed, pure and simple.
But more than that, its a matter of morality, which I suspect you also scoff at, RP. I guess you think, like the rest of the neoliberal wannabes, that you are somehow above all that, because maybe you think you see something the rest don’t.
you’ve been fooled and you are being taken advantage of. and one day, one day soon, when they let you know you have no place at the grown-ups table, you will understand what I mean.
Talk about “ignorant”. you aren’t only a beggar to your own demise, you are its chief cheerleader as well.
willyloman wrote:
“That is the heart of the neoliberal agenda. It’s not NAFTA’s fault… its not the IMF’s fault… its the people’s fault for being poor enough to have to accept slave wages and dangerous unregulated working conditions.”
Actually, the Haitians take the work because it’s a better deal for them than what they had before. (By the way, in case any readers here are confused, most people in Haiti live on less than 63 cents/hour. The cost of living is much lower there, of course.) For all your sanctimonious ranting, what you’re proposing would result in Haitians earning less money. Deepened poverty to satisfy your self-righteousness.)
“‘If coercive laws force employers to hire workers there at higher wages, there will be that much less employment.’
“see? little ‘l’ libertarians are much like the big L libertarians it appears…
“seems like neither one of them like minimum wage laws…
“I guess we can expect that from little ‘l’ libertrian Rand Paul?
“We can all work if we all agree to accept a lower wage than the minimum wage, right?”
Yada, yada, yada.
“‘poisonous government and government-accredited skoolz ‘
“you know, the more you write the more you sound just like the other, ‘big L Libertarians’… God Bless that privatized school system right? God Bless the fact that it is a private business and can discriminate against anyone they want to.”
The private school system is government-accredited. That’s the way the government wants it, which means the private schools aren’t fundamentally different from the socialist (“public”) ones. (An unaccredited school, when state law even allows it, isn’t readily accepted for entry into government-accredited colleges. And the government forbids entry into professionally licensed fields without degrees from accredited schools. In plain language, extortion.) That’s one reason my wife and I homeschool (actually, unschool, to use the term famously coined by John Holt) our children. (Another reason is that children learn more and better and are likelier to develop into fulfilled adults without premature exposure to the compulsory indoctrination and crowd control that characterize the system of authoritarian schooling.)
Of course, without government-driven schooling, our children wouldn’t be routinely educated in statist lies like: Lincoln fought to free the slaves; or, Franklin Roosevelt saved capitalism.
“You know, the more you write the stronger my case becomes. You just keep making my points for me.”
Or, as Pee-wee Herman so eloquently put it, “I know you are, but what am I?”
“Or am I missing something? Is that my ‘poisonous gubment skoolz’ education showing through?”
Could be, my friend. Could be.
willyloman wrote:
“of course he reads what he writes, Jan.”
Thanks, Scott. I really want people to know I read what I write. Unfortunately, there must be people who don’t do that. What would you call that: automatic writing?
“He’s a neoliberal zealot. He believes that. He has too, because if he doesn’t he would one day come to the realization that he is nothing more than a supporter of modern day slavery.”
Whoa, and I always thought neoliberals were people like Michael Kinsley and _The New Republic_ magazine. Yet here I was one and didn’t even know it! And a zealous one at that. Thanks for clearing that up.
Foolishly, apparently, I’ve been calling myself a paleolibertarian all these years. I even founded and continue to moderate a paleolibertarian discussion group ( http://groups.yahoo.com/group/paleolibertarians/ ), little realizing I was instead a neoliberal zealot all along. How embarrassing.
I have to be steadfast in my newfound neoliberalism, otherwise I’d have to face the fact that letting downtrodden Haitians choose to work for higher wages than they’d be getting otherwise is nothing less than slavery.
The revelations never stop!
“He talks about ‘liberty’…
“’It may seem strange that any men should dare to ask a just God’s assistance in wringing their bread from the sweat of other men’s faces; but let us judge not that we be not judged. ‘ Lincoln”
It’s evidently Lincoln-quotin’ time. Let’s try this one:
“I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so.” (Lincoln’s presidential inauguration address, 1861)
Hmm, sounds suspiciously neoliberal to me.
and do you know why it was the best thing they had?
because neoliberlization involves all kinds of things… like the removal of trade barriors that flood the nation with cheap subsidized corn and rice which crippled and destroyed the agricultural base of Haiti and sent 2 million, dislocated, looking for work. ask Bill Clinton; he already admitted to doing this in Haiti 2 months ago, but you already knew that didn’t you?
they also sell off industry and production facilities for pennies on the dollar, which are then closed by the multinationals who wish to bring in their own brands of goods.
Labor laws are attacked and labor unions are busted up, leaders disappeared.
So no, it’s not just sweat-shops that cripple the nation, its an entire package. They dropped it on Poland, they dropped it on Russia, Chile, Argentina, various African nations, and Indonesia, to name a few.
We’ve seen it before and we will see it again. Right here in the good old US of A.
Hows that for a “gubment skoolz” education?
oh wow, look at that, RP just learned that Lincoln wasn’t always against the institution of slavery.
what happened, homeschooling missed that part earlier in your educational career? that’s funny; I would think that would be the ONLY part of Lincoln’s history that the homeschoolers would teach.
It seems only fair to identify the real discriminatory effect of signs like the one posted.
In order to do that, a sign must be posted on such a fence that says, Help Wanted – Non-Citizens Only.
That could be accompanied by a sign that says, Help Wanted – Non-residents Only,
or Help Wanted – Blacks Only
that’s absolutely true Pat. The discrimination the neoliberals want freedom to conduct is the freedom to hire ONLY illegal non-residents… that, then, when they end unemployment insurance, they can hire anyone they want because everyone will have to take less than minimum wage employment. so yes, you are correct. that kind of discrimination is the first step in the neoliberalization of America.