Here's one of the best, most arse-kickingly profound speeches I've seen for a while: a 30-minute address by the Ayn Rand Center's Yaron Brook to Republican activists in Virginia.
Brook was invited along as keynote speaker to the Republicans' conference to tell them where they're going wrong. He did. Directly. And for his pains he was received not with the slings and arrows of outrageous abuse such as National Party supporters might direct towards a bearer of such tidings, but with a well-deserved standing ovation.
Watch and see why.
Brook was invited along as keynote speaker to the Republicans' conference to tell them where they're going wrong. He did. Directly. And for his pains he was received not with the slings and arrows of outrageous abuse such as National Party supporters might direct towards a bearer of such tidings, but with a well-deserved standing ovation.
Watch and see why.
14 comments:
Excellent speech from Mr Brook. I also watched John Voight's speech at the same Republican's conference, where he hit President Obama directly for his naivety.
Bringing An End To This False Prophet Obama! Jon Voight
Unusual for a Hollywood actor like Jon Voight to criticize President Obama, since the majority of actors/actresses in Holywood are Obama worshipers and socialists.
...thus heralding a new era for the Republican Party...right!?
Went to a speaker (a libertarian Democrat - don't start) the other day who divided the party into four camps:
Wall street republicans (balanced budgets without the spending cut emphasis of libertarians)
Social Conservatives ('get the state into the bedroom' etc)
Libertarians
Neo-cons (or "neo con nutjobs" as he called them)
Presumably most of these guys were at this speech by Brook, but how many are going to follow through with the standing ovation?
"Social Conservatives ('get the state into the bedroom' etc)"
Man, those kind of smears from lying Progressives piss me off. Any true conservative does not want the state in their bedroom. They don't want it anywhere.
What they want is the simple damn right to assume the moral position they wish, to take whatever views on any issue that they wish, to hold those views within the communities they live in, and not have their views demonised and their persons assaulted by lying Progressives posing as Libertarians and setting up straw men like "state in the bedroom" (or the other equally idiotic categories) as a means to attack them.
BTW, on the main issue- good post, and thanks for allowing me to discover it.
Can't say I agree with you RB. Conservative are named that because that's what they are - conservative. Which means generally prudish and happy to force people to do what they want.
"Which means generally prudish and happy to force people to do what they want."
Wow..!
Did you join the LibertariaNZ as you planned? Maybe you should, as that kind of shallow propaganda based smear against Conservatives is pretty common within that group.
Ron Paul, an American Conservative Libertarian, (like P J O' Rourke- they have a perspective a lot less crippled by the same ignorance and lack of depth that occurs in NZ), said this about the "true Conservative position"-
... a small, republican form of government is no longer on the agenda for most on the right today. They cover-up up for their abandonment of Conservative ideals by making a lot of sound and fury over symbolic non-issues such as what is the cultural meaning of Oprah Winfrey's tube top or whether gay priests should be allowed to drive foreign cars, ad nauseum. It's all a smokescreen."
Sounds to me a lot like the NZ Libertarians, and this opinion is I think born out by a recent list produced on this site and composed by the current Lib's leader (Mr. McGrath) that made some shallow attempt to distinguish between Libertarians and Conservatives by simultaneously misrepresenting Conservative positions and claiming a number of modern leftist/ Progressive positions could be identified as liberty focused, when that interpretation is in fact open to wide argument.
Most of the issues the Libs think are important, and put at the forefront of their cause, are in reality extremely peripheral but driven by the sound and fury their US based colleague refers to..
To correct your own ignorance and misconceptions, I suggest you buy and read one of the best books written in recent times on Conservatism. Its called "Liberty and Tyranny", and written by Mark Levin.
Its been a best seller for a few months now but I doubt you would have heard of it, given its contents are so challenging to current liberal political perspectives that most of the media is busy pretending it doesn't exist.
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=31224
For my own position, I would like to support them, but I cannot do that when they and their leaders especially are simultaneously so fixated upon unfairly smearing Conservatives, and promoting so many Progressive issues in the perverse idea that these issues somehow underpin liberty.
The good thing about a libertarian viewpoint is that it doesn't require a whole lot of mututally contradictory policies. If you want to know which side of a policy debate a libertarian person is likely to take, just apply some simple rules. The whole idea of a "conservative libertarian" is nonsense. Either they are in favour of freedom or they aren't. You can't be a libertarian if you say "I'm in favour of freedom, but only if you think, say, and do things I approve of."
RB: The Libz in NZ seem to be doing a pretty good job of sticking to the core principles of freedom. There may be things in there that you consider "progressive", but what would you suggest they do? Should they promote freedom in everything except whatever's in a certain list that someone comes up with? Makes a mockery of it. "First they came for the jews..."
You attack my comment as a "shallow propaganda based smear". It wasn't a smear at all, it was an observation, based on the evidence of the majority of people/parties around the world who describe themselves as "conservative", and prefer traditional, often religion-based viewpoints on many issues. I can't imagine a conservative would consider that a smear unless they were for some reason feeling guilty about holding those opinions.
RB, you quite rightly surmise that I haven't read all the books that you have, and it would probably be somewhat odd if I had, much as it would be odd if you knew everything I know. However, thanks for the heads-up. I'll see if I can lay my hands on a copy of that book. In the mean time, I don't think we should keep getting hung up on word definitions for things like "conservative" and "libertarian". Everyone is going to have slightly different opinions on things, so having one term to describe everyone who broadly associates with a school of thought is always going to have problems, particularly at the fringes.
RB: Just read that link you supplied. I got as far as "Fundamentally, Levin explains, conservatives recognize that there is an immutable natural law ordained by God that all men and nations must obey. He also makes clear that while human beings have a God-given right to individual liberty, they are also imperfect by nature and, thus, if given too much power, are likely to abuse the God-given rights of others." and had seen enough.
You wonder why people make fun of you and trash your views? Well, crap like that is why.
"Fundamentally, Levin explains, conservatives recognize that there is an immutable natural law ordained by God that all men and nations must obey. He also makes clear that while human beings have a God-given right to individual liberty, they are also imperfect by nature and, thus, if given too much power, are likely to abuse the God-given rights of others."
That is pretty much the Xian idea.
"You wonder why people make fun of you and trash your views?"
No I don't wonder that at all. In fact most of my comments on Kiwiblog draw large amounts of positive karma. Your completely baseless allegation is just another attempted smear. Weak and cowardly, and made as a substitute for the real argument you cannot come up with.
The point I am trying to make is that the Libertarians make a mistake by alienating and smearing Conservatives, who are in fact people who value Liberty. Whether their reasons are based on faith or whatever does not matter.
Worse, the Libertarians adopt the ideas of the Progressives, in the mistaken belief that these ideas promote Liberty, when it is very easy to argue they do the opposite.
Liberty needs every ally it can get. The Libs make a big mistake when they continually disparage Conservatives at the same time as they promote Progressivism.
Forgive me, I didn't know. If your "karma" has been verified at Kiwiblog, then who am I to doubt your opinion. I stand corrected.
Shit oh dear. What a hypocrit you are RedBait! You've got a nerve, going on about being smeared, especially after some of the perverse ad hominems you've been known to post over recent times. You can't expect to be taken seriously or with any sort of respect after the way you've behaved.
Conservatives are not consistent supporters of freedom. They are exactly as characterised- lusters for control over other people. There are many examples. For instance, the insidious demand for control over private morality.
Then there is the evil insistence in compulsory belief in the superstition of a supernatural being- one that supposedly communicates with the chosen ones and through them grants permissions and privledges (or takes them away). Of course everyone is expected to trust the annoited conservatives through whom this spirit-monster-ghost-thingy makes holy commands, even when the commands are arbitrary nonsense.
Then there is the consistent conservation of the legislative and social structures the Progressives erect and empower - perhaps the conservatives undertake some fine tuning from time to time (in order to better suit conservative agendas, special interests and rorting), but despite occasional impressive rhetoric, never a principled roll back...
Then there is the continued promotion of big government over and above the private individual- just so long as that big government and its authoritarian means is controlled by conservatives, then it is supposed to be AOK.
In decades of Progressive-Conservative power coalition there has never been a consistent dedication to Individual Rights or freedom, certainly not from the conservatives. Why should ANYONE trust those guys now?
Libertarianz have been pointing out the shortcomings of the conservatives for some time. So they should. It's those lousy dishonest conservatives who should be shamed. Frausters, charlatans and cheap fibbers.
BTW you were requested by the NPC site host to cease and desist posting here, yet here you are trespassing again and again. Typical conservative- you recognise no rights except what you want for your own. You are beneath contempt.
LGM
Yawn..
What an insufferable pompous bore and windbag.
Over five hundred words of demented hate driven crap.
36 votes?
Sad, but man, with low IQ half educated lying smearing cowardly morons like you insisting on fronting for them, they should count themselves more than lucky.
"The good thing about a libertarian viewpoint is that it doesn't require a whole lot of mututally contradictory policies."
(and)
"Either they are in favour of freedom or they aren't."
Yes.
RedBaiter
See, here you go again. Scratch the surface and you revert to type. You've once again descended to cheap ad hominem and name calling. No wonder you are treated with contempt.
Stated again, you were ejected from NPC and here you are trespassing again. That speaks volumes about your values and what you represent.
LGM
Post a Comment