If they re-did Mount Rushmore today...

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by Wuerffel5220, Jul 11, 2013.

  1. neisgator
    Offline

    neisgator Belligerent Gator

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2007
    Messages:
    10,836
    Likes Received:
    108
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Quincy IL
    Ratings Received:
    +108 / 0 / -0
    Post 59. I didn't use "libertarian" first.
  2. wgbgator
    Offline

    wgbgator Sub-optimal Poster Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2007
    Messages:
    21,173
    Likes Received:
    302
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Orlando, FL
    Ratings Received:
    +849 / 74 / -11
    Ok, dreamliner. :grin:
  3. orangeblueorangeblue
    Offline

    orangeblueorangeblue Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    55,497
    Likes Received:
    483
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,715 / 109 / -27
    Although Lincoln's primary problem with stopping slavery (something he didn't really believe in at his presidency's start) was, ironically, a Constitutional one. By attempting to be a strict Constitutionalist, he created his own roadblock to ending slavery.
  4. wgbgator
    Offline

    wgbgator Sub-optimal Poster Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2007
    Messages:
    21,173
    Likes Received:
    302
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Orlando, FL
    Ratings Received:
    +849 / 74 / -11
    This is why the Emancipation Proclaimation liberted slaves in states in rebellion. No Constitutional protections. ALso, why he needed the 13th Amendment. But his constitutionalism often found him at odds with the Radical Republicans.
  5. neisgator
    Offline

    neisgator Belligerent Gator

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2007
    Messages:
    10,836
    Likes Received:
    108
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Quincy IL
    Ratings Received:
    +108 / 0 / -0
    Surprised you didn't comment on my libertarian Rushmore.
  6. wgbgator
    Offline

    wgbgator Sub-optimal Poster Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2007
    Messages:
    21,173
    Likes Received:
    302
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Orlando, FL
    Ratings Received:
    +849 / 74 / -11
    All I know is the presidents I've always liked the most are the one Liberarians seem to hate the most, other than Wilson. Everyone hates Wilson. He had something for everyone to hate.
  7. orangeblueorangeblue
    Offline

    orangeblueorangeblue Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    55,497
    Likes Received:
    483
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,715 / 109 / -27
    There was a large sway of public cry that was largely at odds with the Constitution. I think this put Lincoln in a hard place and probably resulted in a lot of his contradictory stances.

    There seems to be a prevailing notion that the Civil War was the only - or fastest - resolution to the rift in the Union. Very little historical perspective goes into alternatives.
  8. MichiGator2002
    Offline

    MichiGator2002 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    14,936
    Likes Received:
    334
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +965 / 43 / -9
    The proclamation had no force of law in any state in rebellion, though.
  9. orangeblueorangeblue
    Offline

    orangeblueorangeblue Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    55,497
    Likes Received:
    483
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,715 / 109 / -27
    Well I think this applies to most modern Presidents, though. There's a lot that's sort of nonsensical that has become canonical among Libertarians (though thankfully not of those with economic backgrounds) like requiring that fiat by backed by commodities, for example.

    From a fiscal & foreign policy standpoint it's hard to reconcile the roles and resulting policies of presidents with Libertarianism.
  10. orangeblueorangeblue
    Offline

    orangeblueorangeblue Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    55,497
    Likes Received:
    483
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,715 / 109 / -27
    Well yeah, that's the point.
  11. MichiGator2002
    Offline

    MichiGator2002 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    14,936
    Likes Received:
    334
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +965 / 43 / -9
    Yeah, meant to quote WGB.

    Quick way to test this, too -- had the confederacy won the war (which basically means the union stops trying to annex them by force; they were not trying to capture New England), would Jefferson Davis' government needed to have somehow revoked or rescinded the proclamation for slave ownership to go on?
  12. demosthenes
    Offline

    demosthenes Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    6,361
    Likes Received:
    91
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    Ratings Received:
    +286 / 26 / -4
    Not only that but up to that point Roosevelt was a Republican. He became more liberal at the end of his political career.
  13. orangeblueorangeblue
    Offline

    orangeblueorangeblue Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    55,497
    Likes Received:
    483
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,715 / 109 / -27
    Obviously, no, although it's not unprecedented that "sovereign" nations still yield to laws enforced on them by other countries, particularly a mother country.
  14. orangeblueorangeblue
    Offline

    orangeblueorangeblue Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    55,497
    Likes Received:
    483
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,715 / 109 / -27
    In this case that's obviously not the case. For as much as people say the Civil War was "not about slavery," it still very much was, even if it was just a practical application of the South's qualms.
  15. GatorRade
    Offline

    GatorRade Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    6,727
    Likes Received:
    185
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +549 / 11 / -2
    Although I think of the term socialism as a bit more broad, I think this is a good way to describe the most common unspecified definition of the term.

    In this regard then, we should recognize that we've never had a president that promoted a 100% command economy. Nor have we seen one promote a 100% free economy. Therefore, we end up using categorical labels, such as socialist, to describe individuals present on a continuous spectrum, which is obviously never going to be a perfect solution. As a result, I would not endorse defending these labels too ardently.
  16. orangeblueorangeblue
    Offline

    orangeblueorangeblue Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    55,497
    Likes Received:
    483
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,715 / 109 / -27
    Sure, technically it can also mean a shared role with private markets. Ultimately, without direct and total control of pricing or production, it isn't going to be socialism.
  17. harwil
    Offline

    harwil Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2007
    Messages:
    1,544
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Ratings Received:
    +68 / 1 / -0
    Facetious, I presume?
  18. GatorRade
    Offline

    GatorRade Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    6,727
    Likes Received:
    185
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +549 / 11 / -2
    We pretty much agree here, but I sort of think of socialism with the goal of social good (although clearly capitalism creates social good; it is not the stated intention). I have in my head Marx' ideal of a stateless society without distinction between labor and capital. Perhaps it is an unrealistic idea, but in theory he saw this as a possibility.

    I can also see some examples of command control of pricing or production that don't equate to socialism, such as the TARP funds. But for 99% of the conversations, I'm good with your definition.
  19. harwil
    Offline

    harwil Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2007
    Messages:
    1,544
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Ratings Received:
    +68 / 1 / -0
    your history is off.Coolidge's presidency ended in January 1929.
  20. orangeblueorangeblue
    Offline

    orangeblueorangeblue Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    55,497
    Likes Received:
    483
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,715 / 109 / -27
    Yeah I thought about that about two seconds after posting it but thought I'd let it float.

    The point was more about the self-aggrandizing use of tax dollars more than the depression part.

Share This Page