Sunday, July 31, 2011

Thoughts for Conservatives/Libertrians With Open Minds...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Birthplace of Independent Conservatism
Liberty -vs- Tyranny


Intellectual honesty... A concept worth aspiring to. Unfortunately the philosophic regimen and discipline to achieve this lofty goal has been lost on the current generation of self serving and single issue driven politicians. Make no mistake folks the preceding statement applies to both parties. Neither can get past ideological differences to solve common problems.

This site markets itself as an Independent Conservative/Libertarian blog with a strong focus on Constitutional and Randian principles. Understanding the full depth of either requires a bit of study as well as an open mind. Both are attributes that our founding fathers, and the principles that they stood for, require.

Maybe this site was naive in its inception as it launched its maiden voyage. It believed, incorrectly so, that conservatives and liberal alike understood the basic and central concepts that lead to the birth of the Age of Reason and The Enlightenment.

This site could not have been more incorrect in its assumptions.

As Rational Nation USA has recently voiced its concerns that conservatives have lost the high ground through their incorrigible and intransigent stubbornness in the pursuit to preserve the purity of their ideological agenda it has lost considerable readership. So be it. Rational thought, which ultimately leads to the truth, is exceedingly more important than ideological platitudes and over heated hyperbole.

The fact is the independent conservatism this site has defined and clearly enunciated over the past two plus years is not the conservatism that the current crop of conservative republicans understand, let alone support.

So, going forward, this site remains committed to the principles enunciated in its Conservative Manifesto. For those closed minded sheeple like conservatives the Editor in Chief encourages you to find a site that will tell you exactly what you are desirous of hearing.

For those with an inquiring and inquisitive conservative/libertarian mind this is the place to be. A place where open mindedness and free flowing concepts are welcome.

Remember this tidbit... To find successful solutions you first must understand the problem. In business so it is in government.

Update: Thanks to the info provided by TAO I happily link the readership here at Rational Nation USA to DonorsChoose.org Make the trip, it just may turn out to be a worthwhile one.

Via: CLASSICAL LIBERALISM: THE BEST OF POLITICAL CREEDS

23 comments:

  1. What you may sometimes forget, sir, is that you may very well be as biased and full of sh_t as I am! However, if you've even so much as made someone fully understand WHY they disagree with you, you have accomplished much.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Wish I had some answers for you RN. Both sides are guilty of not wanting to hear the other's views. Anymore others of differing views from the blog host and regular visitors is told to go away cause they don't want to hear anything that doesn't agree with what they think.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Our Founding Fathers were not Randians (a softer way of saying "Objectivists") in much of any way.

    They did not believe the common self-interest was that self-ish.

    They may or may not have been wrong, and you and I and a lot of other people can argue that all we want, but there's no evidence I know of our Founders seing the future the way Rand did.

    If anything, it can certainly be argued that Rand was criticizing our very Constitutional foundations. She always saw some things as constant and static and infallible.

    Got news for you, Sunshine! Nothing is constant and static and infallible. Nothing. We living in an ever-expending, ever-changing universe.

    So, of course the Constitution is a "living document!" We can amend it! Isn't that what you conservatives want to do these days, with that insipid "balanced budget amendment"???

    And so, of course, our Founders were not in the least bit Randian. They saw a changing universe, a time for coming together and a time for more purile self-interest. It wasn't and has never been about "altruism" (an uncomfortably weird obsession with Ayn Rand). It was about balance, even if against standing principle - at times.

    And here's where "intellectual honesty" goes out the wondow. It is a purile attempt at attaching intelligence and honesty to ideological rhetoric. Who are you to say who's honest? Or Intellectual? Or is being honestly intellectual, or intellectually honest?

    Rand was sooooooo purile.

    Our Founders were not.

    JMJ

    ReplyDelete
  4. JMJ - You don't know a f-ing thing about Rand or her philosophy. Your abject ignorance of her philosophy is obvious, as it is for so many others who have never taken the time to study and truly understand the concept of RATIONAL SELF INTEREST.

    Liberals ought to love Rand. But because you have no clue you remain clueless.

    But you know, it is not my job to educate you on Rand and therefor JMJ I leave you to your cluelessness.

    Now, have a good say sir.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Georges - Actually sir neither one of us is full of caca.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Joe - Answers lie within oneself after rational self introspection.

    Keeping ones ears plugged to opposing views creates blissful ignorance, that which I am beginning to understand most are desirous of.

    Opposing views and the resulting dynamics they created are what made this country the greatest in the world.

    And now sir it is time for blissful sleep for tomorrow is another day in paradise.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Final Thought and Comment from Blog Proprietor ... All rational, considered, respectful, non cursing comments are welcome here at RN USA. Regardless of ones political proclivities.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Les,

    What exactly did I say that you disagree with?

    Please.

    I'd love to know.

    JMJ

    ReplyDelete
  9. Donald in Bethel, CT says:

    I find it interesting that the word for "left" in Italian is "sinistra", where we derive our English word of "sinister". In occultism, "The Left Hand Path" is given to satanists. In The Scriptures there is a verse that goes:
    "A wise man's heart directs him toward the right, but the foolish man's heart directs him toward the left." As a place of honor, to sit at a person's right hand is considered a tremendous blessing. And speaking of blessings, a father will bless his children using his right hand, not his left.

    I mention all this because it is apparent that even in the fabric of our existence, be you religious or not, "the left" is not considered a blessing, but a curse.

    Hmm. No, we don't see this in effect today, do we? I mean, The Left is full of honorable men and women, while The Right is full of miscreants, perverts, and liars. (Okay, liars, yes...)

    Just a passing thought. The Right and The Left...even our own history shows us which one is correct.

    Les, as an independent conservative powerhouse, I name you as being Right. In many ways. Bravo, sir.

    ReplyDelete
  10. 1} If anything, it can certainly be argued that Rand was criticizing our very Constitutional foundations. She always saw some things as constant and static and infallible.

    2} And so, of course, our Founders were not in the least bit Randian. They saw a changing universe, a time for coming together and a time for more purile self-interest. It wasn't and has never been about "altruism" (an uncomfortably weird obsession with Ayn Rand). It was about balance, even if against standing principle - at times.


    Just for starters JMJ you should do the ten years I did reading and rereading and studying Rand. Then you might have the authority to critic her positions and works. UNTIL THEN YOU REMAIN A SHEEPLE TO THE KNOWLEDGEABLE RAND DETRACTORS.

    Good day sir.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Lets spend our time making a difference:

    http://www.donorschoose.org/

    ReplyDelete
  12. This should have read... "UNTIL THEN YOU REMAIN A SHEEPLE TO THE {UN}KNOWLEDGEABLE RAND DETRACTORS.

    Sorry for any further confusion I may have caused you JMJ...

    ReplyDelete
  13. Ah, TAO, I agree.

    However, my question/concern remains... how will the nation find the wisdom to bridge the BS gap?

    And on whose expert opinion will we do so? Keynes or Hayek? Aristotle of Kant? Jefferson or FDR? the list goes on.

    You see TAO, you have made me the skeptic/cynic...

    ReplyDelete
  14. Actually, Les I don't give a damn about philosophy but rather focus on "walking the walk and talking the talk" and thats why I am publicizing the link that I did.

    I want to see how many liberals and how many conservatives actually add a link to their blogs...considering that it is people taking care of their local schools, charity, and giving a damn outside of bitching about the government I just want to see who better "walks the walk and talks the talk" between liberals and conservatives...

    Bet the liberals win!

    ReplyDelete
  15. TAO - That's too bad, you really should. But then again, it isn't my loss now is it?

    Linked...

    ReplyDelete
  16. You advocated compromise and lost readership. Its unfortunate that you lost readership, but clearly they were here to read principled stances, not compromising ones. I think they were right and you're mistaken on this one.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Perhaps that is so Shane. Unfortunate yes, but I can like with it.

    Even some of the greatest minds of the Enlightenment, the Founding Fathers understood the value of, and need for political compromise at times.

    The Constitutional Conventions stands as witness to this very fact. But let us not let details get in the way...

    Defaulting on the public debt is wrong, it is the principle of responsibility, and the integrity that flows from it that I have argued.

    It does not matter who the president was, or is, that is responsible for our debt to our creditors. I suspect both you and the rest of the Tea Party wouldn't care either if you were the creditors. Principle my friend, principle...

    Oh yeah, I'll fight the battles,I'll argue the constitutional values, I'll advocate the Randian principles of Objectivism. All day long. As I have for many years.

    But at the end of the day I do not intend to win the battle only to lose the war.

    In this case my friend... it is exactly what it is.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Shane, compromise isn't always wrong and it doesn't require that one sacrifice principle. The debt ceiling debate has never before been about principle... it's always been political and this time was no different.

    Republicans attempted to link spending to the debt debate as leverage against the Democrats, and I would argue that they were successful.

    Compromise for the sake of achieving a portion of your ideological goals, as long as you don't give something away that violates your ideological goals, is wise and necessary.

    RN, sorry to hear you're losing readers. I haven't commented much lately, but count me as a regular reader still.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Thank you HR. I need to get over to your site more frequently. It seems there is never enough time in a day.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Another cultist philosophy who claim to have the answers to all our problems. Grow up.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Anon - Brilliant, simply brilliant. For one such as yourself with little to absolutely no brainpower I hope you didn't suffer a stroke from using your pea brain to come up with your one liner...

    ReplyDelete
  22. If we all follow you into Randian utopia, America will be perfect.
    That delusion is why you have lost readers, and rightly so.

    ReplyDelete
  23. So say you Tom... You are part of the problem, whether you wish to acknowledge it or not rests entirely with you.

    now have a nice day...

    ReplyDelete

As this site encourages free speech and expression any and all honest political commentary is acceptable. Comments with cursing or vulgar language will not be posted.

Effective 8/12/13 Anonymous commenting has been disabled. This unfortunate action was made necessary due to the volume of Anonymous comments that are either off topic or serve only to disrupt honest discourse..

I apologizes for any inconvenience this necessary action may cause the honest Anonymous who would comment here, respect proper decorum and leave comments of value. However, The multitude of trollish attack comments from both the left and right has necessitated this action.

Thank you for your understanding... The management.