Chairman TAO's Challenge

 By: Les Carpenter III
 Rational Nation USA


Chairman TAO over at Corrupting Conservatives, the premier progressive collectivist blog of the year,  has been having some fun with recent posts at Rational Nation USA.


It is apparent, at least to the rational thinkers amongst us, he has the usual personality disorder most all extreme progressive collectivist suffer from. The medical term (if there is one) escapes me for the moment so I shall substitute my own... Severe Delusional Collective Nanny State Worship.

 Perhaps the above description some may find harsh. It is nevertheless an accurate one. For those who may not have braved a visit to his den of  collectivist thought a visit is well worthwhile. If for no other reason than to gain a glimpse into the mind of a most dangerous foe, the progressive collectivist. The ghosts of those who followed the philosophy and principals of the progressive collectivists such as V.I. Lenin, Joseph Stalin, Chairman Mao, and Pot Pol I am sure would agree.

For all the Chairman's talk about owning his own business he is a prime example of one who both is willing and happy giving the government maximum economic and political control over his life. Irrespective of what TAO may say publicly on his blog he is desirous of forcing the same for you as well. Regardless of the fact you did not ask for it nor do you want it.

Progressive collectivists decided long ago they know what is best for all, and it is always Leviathan government controlled by those suffering equally from Sever Delusional Collective Nanny State Worship. A question to illustrate the point... Have you ever found a progressive collectivist to agree with anything that differed in the slightest from their cherished progressive collectivist belief?... I thought not.

There was a time when liberalism was actually attractive. That era died with Thomas Jefferson. The concept of liberty is simple to understand unless, as the progressive collectivists intentionally do, you chose to make it complex. Liberty, at least as understood by most conservatives and Libertarians means... The freedom to make choices of your own free will with respect to your life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. Liberty is the ability and right of the individual to make decisions with respect to their economic and personal welfare and desires as they see fit. Liberty requires the individual accepts responsibility for themselves and acts on their own behalf and self interests.

Liberty requires resistance to the state that with each regulation, with each new entitlement, with each new expansion of the bureaucracy, another small lose of liberty occurs. Maximum liberty requires the recognition that each and every individual is entitled to the vary same liberties you and I are. For those who love liberty it is our deepest responsibility to recognize and respect the rights of others to their life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness equally as well as our own...

It is no ones right (including Leviathan) to take from someone and give to another that which they have not earned the right to posses.

Since Chairman TAO made comments on a recent post at Rational Nation USA which I, the editor lacked time to respond to immediately following his post time I have decided to address them for the Chairman with this post.


The issue of slavery: I never claimed slavery was okay. It is both morally and ethically wrong and deserves the greatest condemnation. My reference to the slave trade and Africans selling their own into slavery was merely a point of reference to demonstrate the realities of the times. The obvious attempt to make me out a racist is so typical of your ilk.


With respect to Jefferson - It was not "okay" he had slaves. It remains the glaring personal flaw the man who was a great thinker and wrote our Declaration of Independence had. It however does not change the beauty or the profound wisdom and significance of his words. 


With respect to Lincoln - Once again you mis use my reference.  My position on Lincoln is that he was a statist. He used the federal government to forcibly keep the union together at a great loss of life. As I am sure you know the Civil War was more about economics and markets that slavery. An industrializing (if you will) north and an agrarian south who wished to remain so. Lincoln used his statist powers and the US military to prevent the southern states from succeeding from the union. As the United States was formed by voluntary association and entering into a contract by mutual agreement there is a sound argument the southern states should ave been allowed to succeed. Slavery was just the rallying cry.

With respect to the womens suffrage movement - I will concede that there was likely never any thought given by the founding fathers as to women having the right to vote. Women unfortunately held second class citizenship throughout much of western history. The still do in many parts of the world today.


As to landless males: The rational the founders held with respect to owning property as a ticket to the right to vote was based on sound reasoning as they saw it. Property ownership gave individuals a state in the land and society. As the nation was agrarian, ownership of property allowed people to provide the necessities of life for themselves. Landless individuals on the other hand were viewed as lacking a stake and were much more likely to be the least productive and the ones most dependent on government for their welfare.

I wish to make perfectly clear I do not advocate the return to slavery, women not having the right to vote, nor the idea that just because you do not own property you should not have the right to vote. Neither do I know of any conservative or Libertarian who feels we should.

I will state however that it is a perfectly reasonable and rational position (IMO)  that to vote in America one should posses the ability to speak, read, and write English. Sorry liberals Michael Savage has it right when he says... Borders, Language, Culture.

Regarding non interventionist F.P. - Washington and Jefferson's advice against forming alliances with foreign powers and thus entangling ourselves was sound reasoned logic. However, following WW I (Woodrow Wilson (D)), and WW II (Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman (both D's) foreign entanglements and interventionist foreign policy became the norm. And shall we not forget Lydon Johnson, anther D and interventionist that exploded the war beyond anything Eisenhower or Kennedy ever envisioned.

I find it interesting the Chairman chose to use Israel as example of how we should pull our support of this only middle eastern democracy in support of his position statement. Logically one would have to concede the point he makes is rational. It would be my preference that we rethink our entire foreign policy along the lines of the Washington's and Jefferson's philosophy... As well as that of Representative Ron Paul. However, to do so at this time would almost certainly result in the genocide if the Israli people at the hands of the Iranian extremist President or some other irrational extremist in some other irrational extremist Islamic theocratic state. But I am sure TAO is not at all concerned with this likelihood being no doubt the supporter of all things Islamic, no mater the irrationality.

The point of this little travel through Chairman TAO's obvious transparent lack of integrity is just this... Conservatives and Libertarians can and will debate progressive collectivists. Proponents of individualism, liberty, and the right of free will and association have been doing it for well over a hundred years. We have will continue to acknowledge their valid rational points as infrequent as they are and when correct we will concede.

 The Chairman's attempts to misrepresent, twist, and turn the words of conservatives and Libertarians only shows his strict adherence to the progressive collectivist ideology and it's universal failure wherever it as been tried. Equally as telling and importantly is his lack of rational and unemotional thought.

Again I urge anyone who has not visited the progressive collectivist blog of the year, Corrupting Conservatives to do so. This is the irrational and inherently evil thought process that liberty is up against. Do not be fooled by the "fuzzy feel good emotionalism" of the progressive collectivists. Do the research, there are many examples of the abject failure of Chairman TAO's philosophy in modern history.

Long live America and here's to liberty and free choice!

Via: Memorandum