Posted on | December 17, 2011 | 11 Comments
Yet another superb Bill Whittle outing:
Now that you have a clear idea of the historical basis for ‘fascism’, here goes Larry Johnson:
The core of conservatism is the belief in the inalienable rights of the individual and the limits imposed on Federal power in order to protect and preserve those rights. But none of the Republicans, with the exception of Ron Paul, believe in the limited power of government. To the contrary.
All willingly embrace the claim, first by the Bush Administration and now by Obama, that the Federal Government can declare a person a “terrorist” or a “terrorist supporter” and hold that person indefinitely without recourse to a court. If you are younger than 38 years old you probably do not remember much of the Cold War with the Soviet Union and Communist China. But there was a time when the United States resolutely opposed and fought against those authoritarian regimes. Yes, fascists and communists. Those governments insisted they could declare someone an enemy of the state and, by virtue of their declaration, do whatever they wanted to that person.
Johnson’s theory seems to be that the United States Constitution was somehow ratified everywhere, and that the rights of our citizens apply universally. The nearest I can come to agreeing with Johnson is saying that, yeah, the notion of the Laws of War is firmly rooted somewhere in the past, probably in the roaring ’20s, before they got around to outlawing war in the early ’30s, and proceeded to gear up for WWII.
Yes, one can largely agree with the complaints about Senate Bill 1867, especially where it seems to blow by posse comitatus. Or at least the some Congressmen can explain the missing nuance here:
Racism was another topic in Whittle’s essay. On that topic, Stogie over at Saberpoint actually has links to Ron Paul’s (in)famous newsletters, which end up being kind of ho-hum, for a bit of light perusal:
Anyone who reads this blog knows that I am not a supporter of Ron Paul. Paul is a paleolibertarian, and as such, holds foreign policy views that seem similar to those on the far left. For that reason, I cannot support him as a candidate. However, truth is truth and fair is fair. Ron Paul’s views on race are often tactless and unhelpful, but not necessarily wrong.