Modern Whig Party - what is it?

[Slutter McGee]

I figure this has been mentioned here before. So I did a search for any threads in the last year with "Whig" in the title and didn't find anything.

I heard about them today, and this is what I read about them on wikipedia:

Fiscal responsibility – "The Modern Whig philosophy is to empower the states with the resources to handle their unique affairs."
Energy independence – "Reduce dependence on foreign oil by developing practical sources of alternative energy. This will have the simultaneous effect of changing the national security dynamic."
Education/Scientific advancement – "Increased public and private emphasis on fields such as space, oceanic, medical and nanotechnology. Also, providing common-sense solutions to enhance our educational system from pre-school to university-level studies."
States' rights – "Each state can determine its course of action based on local values and unique needs."
Social progression – "Government should refrain from legislating morality."
Veterans affairs – "Vigilant advocacy relating to the medical, financial, and overall well-being of our military families and veterans."
There are also self-described "general principles" of Modern Whig philosophy that are included along with the tenets: "This includes general principles of fiscal responsibility, strong national defense and bold social progression."[36]

Apparently they are trying to be a middle ground party, but that sounds like a pretty sound federalist approach, and one that could be a potential ally for us. Does anyone know specifics on their approach to foreign policy, or anything else about them?

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

[Imperial]

Their platform is not highly developed at the moment. Basically, I have seen a bit of a conservative lean and a big tent emphasis. I know they cover them at Independent Political Report (http://independentpoliticalreport.com) off and on.

[nate895]

The "we shouldn't legislate morality" is a stupid line. If you have a single law, even if that law is that everyone can do whatever they want, you're legislating your version of morality/ethics. Passing a law to do anything is saying that the state has a moral obligation to do something (or nothing) on a specific matter.

[Bucjason]

The "we shouldn't legislate morality" is a stupid line. If you have a single law, even if that law is that everyone can do whatever they want, you're legislating your version of morality/ethics. Passing a law to do anything is saying that the state has a moral obligation to do something (or nothing) on a specific matter.

I agree.

If you say people have a "right to free speech" , you are legislating morality based on the fact that you feel free speech is moral.

If you say "murder will be illegal" , you are legislating morality based on the fact that you feel murder is immoral.

All laws are legislating morality.

[Slutter McGee]

The "we shouldn't legislate morality" is a stupid line. If you have a single law, even if that law is that everyone can do whatever they want, you're legislating your version of morality/ethics. Passing a law to do anything is saying that the state has a moral obligation to do something (or nothing) on a specific matter.

It is not stupid. It is a line that is common usuage and accepted to mean "we don't believe in forcing somebody to follow laws that do not protect the rights of another individual."

Does it have problems in the realm of semantics? yes it does. But it is usually applied to morality based on religious beliefs, rather than utilitarianism, egoism, or a host of other ethical frameworks.

So despite the semantic issue, the meaning is much more clear to a general public than a bunch of philosophical rambling.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

[payme_rick]

the meaning is much more clear to a general public than a bunch of philosophical rambling.



yup... see your point there... agree... no need to dig any deeper than the original intent of those words...

[payme_rick]

yup... see your point there... agree... no need to dig any deeper than the original intent of those words...

additionally, I don't know much about this Whig Party, but if they are an ally, it's "that line is stupid" type talk that keeps liberty in the basement and not inside the house... stop making enemies on technicalities...

If it were a piece of legislation: YES, go deeper into it, expose what the loop-holes etc... are... but just a group's mission statement? take it for what they mean, and it's obvious what they mean...

[speciallyblend]

if the gop fails us. then we should look at Ron Paul's platform as a uniting factor to create a new political coalition that unites the lp/tp/cp/rpr/rpd/indys leaders and liberty minded voters!

Liberty Party has a nice ring and the brandname hasn't been tarnished by the 2 failed parties!!

just sayin:) if this political coalition happened. it would immediately be a viable 2nd party in many states and possibly nationally!! the gop should really be fearful;)

the gop had a miracle back in 2006-2007, i joined the gop. it was like parting the red sea literally

[Slutter McGee]

Looking at their somewhat undeveloped platform, there are a few things that I don't like. They seem to put dipomacy first, but seem to support some degree of interventionism. If they are were in favor of declared war only, and not in support of nation building, I could see myself accepting them, despite disagreements on noninterventionism. Again though, it is not really clear. They do support pulling out of Iraq which is good, but they don't seem to have a problem going into Pakistan.

The only other problem I see is that they support fully funding our education system and introducing tougher minimum standards. State issued minimum standards tend to cause problems by my observation. But seeing as they support this from a state level and not a federal level, I don't have a major problem with it.

If I can get clarification on a few of these things, especially concerning foreign policy, then I might consider looking into them.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

[Old Ducker]

Start with a name and then try to build a platform around it...what a joke.

[RyanRSheets]

If you say "murder will be illegal" , you are legislating morality based on the fact that you feel murder is immoral.

No.

Whether or not murder is moral is immaterial. Coercion, theft or destruction of someone else's property can be legislated against without ever considering morality.

[Slutter McGee]

Start with a name and then try to build a platform around it...what a joke.

Because starting a new Party with a new name works so much better.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

(EDIT). I really don't think 3rd party is the way to go. I would like to change the Republican Party. I just like to know my options.

[silentshout]

No.

Whether or not murder is moral is immaterial. Coercion, theft or destruction of someone else's property can be legislated against without ever considering morality.

Agreed.

[Bucjason]

No.

Whether or not murder is moral is immaterial. Coercion, theft or destruction of someone else's property can be legislated against without ever considering morality.

It IS material....because if the question of Murder , Theft , or Destruction of property can not be deemed morally wrong , then you are NOT justified in passing a law that says I can't do it .

For Example: What if I don't believe in personal property ?? I think everything belongs to the collective. Aren't you imposing your morals on me? Yes , you are.

If you don't believe in legislating morality , you are advocating simple anarchy, because EVERY law and every RIGHT is based on some Moral foundation of right and wrong.

"Man has been subjected by his Creator to the moral law, of which his feelings, or conscience as it is sometimes called, are the evidence with which his Creator has furnished him... The moral duties which exist between individual and individual in a state of nature, accompany them into a state of society"
- Thomas Jefferson

[Natural Citizen]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whig_Party_(United_States)

Merger of
National Republican Party (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Republican_Party)
Anti-Masonic Party (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Masonic_Party)


Merged into
Republican Party (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_Party_(United_States))


I don't know much about the modern Whigs.

[Ronin Truth]

http://www.modernwhig.org/