Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 92

Thread: The Rockwell Manifesto

  1. #1

    The Rockwell Manifesto

    Lew's new book, 'The Left, The Right & The State" is out!
    In his intro, Lew writes: "In American political culture, and world political culture too, the divide concerns in what way the state's power should be expanded. The left has a laundry list and the right does too. Both represent a grave threat to the only political position that is truly beneficial to the world and its inhabitants: liberty." Read it all here please:

    http://www.lewrockwell.com/rockwell/...and-state.html

    This book is sure to go to the top of Ron's Reading List.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2

  4. #3
    He has a chapter on "legalize drunk driving"

    Uh, no.

  5. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by lodge939 View Post
    He has a chapter on "legalize drunk driving"

    Uh, no.
    Legalize Drunk Driving by Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.

  6. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by Truth Warrior View Post
    He makes some good points, but not good enough.

    Now, the immediate response goes this way: drunk driving has to be illegal because the probability of causing an accident rises dramatically when you drink.
    I agree with the obvious rebuttal

  7. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by lodge939 View Post
    He makes some good points, but not good enough.

    I agree with the obvious rebuttal
    Lew's overall reasoning works for me TOO.



    "The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire." ~ Robert A. Heinlein (1907-1988)
    Last edited by Truth Warrior; 12-31-2008 at 08:39 AM.

  8. #7
    Works for me.

    I got stopped twice at checkpoints in Mexico last week and had to take a breathalyser. I would refuse if they stopped me in the US. I am not about to argue with El Transito. My 6 yr old asked me why we were stopped and I let out my rant then.

  9. #8
    Too often libertarians just want no laws at all. I saw an article where Rothbard got all bent out of shape over the UK sending a task force to the Falklands even though Argentina started that war for no reason. He basically said Argentina are right to pointlessly invade the island because Britain had an Empire and is evil!



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by lodge939 View Post
    Too often libertarians just want no laws at all. I saw an article where Rothbard got all bent out of shape over the UK sending a task force to the Falklands even though Argentina started that war for no reason. He basically said Argentina are right to pointlessly invade the island because Britain had an Empire and is evil!
    Non aggression axiom + property rights.

    War breaks both = i.e you are not a Libertarian if you support War. I.e You FAIL epically.

    “I will be as harsh as truth, and uncompromising as justice... I am in earnest, I will not equivocate, I will not excuse, I will not retreat a single inch, and I will be heard.” ~ William Lloyd Garrison

    Quote Originally Posted by TGGRV View Post
    Conza, why do you even bother? lol.
    Worthy Threads:

  12. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by lodge939 View Post
    He makes some good points, but not good enough.
    You haven't made any. And thus you fail remarkably.

    I agree with the obvious rebuttal
    Your rebuttal is that it is ok to make illegal actions, based on ASSUMPTIONS.

    Great. Do you really need me to come up with examples on how insane and idiotic that is?
    “I will be as harsh as truth, and uncompromising as justice... I am in earnest, I will not equivocate, I will not excuse, I will not retreat a single inch, and I will be heard.” ~ William Lloyd Garrison

    Quote Originally Posted by TGGRV View Post
    Conza, why do you even bother? lol.
    Worthy Threads:

  13. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by libertea View Post
    Works for me.

    I got stopped twice at checkpoints in Mexico last week and had to take a breathalyser. I would refuse if they stopped me in the US. I am not about to argue with El Transito. My 6 yr old asked me why we were stopped and I let out my rant then.
    I disagree with all unjustified search and seisure, and any checkpoint, but I agree that drunk driving should be illegal. If a particular activity has a very high probability of causing harm to others, it's reasonable to outlaw it. For example, if you shoot a gun at someone but the gun misfires, it's still attempted murder. Likewise, if a particular drug frequently caused users to start a psychopathic murdering spree, it would make sense to illegalize it.

    I think it is a matter of degrees -- if an activity could be reasonably pursued without the expectation that property damage or injury to others would result, it should be legal.

    The government, of course, has gone way too far down the path of illegalization, but I would agree with a law against drunk driving.
    “If you're on the wrong road, progress means doing an about-turn and walking back to the right road; in that case, the man who turns back soonest is the most progressive.” -CS Lewis

    The use of force to impose morality is itself immoral, and generosity with others' money is still theft.

    If our society were a forum, congress would be the illiterate troll that somehow got a hold of the only ban hammer.

  14. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by lodge939 View Post
    Too often libertarians just want no laws at all. I saw an article where Rothbard got all bent out of shape over the UK sending a task force to the Falklands even though Argentina started that war for no reason. He basically said Argentina are right to pointlessly invade the island because Britain had an Empire and is evil!
    Here's MY ONE law:

    "Do as you please - but harm no other in their person or property."

    Think about it. How much more is REALLY needed? Shut down the frickin' "law factory", Congress.
    Last edited by Truth Warrior; 12-31-2008 at 11:18 AM.

  15. #13
    The idea that drunk driving should be decriminalized is a technicality. Many libertarians who advocate it also advocate private roads, in which case the road company would be setting the rules and could ban drunk driving if it wanted to.

  16. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadow of a Doubt View Post
    The idea that drunk driving should be decriminalized is a technicality. Many libertarians who advocate it also advocate private roads, in which case the road company would be setting the rules and could ban drunk driving if it wanted to.
    It's not even a technicality.

    WHO is the victim of drink driving? WHO!??!?!

    NAME ONE.

    The Law is meant to be about JUSTICE. You can't have fken justice when there is NO LEGITIMATE VICTIM.
    “I will be as harsh as truth, and uncompromising as justice... I am in earnest, I will not equivocate, I will not excuse, I will not retreat a single inch, and I will be heard.” ~ William Lloyd Garrison

    Quote Originally Posted by TGGRV View Post
    Conza, why do you even bother? lol.
    Worthy Threads:

  17. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by Conza88 View Post
    Non aggression axiom + property rights.

    War breaks both = i.e you are not a Libertarian if you support War. I.e You FAIL epically.

    See this is what I mean. If you were living in France in 1940 you would gladly submit to Nazi rule, because opposing them would mean war

  18. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by lodge939 View Post
    See this is what I mean. If you were living in France in 1940 you would gladly submit to Nazi rule, because opposing them would mean war
    99+% of the French did.



  19. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  20. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by Conza88 View Post
    It's not even a technicality.

    WHO is the victim of drink driving? WHO!??!?!

    NAME ONE.

    The Law is meant to be about JUSTICE. You can't have fken justice when there is NO LEGITIMATE VICTIM.
    I agree entirely, but individual liberty arguments, while being correct, are not very persuasive. It has to be demonstrated that any problem that can supposedly be be solved by government can also be solved by freedom. For example, if it were somehow possible for the government to improve the economy by intervening then that makes peaceful mutual self-interest impossible. Arguments for taxes would be justified by saying that, "we must hurt you in order to help you," or some nonsense like that. It may sound absurd to people who already get it like us, but I know some leftists who follow that train of logic because they have a faulty view of economics.

    Once someone understands the world, then things like property rights and the non-aggression axiom become obvious, but not until then. Remember that morality is derived from reality, and not the reverse.

  21. #18
    If someone invades, slaughter them or better yet do what the Swiss do.

    I don't think we have to go over this.
    "The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter." -- Winston Churchill

    Damn proud Classical Liberal/Minarchist!

  22. #19
    You can't have complete liberty without a morally just populace. We do not have a morally just populace. We are materialistic, self-centered douchebags who don't give two thoughts about our fellow man. As long as we're making bank, $#@! everyone else.

    I agree with DUI laws (note: only because of our current state of society), simply because the people aren't going to stop driving drunk just because it's the morally responsible thing to do, but more so because there is a penalty for doing so. I feel if we get rid of all driving drunk laws, the amount of incidents will increase exponentially.

    Not enough people with morals, ethics, and principle. When this country begins to regain the aforementioned traits, then we can get rid of the DUI laws. Until then, we can't maximize our Liberty. It sucks, but it's the truth.

  23. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by Scofield View Post
    You can't have complete liberty without a morally just populace. We do not have a morally just populace. We are materialistic, self-centered douchebags who don't give two thoughts about our fellow man. As long as we're making bank, $#@! everyone else.

    I agree with DUI laws (note: only because of our current state of society), simply because the people aren't going to stop driving drunk just because it's the morally responsible thing to do, but more so because there is a penalty for doing so. I feel if we get rid of all driving drunk laws, the amount of incidents will increase exponentially.

    Not enough people with morals, ethics, and principle. When this country begins to regain the aforementioned traits, then we can get rid of the DUI laws. Until then, we can't maximize our Liberty. It sucks, but it's the truth.
    Hello NWO. "Ordo ab Chao"

  24. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by Scofield View Post
    You can't have complete liberty without a morally just populace. We do not have a morally just populace. We are materialistic, self-centered douchebags who don't give two thoughts about our fellow man. As long as we're making bank, $#@! everyone else.
    Two points:

    1: Of course actions that constitute violence against others should be illegal, based on the principle of self-defense. If, however, it is immoral to use violence to get others to behave in a personally moral way, it doesn't become moral because the others are scumbags.

    2: If we're all materialistic self-centered douchebags, where are your great leaders coming from? Could it be that the leaders will be materialistic self-centered douchebags too, except they'll have even more power? In fact, given that materialistic self-centered douchebags would tend to love political power even more, where they get to use the threat of violence against others to achieve thier goals, could it be that the leaders would be even more douche-like than the general populace?
    “If you're on the wrong road, progress means doing an about-turn and walking back to the right road; in that case, the man who turns back soonest is the most progressive.” -CS Lewis

    The use of force to impose morality is itself immoral, and generosity with others' money is still theft.

    If our society were a forum, congress would be the illiterate troll that somehow got a hold of the only ban hammer.

  25. #22
    Lew Rockwell is most likely the author of the racist articles in the Ron Paul Newsletter.

    He should be shunned by our movement

  26. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by DeadheadForPaul View Post
    Lew Rockwell is most likely the author of the racist articles in the Ron Paul Newsletter.

    He should be shunned by our movement
    Explain THAT to Ron. Without Lew, Ron would not have run for POTUS.

  27. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by Truth Warrior View Post
    Explain THAT to Ron. Without Lew, Ron would not have run for POTUS.
    A lot of bad, ignorant people can occasionally do positive things

    I am not sure whether Rockwell is simply a bad person or if he is just misguided.

    Ron Paul is a human being just like any of us, and he can make a mistake. Blinded by his loyalty to a close friend, Paul refuses to blame or attack Rockwell for associating racism with his campaign

    Does anyone really believe that Dr. Paul has NO IDEA who wrote those articles? Of course he does. I pray to God that he was not responsible. More likely, Rockwell and a handful of other radical ideologues abused their positions and used Ron Paul's name to further their agenda. That agenda is to expand their movement by reaching out to neo-confederates, white supremacists, etc.

    As a movement, we must distance ourselves from these racist views if we want to have any chance of breaking into mainstream politics.

    Do you want to see liberty candidates elected in office? I do. And journalists will dig up these connections to racists such as Rockwell. Aren't we fighting a tough battle to begin with? We are going against the odds already and to further damage our ability to win elections is insane



  28. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  29. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by DeadheadForPaul View Post
    Lew Rockwell is most likely the author of the racist articles in the Ron Paul Newsletter.

    He should be shunned by our movement
    got any proof?

  30. #26
    Racist Rockwell, I heard a Krugmanite say that.
    "The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter." -- Winston Churchill

    Damn proud Classical Liberal/Minarchist!

  31. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by lodge939 View Post
    got any proof?
    First source: http://www.reason.com/news/show/124426.html

    If you look at the articles and people referenced on LewRockwell.com, you see the tacit approval of racists and their ideas. I always found references to Sam Francis and neo-Confederates as unnerving, but I wanted to believe that Rockwell was helping the liberty movement

    It has been no secret in libertarian circles that Rockwell has utilized controversial means to "grow" the movement. It is also no secret that he was a chief ghostwriter in the Ron Paul newsletter

    Connect the dots.

    Reason is hardly the only group of people putting this forth...

  32. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by The_Orlonater View Post
    Racist Rockwell, I heard a Krugmanite say that.
    Does that make it false?

    Wacky Greens say that our foreign policy is based on imperialism, fear, and lies. Is that wrong just because a Green said it?

    How about we judge the validity of an idea or claim by the facts rather than WHO SAID IT.

  33. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by DeadheadForPaul View Post
    Does that make it false?

    Wacky Greens say that our foreign policy is based on imperialism, fear, and lies. Is that wrong just because a Green said it?

    How about we judge the validity of an idea or claim by the facts rather than WHO SAID IT.
    And you know the Reason magazine article is true?
    "The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter." -- Winston Churchill

    Damn proud Classical Liberal/Minarchist!

  34. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by DeadheadForPaul View Post
    First source: http://www.reason.com/news/show/124426.html

    If you look at the articles and people referenced on LewRockwell.com, you see the tacit approval of racists and their ideas. I always found references to Sam Francis and neo-Confederates as unnerving, but I wanted to believe that Rockwell was helping the liberty movement

    It has been no secret in libertarian circles that Rockwell has utilized controversial means to "grow" the movement. It is also no secret that he was a chief ghostwriter in the Ron Paul newsletter

    Connect the dots.

    Reason is hardly the only group of people putting this forth...
    if this is true, he should resign from the Mises Institute as well. I'm reading Human Action at the moment and it's clear Mises despised racists.

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 05-02-2013, 08:23 PM
  2. The Rockwell Manifesto
    By Truth Warrior in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 01-05-2009, 04:35 PM
  3. In the Manifesto
    By winston_blade in forum Manifesto Book Talk
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-14-2008, 01:26 PM
  4. is there a PDF of the manifesto?
    By garrettwombat in forum Manifesto Book Talk
    Replies: 54
    Last Post: 05-12-2008, 05:11 PM
  5. Lew Rockwell: Ron Paul's New Manifesto for Revolution
    By FrankRep in forum Manifesto Book Talk
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03-27-2008, 06:13 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •