Comments: It ain't an argument if it ain't Hobbesian

-I read Greg's 'guess I'm just a fascist' post, and in regards to his Bush contra Kerry theme he echos a sentiment similar to a recent post over on the geek w/a.45's blog. I live in Florida, and in 2000 I cast a vote for Harry Browne, in a state where Bush needed every vote he could muster. But if I vote for Bush this time based solely on his prosecution of the war against the militant muhammedans, couldn't I be accused of trading essential freedoms for relative security?
-Kerry would no doubt be worse or at least more aggressively socialist in both foreign and domestic matters. But thinking beyond how quickly things would deteriorate, could a more rapid statist descent shock us into coherence? If our gentle downhill slide changed to a heart-stopping fall, would freedom loving Americans grab a ledge and begin, at last, to climb the yet surmountable precipice?
-I fear, when we undertake the strategy of incrementalism, we play directly into the script of the stastists, as they're the masters of this art. Every passing decade removes a bit of liberty, and slowly the spirit and intent of the Constitution fades from our collective conscious, along with the failures and attrocities of communistic and socialistic governments.
-On what basis should we place our trust in the next generation desiring a return to a philosophy of individual liberty. They will not yearn for what they have never known; hell most of us are forced to merely imagine what freedom truely is. Time is not on our side; it's on theirs .
-Do you believe there is any validity or viability in a scenario where rapid statist encroachments could prompt a significant political backlash?

Posted by Jasen at May 24, 2004 05:19 PM

I'm not so sure. What I've been saying on the subject is that, with Bush, we may have some messes to clean up later, but first we must ensure that there IS a "later." I am totally unconvinced that Kerry would do as much to prosecute this war we're in as aggressively as Bush. My feeling is that Kerry would hand over the defense of this nation to the UN and the French, and it'll be open season on Americans both abroad and at home. (Never mind Nader, Buchanan, Browne, or whomever GWA.45 and others have pointed out, they fall squarely in the realm of Things That Are Not Going To Happen.)

Would a Kerry election prompt a "real" conservative backlash? Perhaps...but, in the meantime, you've still got to deal with four years of Kerry damage...maybe time enough for some emboldened terrorists to get hold of a nuke and take out an American city. The chance of that is too high to be ignored...and that price is definitely too high to pay.

Posted by Erbo at May 24, 2004 07:39 PM
Post a comment

Remember personal info?