Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Could you please expound upon your point here. I'm somewhat confused as to why I'm being accused of being both "vulgar"and "petty".
When asked, I usually describe myself as a "libertarian conservative: (both words uncapitialized, please), and might emphasize one of the two terms, depending upon the audience at the time. I might also use the term "classical liberal" -- in the context promoted at the time of the Enlightenment, since economic concerns were not a prominent feature of the philosophy of that time.
But the central tenet shared by most of those whom I met and admired during my formative years was that liberty in any form -- economic, expressionary, or personal -- is unitary, indivisible. Tamper with one aspect, and the others will likely be compromised.
But that was in the days before I began grappling with the concerns of finding a role to play in earning a living, and seeking a life partner; the latter never quite panned out, but I still have people I belong to, and vslues which transcend my own existence and perspective.
And another key component of the libertarian value system is the rejection of force and coercion, save as a last resort and as little as possible. The argument that there is some nebulous "greater common good" carries very little weight with me -- precisely because it is so often used to trample the basic rights of the dissenter.
In short, the principal difference between a libertarian and a "progressive" is that the former can achieve his/her goals almost entirely by an approach based upon "live and let live"; groups like Occupy Wall Street, ANTIFA and the rest of the "Social Justice" advocacy cannot without seeking influence and power over the legitimized monopoly on coercion granted to the modern nation-state.
I disagree with almost everything you say, but will defend, to my death, your right to say it. (Voltaire -- expressed in various forms and on many occasions)
Which is a pretty fair distance removed from "The end justifies the means,"
Immigrants in Europe are under the complete authority of Europeans.
If Europeans truly wish to assimilate immigrants into their countries, they should make certain that it is done in a very organized and humanitarian manner.
Each participating European country representing immgrant assimilation, should immediately set up large temporary tents, latrines, and water supply lines.
Immigrants should be thoroughly interviewed and properly vetted. Immediate language tutorials should begin immediately.
Immigrants will be accepted into each of their respective country of occupation. They will be trained wrt to building more permanent housing while being educated in such areas as agriculture, aquaculture, mechanical, electrical, and civil engineering.
Meanwhile, all other European efforts should be expended upon stabilizing immigrants countries of origin, so that most of them can be repatriated.
Your ignorance is showing. You really need to read about how well the *refugees* from the ME have assimilated.
What would you expect from Democrats. Biggest thieves and Rapist there are. How else could Bill/Hillary and their Biggest Donor in Hollywood, Weinstein, be left to rape women for 40 years unabated.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Pat makes a valid point and naturally, it is attacked as being racist
