| | Only two? Most real democracies have three, four, or five.
What about "pro-life libertarians" like Ron Paul and Andrew Napolitano? What about the people here on RoR who wanted to nuke Teheran? I met a Ron Paul guy who said that the Federal Reserve is unconstitutional because only the government has the right to create money. To me, that's communism: everyone has the right to create money.
What about those "totalitarians" who want the government to build roads and explore Mars, but who recognize pro-choice as pro-life? If you read any of the Occupy propaganda, you know that they, too, want to audit the FRB and are opposed to crony capitalism. Even Elizabeth Warren allowed that people who invent things should make "gobs of money." Do we let them out their cages only on their good days?
It's not just you, Jules. Either-Or created a strong undercurrent in Objectivism in which context was dropped in favor of absolutes based on false dichotomies. Political parties are necessarily assorted collections of persons. Some are attracted to specific planks in the party platform. Others are drawn to what they think is an over-arching ideology.
I am a pragmatist. Obviously more of a libertarian, I socialize with the Austin Tech Republicans because I like the people who come to the meetings: they are smart, but not weird. I don't say much about immigration, abortion, or religion. I just take meeting minutes and post them on LinkedIn and Google Groups. But when we lived in Ann Arbor, I helped the Greens put up and take down their Art Fair booth. I stopped hanging out with them when one of the local candidates made questionable claims about their education. The next year, I helped the Libertarians; and that's where I met the Ron Paul communist who wanted the government to have a totalitarian monopoly on money. (Edited by Michael E. Marotta on 12/11, 7:56am)
|
|