Available Now! (click cover)

America's Counter-Revolution
The Constitution Revisited

From the back cover:

This book challenges the assumption that the Constitution was a landmark in the struggle for liberty. Instead, Sheldon Richman argues, it was the product of a counter-revolution, a setback for the radicalism represented by America’s break with the British empire. Drawing on careful, credible historical scholarship and contemporary political analysis, Richman suggests that this counter-revolution was the work of conservatives who sought a nation of “power, consequence, and grandeur.” America’s Counter-Revolution makes a persuasive case that the Constitution was a victory not for liberty but for the agendas and interests of a militaristic, aristocratic, privilege-seeking ruling class.

Saturday, February 20, 2010

CPAC Highlights

Here are my favorite moments from the big conservative CPAC meeting in D.C.:
  • Dick Cheney. Need more be said?
  • Scott Brown introducing Mitt Romney, respectively, supporter and mover of state-run health insurance in Massachusetts.
  • And Ryan Sorba of California Young Americans for Freedom (sic), for his anti-gay tirade, in which he said:
I'd like to condemn CPAC for bringing GOPride [sic] to this event. Civil rights are grounded in natural rights. Natural rights are grounded in human nature. Human nature is a rational substance in relationship. The intelligible end of the reproductive act is reproduction. Do you understand that?
Actually, no I don't. Let's go to the videotape.

I'm happy to report that Sorba was roundly booed.


Anonymous said...

Dammit I thought he was going to say, therefore taxation is wrong.

Tom said...

Being anti-gay isn't necessarily unlibertarian. Using the force of law to impose your views is. That said, I wish many of the anti-religious people and many of the anti-gay people had a little more class and manners.

dennis said...

I kind of disagree with the notion that to be anti-gay is isn't necessarily unlibertarian. I will agree that libertarianism as a political philosophy is compatible with a great number of other philosophical positions granted one doesn't use violence (or fraud or theft) to uphold them. But this only means that libertarianism tolerates people having their own opinions and respects their rights of free association and property. But the spirit of libertarianism (and Classical Liberalism before it) is one of human liberation. A true libertarian world would certainly respect the homophobe's right to his silly delusions but its very spirit would condemn him. If a member of the LGBT community has good cause to fear that his life will be ruined by coming out, a lack of specific state backed oppression against him is of little comfort. A libertarian world would respect Mr. Sorba's right to think and speak as he pleases, but the content of his thought is certainly contrary to what the best spirit of libertarianism is all about.

Sheldon Richman said...

Tom, have a look at this. Certain attitudes, while not themselves entailing aggression, nevertheless are unconducive to the long-run viability of a libertarian society.