America’s Confidence Reflected in its Movies
by James HudnallAfter the moribund Carter years, the age of Reagan issued in a new era of American confidence. And with that confidence came a wave of films full of male bravado after a decade of paranoid, navel gazing films with negative endings.
Carter capped off the sad decade of the 70s, where America bailed on Vietnam, a president resigned in shame and Carter let Iran fall into Islamo-Fascist hands and then failed to rescue our hostages, which Iran humiliated before the world. His economy was as terrible as this one. And the Democrats of his day echoed the same defeatist sentiments of this period, claiming people better get used to high unemployment and an moribund economy because it’s here to stay. American cities were decaying. The Big Apple was said to be rotting and it’s best days were over.
The 70’s movies, echoed the sentiments of many film makers of that era, which showed a government that was corrupt and predatory. America was seen as a hopeless, crime ridden nation where the little guy had to fight corruption at every turn. Hollywood cranked out revenge films, crime films, conspiracy films. Many of them had an unhappy ending. The few exceptions, like Star Wars were a huge hit, but they were an exception to the rule.
Things changed when Reagan was elected. Reagan brought real hope and change. A sense of optimism and a can-do attitude. He was not without his critics, and his first couple of years were spent dealing with the economy he inherited, but he turned the country around and we were off to the races.
And with Reagan came a new decade of films that reflected this attitude. The era of the macho hero: Stallone, Schwarzenegger, Willis, Gibson, Norris, Van Damme, Seagal and others; beating and blowing up villains all over the world. Fighting terrorists, communists, drug lords and other assorted riff raff. The 70s action heroes, Eastwood, Reynolds and Bronson were still around doing their part as well. But they were winding it down while the others took over their game.
The 80’s heroes took action to the next level. The over the top, explosive heavy, bullet saturated thrill ride. And in those films the individual fighting crime and corruption was celebrated. Gone was the message that America was failing. Now America was fighting back. America was strong. America wasn’t gonna take any crap. Look out, bad guys!
I’m sure many might dispute the Reagan connection, but after Carter gutted our military, Reagan built it back up. With the exception of the withdrawal from Beirut, Reagan was going around putting fear in some of our enemies. A strong leader does that. And with a strong leader comes confidence that you’re on the winning side. With a weak leader, like Carter, who went around apologizing for America and befriending dictators (sound familiar?), America was in the doldrums.
This decade is young and we’re starting it off with lots of superhero movies and fantasy films. But many of them are financed by foreign money and the message is moving away from America as a positive light. The movie villains of today aren’t terrorists and drug lords. They’re corporations and capitalists. It’s almost a comment on our society that America is somehow bad for being a success. While our economy continues to flounder in inept hands, let’s hope the culture doesn’t feed that insecurity. The movie business thought they were doomed in the 70s. Things were getting dire for them until Spielberg and Lucas came along. The 80s proved that theory wrong. The business roared back. Part of that came from a positive message in the films of that decade.
Let’s not forget that a positive attitude can accomplish wonders and negativity and despair only leads to more depression.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
91 Comments
Hope to see a new era of American confidence after this fifth-column marxist leaves office…
Anybody who remembers the constant search, during the carter price control gas shortage, for a gas station that was not out of gas, the lines at one that was. The tiny station in an obscure location that you knew of that often had gas when others did not… Obama hasn't taken us there yet, but he still has two more years.
I think to some extent the popularity of these alpha-male movies was due to people's frustration with law enforcement hobbled by liberal indulgence toward criminals, and a general social denigration of alpha-ness.
So, you are saying we had an era of hopeful and idealistic films when Republicans were in office?
Why didn't we see that under George W. Bush? The film-makers actively tried to make negative films portraying the US government as the enemy. And even Schwarzenegger as Governator couldn't change that.
What we need is not a more optimistic outlook of the current situation, but a renewal of the pioneer spirit. http://colonize.wordpress.com/
I'm still waiting for the accurate biographies of the left's greatest heroes…Mao, Stalin, Lenin, or Castro.
Even in the Expendables, the big bad were American ex-CIA (they even went so far as to water board someone). The foreign dictator was shown to be sympathetic before meeting his end.
Even in Conservative movies, evil-white-Capitalist and evil-white-Army-Guy make an cameo appearance in every film. Hollywood has a little way to go before it returns to reality.
I think you're right, James. One of the last great films of the WWII generation was The Wild Bunch:
Deke Thornton: "You think Pike and old Sykes haven't been watchin' us. They know what this is all about – and what do I have? Nothin' but you egg-suckin', chicken stealing gutter trash with not even sixty rounds between you. We're after men – and I wish to God I was with them. The next time you make a mistake, I'm going to ride off and let you die."
"We're after men." They weren't hunting metrosexuals or guys who wanted to get in touch with their feminine side. What we've had from the "Peace generation" is CGI boredom and moral hash. I mean, in the Wild Bunch, the bad guys had more honor than what we find in any Jason Boring flick.
America, F*ck yeah! I think the reason you didn't see it with Bush so much is that things move in cycles. It took this long for the economy to get bad, war going south, people fed up, etc. This makes people long for hope and something that makes them feel good at the theatres. Depressing films like Doubt, The Reader, Redemption Rd, etc, etc, are not something people want to see to forget their troubles. Kinda like all those upbeat films we have had going back to WW2. Escapism at its finest.
Most efficient way to create a shortage of a product and/or service is to slap price controls on it.
Happens every time.
If you ask me that's because Bush 43 wouldn't fight back at political attacks while he was in office. Personally I believe he had too much respect for the office, and wouldn't sully it with personal attacks.
In my opinion this simply led the left getting ever more insane. When the left attacks, and they don't get a response, that crank up the intensity.
The entertainment industry reflected that. Crazier and crazier, like a spoiled little kid, throwing a tantrum.
So lets put price controls on taxes and congress critters.
Hollywood jumped on fellow Californian Reagan's bandwagon…
They knew a change was a 'comin'. 'Red Dawn' paved the way, and 'Rambo II' and others followed with huge box office numbers. Conversely, the industry pretty much despised George Bush from day one. Heavily invested in Clinton/Gore, they felt him to be illegitimate.
And 9/11 sealed the deal. His tack to the right infuriated the left no end, and then the long knives came out.
Movies that MIGHT be favorable to a Bush audience like 'The Great Raid' were shelved ON PURPOSE so as to not help create any groundswell for conservative elections.
The only reason 'The Expendables' was even made is because a conservative star (Stallone) got his pals together and did a (relatively) modestly budgeted film with a secondary studio (Lions Gate). Don't look for
the majors to do anything even remotely like it…
rogue agents are a real issue…
And Robert's character- guys like that who see the 'quick kill' as too good to pass up exist. The setup with 'Mr Church' is more or less how it would come down, and the waterboarding- yes a gratuitous slap for sure- well, everybody does it.
Because it works.
The film threw a sop or two at the left, but it was minimal…
That's not what he's saying. Hollywood wasn't controlled by Bush, it was and has been controlled by pinko liberals for as long as I can remember. I know I'm only in my early 30's, but this crap has been shoved down my throat for at least the past 18 yrs. The alpha male is a threat to the weenie liberal. Therefore, they create the illusion that he's extinct or passe. The alpha male is one who takes charge… a weenie liberal is a blameshifter, and a coward under the guise of the intellectual victim who sacrifices himself to right a wrong. We've seen this regurgitated thousands of times over.
Planning on just that come November.
They have to throw a bone to their liberal producers.
How come sly didn't go after the islamo facsists in his new movie instead of some vague, made up South American dictator.
I'm afraid we'll be getting anti-Bush crap until after Obama is gone, because Zero and his pals can't come up with anything other than blaming Bush for everything: More garbage like Redacted and Green Zone, when what we need is something more along the lines of Independence Day.
And the Republicans in congress didn't fight back either. You can't get your message out without the energy and tenacity that, for all their faults, the left has in abundance.
The film that most encapsulated the 80's for me came out of the UK in 1982: "Who Dares Wins". In America it was called "The Final Option" because few people in the US would recognize the SAS motto. I saw it again recently and although its a bit dated the last half of the film is as good as anything you'll see today. The bad guys are leftest radicals who hold an American embassy hostage. The exchange between the terrorist leader and the American ambassador alone makes it worth tracking down.
Following the logic of the article raises one question. Who is the next Reagan?
Cmon guys, if you care about this stuff, consider Declaration Entertainment.
Once again, well said, Mr. Hudnall. Look for everyone who is asking why Hollywood didn't make a turnaround during the Bush years, like they did with Reagan, let me make it real simple:
Bush ain't no Reagan. Not even CLOSE. In fact Reagan died in 2004 and that made the contrast that much more apparent. Reagan was able to advocate for conservative principles, and he did so eloquently and succinctly. Bush wouldn't even stand up for himself. There is no comparison, I never would have thought of it even except for the posts on this site asking this question. You all are far too generous to Bush.
Make it, or keep waiting.
I know George is a committed Christian, but you'd think there would come a time when he figured out that turning the other cheek was only an open invitation for the Left to bitchslap him again.
Right? You would think.
why go there?
This worked as a pro-US parable,which was it's intent…
fine film…
The real stars (besides Lewis Collins, who did train hard for the role) were the SAS advisors to the film, several of which we know. In the film's credits they are listed as 'Anonymous'. Years have passed and we will admit that Sgt Barry Davies was amongst the experts.
Lifted a pint or two with him back in the day.
Based on the hostage crisis at the Iranian Embassy in London in the 70's. The detail work in the film, the action sequences- were spot on. MGM shows it on their cable channel from time to time. Not to be missed…
one suspects he may 'come out of the closet' fighting after his book comes out in November…
The family are class acts, irrespective of how you frame their politics. Both he and '41' feel the Presidency a honor, and respect should be shown to the Occupant. That means both Clinton, and Obama. Clinton never departed all that far from Bush the elder's world view. But 'W' and Obama are light years apart.
Expect that to become an issue soon…
Exactly, Islam doesn't always have to be the bad guy (sometimes would be nice though), in fact that would get boring. Mix it up, use a made up bad guy, use a real bad guy and hell make the government the bad guy occasionally, just don't stick to one thing and bore us (ie BUSH IS EVIL).
I didn't see the water boarding scene as a liberal sucker punch at all, as you say dcase it works. CIA guys now it works and they used it when they needed to, if the locals were doing the questioning it would have gotten ugly, we all know it. If anything, to me it showed how much bullsh##t all the crying about water boarding is, the next scene the girl is in, she is fine, no lasting damage was done to her at all. It actually shows that water boarding works and doesn't do any lasting damage to the person.
Exactly, I don't want to see all these Oscar bait depressing films. The are boring, depressing and I fell like crap after watching them (more so if I had to pay money). I left The Expendables pumped, in a great mood, I went to the pub and convinced a mate to come see it with me on Wednesday.
The movie posters displayed on BH today are scaring the LA Times. Perhaps a little sensitivity to the metrosexuals in our midst would be appropriate.
Nah. Make them pee their collective panties.
Troll invasion declaring American confidence a replay of the rise of Nazi Germany expected any moment now.
"Cobra" needs a reboot in the vein of "Rambo" and "Rocky Balboa." Come on, Sly, make it happen and go for the trifecta!
Agreed. Whatever your principles and beliefs are, as a leader you can't do much to advance them if you can't articulate them well.
well, friend, the truth cuts both ways…
Having been waterboarded- and then joking about it later- it obviously isn't a permanent psychic scar.
The left opposes it precisely because it DOES work. So, while ti maight have been a sop to the left it did, as you say, show it to be a little bit less than bamboo shoots up the fingernails…
you bet- listen, the international drug trade dwarfs Islamic militancy in scope by a huge margin- and this also put the gang in the tropics with a beautiful woman, and while it's been done before, the plot of this film worked just fine…
I'd take the tropics and a beautiful girl over the desert and some Islamic terrorists any day!
Retired detective Marion Cobretti is pulled back into service after a series of familiar murders surface in Los Angeles. Eva Mendes plays detective Gonzales, daughter of Cobra's ex-partner. Together they are on the hunt for a serial killer obsessed with Night Slashers exploits, while the city ignites with gang warfare.
No no no, we can't have the government be the bad guy while a black man is in office, that would be racist, somehow. /sarc
Well, the "biography" of Che bombed big time, so I doubt that will happen any time soon.
80's movies were so over the top awesome because the people who made them were so jacked up on coke. Kidding. But only a little.
We need Stallone to make Rambo/Rocky/Cobra – if Van Damme can play his own twin, then Sly can make this happen!
Speaking of 80s movies & so forth, IDW comics is coming out with a G.I. JOE/Transformers/Star Trek/Ghostbusters comic crossover. I'm intrigued, to say the least.
Speaking of 80s movies & so forth, IDW comics is coming out with a G.I. JOE/Transformers/Star Trek/Ghostbusters comic crossover. I'm intrigued, to say the least.
so did they, and having been both places we concur…
Bush wasn't a conservative. More like a 70s Democrat. He didn't have great leadership skills. A leader gets people to follow him. Bush had trouble with that. Reagan got the lefties to laugh at his jokes. Even though they hated him, most of them respected him. Bush was not respected by his critics. Partially because he didn't fight back or even deflect them well.
The big difference is Reagan was focused in renewing America, which he did. Bush was focused on winning a war that he said would last longer than his two terms in office. He knew he wouldn't be able to finish what he started and that didn't inspire confidence in many people (even though that was a realistic view of his)
Well said.
Definitely not to be missed. Sadly, not available on DVD here in the US, at least not when I last checked — Region 2 only. The action scenes are top-notch, especially the embassy-clearing battle at the end.. The technical details are obviously well-researched, as well, with some (at the time) very high-tech gadgetry. And the (explicitly) Communist activities depicted include not just the core terrorist actions, but also a British MP very much in the George Galloway vein, some lefty-chic artists, a Soviet agent engaged in funneling money to various "peace" causes, and a brief scene with a useful-idiot priest.
" I left The Expendables pumped, in a great mood, "
Exactly, I'm dating my self here but I can remember after Rocky every Itialian guy I hung out with was thinking he could be a contender.
I work in a supporting position with the SEALs and not long after Rambo came out there was an increase in applicants for the teams.
it's why the film was hated- HATED by critics…
It still routinely gets 'one star' and is referred to a a 'simple minded anti-terrorist movie' and dismissed.
It is ANYTHING but…
One thing that struck me at the time about Independence Day and also Air Force One, was the almost-painful contrast between the movie presidents and the real one. It was almost as if the filmmakers were trying to compensate for Slick Willie, giving us presidents to cheer for rather than be embarrassed by.
Aside: Compared to Obama, I actually miss Bill Clinton. If you told me back in 1998 that I'd say that one day, I'd have called you insane, but there it is.
He still should have responded to the smears against him though. That's why our next guy can't be some softy. Even the least idological of people will begin to believe a smear if it is mostly unrefuted. I'm not too high on Tim Pawlenty for that reason. Good guy, good gov, but I think the left would destroy him.
Silly me I forgot the PC rule book, at the present time the Tea Party (funded by the GOP and evil corporations of course) should be the bad guys. Thanks for the reminder.
I don't think problem was so much that he wouldn't fight back, but rather he ceded control of the national conversation.
The left tried to do the same thing to Reagan, they have a very thin play book. On a few occasions Reagan fought back, but for the most part he ignored them, but he didn't give up the bully pulpit. He was still in the news all the time, setting the tone of the debate. And that drove the left absolutely nuts.
What Bush did was keep a lower profile, and that created a vacuum in the news, which hatred rushed into fill.
Exactly: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wusgcG4rfo&fe...
They had Air Force One on tv in Australia the other night and I watch it at work, still a pretty good movie. And yes Ford as the president kicked ass and didn't play sax.
I like Cobra. One of my favorite lines is when Stallone (Cobra) admits that he has an attitude problem, "but it's just a little one."
I'd watch that.
Sums up my decade. On movie night back in '85, I went to "Rocky IV" whereas the rest of the family went to see "White Nights". 'nuff said.
In my opinion, I don't think Bush's problem was so much his inability to articulate his beliefs, but rather his refusal to do so.
Karl Rove said in his book that the administration's policy toward the left was "if you wrestle with pigs, you get dirty."
If I had to guess, that stance was probably driven by the history of Richard Nixon. Nixon engaged the press and the leftists, and for all intents and purposes, the media engineered a great coup against him. If anyone hasn't done so, I highly recommend reading "Silent Coup" — it's pretty powerful.
That being said, I do believe that Bush could've stood up a little more. He had the most powerful voice in the world, and he could've helped his own cause by protecting himself from a stronger position.
Pretty easy decision really.
I already posted this but it didn't come up, hope I don't double post. Oh well.
I remember hearing about the same affect after Top Gun came out. Clint Eastwood was trying to do the same with Heartbreak Ridge but it didn't quite work and the USMC disowned the movie!
I love uplifting movies, the underdog overcoming the odds, I just watch Marky Mark in Invincible tonight and I don't even like American football, I just like that type of movie.
That's it, guys. It's all in the atitude. I said this on another thread, but seeing even the dated and corny old flicks of the 80s leaves you with a feeling of pride and satisfaction. Watching those anti-American, or just depressing artsy flicks makes you want to dance with a train. Which goes over better when people are already depressed and desperately want to feel good, even if it is only for 2 hours?
For all intents and purposes……it's the same thing isn't it?
Good post.
"Say you…say me…" Dang! Earworm!
I'm not sure if you're old enough to remember Reagan's terms, I was graduating high school in 1981, so I had a front row seat for it. It's hard for me to explain it, because I'm not sure how to phrase it.
For all essential purposes Reagan had the MSM wrapped around his finger. They'd ask questions about Iran Contra, Reagan would ignore them and talk about something like jelly beans. And the jelly beans made the evening news.
When Bush tried that, the only thing in the press were screams about questions he wouldn't answer.
Reagan just had this way of doing it. He was definitely unique. When I think back to Reagan I remember those shots of him riding horses at his ranch in California, cowboy hat and all. It will take some time before people will look back on Bush and think of something besides protests.
Does that help any?
A movie I loved from the '80's was 48 Hours. They should never have done a sequel, it was such a great action movie. It could never be made today. Native-American bad-guy (sidekick to the always awesome James Remar)? African-American con? I feel so sorry for ethnic actors. They never get to play the good n' crunchy stuff anymore.
Me too. Come on Sly, bring back Cobra!!!!!
Yeah it's sad that Hollyweird is so stupid when it comes to what the movie going public really wants to see. I really liked Cobra and I recently saw another one wilth Sly that was too cool, Stallone's movie, Get Carter, is a good action flick with a compelling storyline and kept my eyes glued to the screen. Add that one to your Netflix queue, you won't be sorry.
48hrs is an all time classic cop-buddy movie. Eddie was at the height of his power and Nolte looked and played the part of the grizzled cop perfectly.
Not old enough to remember much about Reagan, and I get what you're saying, but I just think they (Bush 43 admin) could have done a better job defending their positions and pointing out unfair attacks. I don't think they needed Reagans media charm to do it. Although I'm sure the political climate has changed drastically since then.
The Reagan years were a wild ride. At that time I was a died in the wool lefty, so I despised every molecule of the man.
And then history proved that he was pretty much right about everything. That was one of the things that got me kicked out of the left, I refused to be a hypocrite and say Reagan was wrong. He wasn't. He kicked ass.
'Here's my strategy on the Cold War: We win, they lose.'- Ronald Reagan
While the political climate is indeed different, make no mistakes, it was still just as cut throat, its just that the media at the time (MSM) was in charge of what we could see and read, so with that filter safely in place, there was less need for open hostility, so politicians could appear to be more civil in public.
Remember there's a reason for the hostile MSM to attack presidents. If they do it effectively, they can derail an administration from its agenda. If the administration is busy defending itself against the enemy MSM, they aren't accomplishing much else. Its a political weapon pure and simple.
Reagan's charm and his ability to communicate directly with the American people effectively disarmed the MSM which is why they called him the Teflon President.
Bush may have been very charming in private (I've heard from Rush, he's very good on the personal level), but no one is going to confuse him with Reagan in public speaking. There were a couple of times he pulled it off, the impromptu speech at ground zero right after the attack. Another time he nearly brought a tear to my eye.
One time he was working a rope line and a young female teenager reached out to shake, and mentioned she'd lost her father on 9/11. Bush reached out and gave her a giant hug, and I think he actually cried a little. I'm a cynic, but even I'm not that cynical. I don't believe it was staged at all.
Both of those examples are at the more one on one level. To get around the MSM and go directly to the American people, you need to be a great public speaker.
I see signs of that in Sarah Palin, which I believe is exactly why the MSM and the left are so terrified of her – they see it too. Shades of Reagan when it comes to inspiring people.
When is America going to get a conservative movie studio? I have noticed that homosexual themed or otherwise perverted sex themes win the awards while nobody even watches films like "Milk". I still applaud the sacrafice of Dan White!
The Michael Caine original is much better
Bush seemed to agree with many of his own critics. He didn't have the faith that Reagan did.
I guess it comes down to not only doing the right thing but believing in it when your enemies mock you for doing it. Maybe Sarah Palin is a good choice for President after all!
It's so interesting to hear how many staunch conservatives are former lefties. Can't say I was ever a lefty, but I would have been accurately profiled 6yrs ago as a typical know-nothing 20 something yr old. Around that time is when I began questioning what we now refer to as "Bush Derangement Syndrome" (BDS), and by questioning the left, I was automatically labeled a republican even though I had no ideological stake in anything at all. It was funny how angry they would become by just asking simple questions and using something as simple as "facts" to stump them. So maybe they knew what I was before I did? By the time I hit 30, I abandoned my "independent" stance and determined that I am in fact conservative. As for past and present though….Were there really Anthony Weiners, Al Frankens, and Allen Graysons during the Reagan era?????????
Well for starters, I'm not a conservative, I'm to the right of many people here, I'm a libertarian. If you ask me conservatives are just fine and dandy with big, all encompassing government, as long as they are in the driver's seat. I don't believe the problem is who's driving big government, the problem is big government.
And agreed, even if you are on the political left, one of them, they still don't want to hear any facts. Do that and you'll get the boot faster than Obama can crank the deficit up another trillion. The left's ideology is built on a foundation of emotions, and emotions are no match for facts in a rational debate. Pointing that out is like yelling the emperor has no clothes.
Were there idiots like that during Reagan's term? Oh hell yeah. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oNaasFvvFlE
When the news could only go through the MSM, the political left knew their wing men in the MSM had the flanks, so they didn't even have to really address what the political right had to say, because no one ever heard it unless they watched the news feed from congress, and even then, it was muted out of a sense of respect for the institute. Reagan had to deal with all that and still managed to pull it off.
What's happening now is the message from the right is leaking out via talk radio, cable and the internet. And the MSM has no idea how to deal with it. This wasn't supposed to happen. They didn't cover this in journalism school or at the cocktail party circuit.
All they know how to do is blithely dismiss those who don't agree with them as uneducated, uninformed boobs, hence clinging to religion and guns. Remember when Obama came out with that line during the primaries? That's because his numbers weren't looking to good in the Pa. primary. He wasn't talking about the right or the GOP. He was talking about rural, blue collar democrats.
There is an unofficial caste system in America, the ruling elite who must sacrifice and deal with us unwashed masses. The Obama administration is just the most blatant public faces to do this since Rosie O'Donnell. He has open disdain for those of us not part of the liberal elites. Usually they do a better job of hiding it.
Because of the internet and the rise of the new alternative media we are able to get a peek at the man behind the curtain.
Extremely strong piece James and once again accurate both historically and now.
I'm a little bent out of shape lately with Obama the Muslim supporting the ground zero mosque and most likely up to much much worse. Is there such a thing? I'd bet on it. But the positive tone of the article helped zap me back to the proper perspective. The kicking ass on bad guys perspective. I like that perspective.
Thanks.
No…I'm pretty sure I don't miss Clinton at all.
I don't think there's a single Democrat president that I wished was back in office.
"Bravo Two Zero" was a better book than the Sean Bean film-version. But still, it was a great movie.
Hats off to the SAS.
Well, I consider myself a bit of a conservative/libertarian hybrid anyway. It's just hard to get on board with certain libertarian positions. IE- Legalization of drugs….imo, that would just contribute to the degradation of society, and that makes it less of an individuality issue, and abortion is killing plain and simple. Sure, there are rare instances of rape and incest where an acception could be made, but firmly against it for the most part. I think those are really the only libertarian positions where I have to part. But as far as small government, deregulation, and fiscal responsibility, I'm right there with you. I may not be clear on certain positions with the Libertarian party so I insist on being corrected if I've mischaracterized anything. Also it seems that you're opinion of conservatism is synonymous with the Republican Party, and I don't see it that way. I support a Republican candidate only if his/her governing is a reflection of the aforementioned views.
Thank god for new media.
When it comes to libertarianism, the thing to remember is there is no organized structure, like a party. There are factions that call themselves the libertarian party, but the idea of organizing itself is anti-libertarian.
So what some nut says while claiming to be a libertarian, doesn't necessarily cover all libertarians. Hell they think I'm nuts for being a Catholic. But because I'm a libertarian, I can tell the go eff off.
Here's the underlying principal for libertarianism. I agree to leave you alone and let you live your life the way you see fit, and in return you agree to leave me alone and live my life as I see fit.
On top of that we are free to make mutually agreeable associations and contracts, but we still can't force any one, it all has to be free association.
We don't believe in using the government's monopoly of force to make people live the way we think they should, we respect their right to make those decisions, even if we don't agree with them.
Freedom also mean the freedom to be an idiot. If some one wants to piss away their life as a prostitute or an addict, I have no moral authority to stop them, but I certainly shouldn't have the fiduciary responsibility to pay for it.
I'd rather save my extra wealth for those aspire to a better future, not those pissing away their lives.
This is where I get Libertarianism and Objectivism confused. I thought I was an objectivist, but their ilk seems to be comprised of ivory tower intellects much like that of democrats. I agree with many tenates of Objectivism, but it seems their ideology is rooted in Atheism, and that's where I differ. I don't consider myself a religious person or an Atheist. I'd probably describe myself as 50% Christian 50% Agnostic. I do support the separation of church and state, but think religious freedoms should be protected. Thats why I see myself as a Conservative/Libertarian hybrid.
That's fine with me. But I will attempt to gently prod you to over time change that to libertarian/conservative hybrid.
I don't know much about objectivism, other than a few interviews and stories I've read about Ayn Rand. Personally I think she was a bit daft, but growing up in the USSR could have that affect on people.
My own opinion of her was she thought she needed to be unnecessarily harsh in her rhetoric because she wanted to get her point across with out anyone co-opting her message. If I'm right, she certainly accomplished that. Practically no one, any where on the political spectrum, want to go anywhere near her.
I simply take her ideology one step further. She declared no one should ever do anything for anyone other than themselves. And if helping other people makes me personally happy, then by helping them I am doing helping myself. And if she and her followers don't like that, too bad.
Thanks for the polite debate, and I look forward to more in the future!
Thank you. That was an outstanding video.
I agree that Rand seems a bit cold, and lacking in certain human qualities. She did repel both right and left. Maybe that was her intention. I'll definitely keep an open mind about the conservative/libertarian…libertarian/conservative thing. I enjoyed the exchange Edski, and I look forward to more as well.
One of the major tenants of my libertarianism is that if one fails, then they should fail. We are guaranteed the pursuit of happiness, not happiness. Guaranteed the opportunity to try, not to be successful. If you fail, dust yourself off, figure out what you did wrong, and try again, but don't sit there whining that someone should come and fix it for you. We are owed nothing but our life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. Anyone who tells you otherwise is selling something. And the price just might be your freedom.
Sorry, got a little caught up there, but all these entitlement-seeking-"somebody-ought-to-do-something" bastards are wearing me out.
I've always found that one of the hallmarks of a real man is the ability to swallow his pride and take responsibility for their actions. Only whiny little girlie-men try to get someone else in trouble for what they, themselves, have done.
That's funny. I heard Rush say something on the radio the other day that resonated so strongly with me. "How can a man be a liberal and call himself a man?" I freaked out because I've pondered that over that question before in my attempt to try and understand liberals. He says a lot of things we're all thinking. It's just that I've never heard someone say that out loud before.
Agreed, and don't worry about getting caught up, people standing up for individual liberty and personal responsibility are music to my ears.
The promise of America is supposed to be equal opportunity, not equal out comes. We do not have equal talents, or equal desire for success. We will never have equal outcomes. It's impossible.
The other day I heard the song "We're in the Money" and remembered that song came out during the depression.
You must be logged in to post a comment.