tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7608702.post3446797073173054268..comments2023-10-25T08:46:20.242-05:00Comments on The Distributist Review: Making a List; Checking it TwiceJohn Médaillehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16463267750952578888noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7608702.post-82621922552482768932008-01-10T07:23:00.000-06:002008-01-10T07:23:00.000-06:00John, if you're interested, it was Sinclair Lewis ...John, if you're interested, it was Sinclair Lewis who made the quote about the flag-wearing and cross-bearing American fascism. Perhaps it's in his novel, "It Can't Happen Here", based on that very topic, but I've been unable to find that out for sure.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14240450531278076454noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7608702.post-49963805016339344652008-01-08T22:01:00.000-06:002008-01-08T22:01:00.000-06:00John, we really don't know. Lincoln didn't know. F...John, we really don't know. Lincoln didn't know. FDR didn't know. Truman didn't know. Bush doesn't know.<BR/><BR/>But in the FINAL analysis, these were men who loved their country and did what they thought was the right thing.<BR/><BR/>I would delegate you as one of many to the task of making sure that those who follow are people of good will and continue to revere America as we do.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7608702.post-82633016555510613972008-01-08T20:35:00.000-06:002008-01-08T20:35:00.000-06:00Quintus Arius says, I favor intense interrogation ...Quintus Arius says, <I>I favor intense interrogation methods (hardly torture when measured against our enemy), I favor data-mining phone and emails against potential jihadists. I favor the Patriot Act.</I><BR/><BR/>And how will you know that they are using all these things just against "jihadists" and not merely against political opponents? And while you may trust Bush, you must remember that the powers you give to him, you are also giving to (perhaps) a Clinton, an Obama, or people yet unknown and whose characters are unknown. Would you feel just as comfortable if they had these powers?<BR/><BR/>Who is it that said, <I>When fascism comes to America, it will come wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross.</I>John Médaillehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16463267750952578888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7608702.post-7250259561599888422008-01-08T19:35:00.000-06:002008-01-08T19:35:00.000-06:00John, I disagree with your harsh assessment of the...John, I disagree with your harsh assessment of the Bush administration, as though it was a power grab as an end in itself. In my opinion the successful attack against America on 9/11 was a traumatic event for George Bush personally.<BR/><BR/>It was seen by him a failure of the United States government and by him to "provide for the common defense against all enemies, foreign and domestic". A sworn commitment.<BR/><BR/>He made a personal commitment, i.e. 'Never again' at least not on my watch. <BR/><BR/>Now as time erodes our memory and partisans such as you see political oportunities to attack the president's aggressive measures.<BR/><BR/>I favor intense interrogation methods (hardly torture when measured against our enemy), I favor data-mining phone and emails against potential jihadists. I favor the Patriot Act.I could go on. I do not feel threated by these defensive measures at all. On the contrary. John, if this sounds too hawkish, so be it. I'm driven by an intense love of my grandchildren.<BR/><BR/>As far as the invasion of Iraq - it was a monumental break down in intelligence. A breakdown caused by a decade of benign neglect fostered by the end of the cold war. Everyone, including most influential Democrats believed Saddam Hussein was a gathering threat. <BR/><BR/>I think history may well look at the Bush legacy in the middle east with favor, but not for us now.<BR/><BR/>Now on another topic, health care, we have much more common ground, as well as your views on abortion.<BR/>Thanks for your efforts.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7608702.post-8222120716558841512008-01-04T02:39:00.000-06:002008-01-04T02:39:00.000-06:00I see a man who tries all his best to correct what...I see a man who tries all his best to correct what is becoming a shame in our American politics that made a lot of people hate us as Americans.<BR/><BR/>As a person from the Midele East, I may add another thing on what should change. <BR/>We need to work for justice and TRUTH, we cannot in any way speak about democracy, freedom and justice for all when the people of Palestine is abused for many years.<BR/><BR/>When the people of Palestine had trusted us Americans as honest brokers for peace and justice and find themselves wrose than ever because of our foreing policy who made Israel the only reality that we support, protect and forgive every injustice. <BR/>And even when we accept one settlemt on the land of the people to whom we promised that they should have their own INDEPNDENT state at last; OR when we do not want to see the discreminations, the racism of an aparthaied wall who distroyed the life of a people. And when call of a Jewish State that would exclude the Christians and Muslims for thier own land and send them some where one day.<BR/><BR/>And when we think that for the sole right of Israel to defend itself Israel has the right to jail, kill and do what ever to the Palesatinians who from their side should never have the right to resist occupation, or come back to their own lands or homes; but accept as fact their FATE (made in America) and bless the people who are taking their lands and their resources...<BR/><BR/>We should call for non-violence from both parts and not see one side as terrorist and the other side as victim when everybody is killing everybody: one is killing with weapons that we Americans send, the others kill with weapens of their own. Non-violence and real dialogue and justce for all is the solution.<BR/><BR/>American that I love and I serve should absolutely, as my beloved country, correct the injustices and work HONESTLY, yes at last HONESTLY for peace, freedom and TRUTH.<BR/><BR/>Enough is enough, we need to be proud of ourselve as Americans at the end and not ashamed of what we have done to the people here and there....<BR/><BR/>Abouna Labib Kobti<BR/>www.Al-Bushra.org<BR/>http://www.al-bushra.org/updates2007.htmAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7608702.post-30827017651083219632008-01-02T10:41:00.000-06:002008-01-02T10:41:00.000-06:00Brad points out that I ducked the issue of immigra...Brad points out that I ducked the issue of immigration. A definite oversight, perhaps because I don't have any good answers. It is one of those issues where nearly everything you hear from both sides is true, or nearly so. The problem has been allowed to fester since the Reagan amnesty. Further, many felt that the NAFTA agreement would make the problem go away, since Mexico would become rich from "free" trade. But the exact opposite happened. <I>Quel suprise!</I><BR/><BR/>Ross Perot said that NAFTA would create a "giant sucking sound" of jobs going south. That was partially true, but the real sucking noise was Mexicans, impoverished by NAFTA and the incompetence and greed of their own govmint, would be drawn North in every greater numbers.John Médaillehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16463267750952578888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7608702.post-50234216664522411102008-01-02T08:50:00.000-06:002008-01-02T08:50:00.000-06:00I would add ending the policy of open borders ille...I would add ending the policy of open borders illegal immigration. It is a widescale rejection of the rule of law. It makes American industries structurally dependent on illegal labor. It creates an unassimilated third-world nation within the nation. It exploits the immigrants by, in many cases, not paying them minimum wage. In short, it benefits all parties involved in the short term, but harms everyone in the long term.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7608702.post-72669582961024478512008-01-01T23:52:00.000-06:002008-01-01T23:52:00.000-06:00Your point on ending the free-trade dogma is well-...Your point on ending the free-trade dogma is well-taken. As you know from my comments on your previous post I self-identify as a libertarian (more precisely, a Georgist who admires Lysander Spooner), which is normally all about free trade, but the scenario of trading with foreign governments and companies that are essentially engaged in extorting slave-labor and by virtue of that crime are able to sell cheaper than our domestic manufacturers highlights some real moral complexity. It's like buying what you know to be stolen property for a better price than you could purchase it legitimately elsewhere. I've always been distrustful of the idea that tariffs should be enacted simply to protect American jobs and American salaries, because people in other countries need jobs too, and consumers are generally entitled to purchase things as cheaply as they can, and if something can actually be produced more efficiently elsewhere then it doesn't seem like the end of the world if those American workers are thereby led to find a more meaningful and productive place in the economy. (Ideally, with a Georgist taxation system -- and even more ideally a "citizen's dividend" -- leading to distributist goals, they could find their place as capitalists themselves.) But the reality is that only a pittance from the type of trade your describing goes to the foreign workers and the bulk goes into the pockets of the exploiters. <BR/><BR/>Theoretically, it seems like it might be perfectly in accord with "natural law" to cut off trade entirely with a government or with a company whose government allows it to exploit and cheat its workers. (No black and white lines there, though, because just about all governments oppress their people to one degree or another, and total embargos have done serious harm to the populace -- rather than the ruling class -- of foreign countries.) If that's the case, then tariffs on the same kind of exploitive trade (and where an embargo would do more harm than good) would seem to be acceptable as well, if designed to prevent or reduce the foreign interests' profit from their injustice by leveling the playing field. But it seems that such tariffs should be imposed on a case by case basis and premised on just such moral considerations, rather than a simple desire to protect American jobs and salaries. E.g., there would be no basis for a tariff on goods coming from a worker owned co-op in a foreign country.<BR/><BR/>I'm obviously a total amateur on this subject. Thanks for pointing out something that I'll need to think more deeply about.John Kindleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13897832130417651667noreply@blogger.com