Is there a Theocracy in Your Future?

I love the coalition of individuals who want to be left alone.

Xelebes said:

You would be surprised. The LUAs in Alberta did not resist Ralphbucks when they were sent out. The ones who resisted were the Liberals and the NDP - the "takers".

Click to expand...

The TCs in BC were insanely jealous of the Ralphies.

Yawn! Not this again.

I wonder how people expect their countries to have modern levels of wealth and power with ancient social structures and governments?

I don't understand where some of these wild ideas come from. First, the fear of a Theocracy in the USA. Unless Islam manages to take over our government, there will be no theocratic rule.

Those on the left constantly make the mistake of pairing conservatives with the Christian right. It's true that most Christians hold conservative values, but there are huge numbers of non-Christian, or at least non-practicing Christians, who espouse conservatism. Just as Communists and Socialists usually vote Democrat, Christians mostly vote Republican.

The latest converts to conservatism that I know, hold closer to the Libertarian platform. However, they are pragmatic enough to know that third parties don't work, so they are working within the Republican Party to eject the useless leadership that is more concerned about the next election than the health and wealth of the nation.

The growing generation of conservatism will hold closer to Ron Paul's ideas than to those of any current Republican leader.

I don't want any level of government sticking their nose in my personal life, and I have no interest in sticking my nose in the lives of others. That includes other countries. I also don't want politicians stealing my wealth to finance their agenda, whether it be on the left, or on the right. I want the Constitution to be the law of the land, not a judicial guide to be ignored so as to gain feel-good points from some special interest.

One other thing...the idea that the Air Force is becoming some sort of religious institution is silly. I spent over two decades in the Air Force, and I can assure you that the charge is utter nonsense. There are always individuals trying step over the line for any cause and at any level of command, but it is not institutional and it never will be. Congress writes the rules that control the military, and all branches operate under those rules.

Don said:

Sarah Palin may never be president, but someone similar may not be far over the horizon.
Yeah, that's the problem with populism; it's popular. As was the genocide of Native Americans. But she's not the first politician to espouse Small Government with a wink while preaching Big Stick with a smile. And you're right, she won't be the last.


My questions:

How would progressives, who are all for larger government today, feel about an all-powerful government if the LUAC as he defines it is indeed in its ascendant phase?
Not happy, I imagine.


Is a movement that supports a long laundry list of appropriate social behavior and a strong military presence around the world, funded with taxpayer dollars, really a "Leave Us Alone" coalition?
No.


By aligning the LUAC with "moral" society and "justified" empire, has he ignored a substantial portion of the coalition who want to be left alone in their social as well as their financial lives, and leave those overseas to live the lives they choose as well?
Yes. Funny how libertarian-ish people don't really seem to have a play in major politics; it's either left/right, but no up/down*. Maybe it's because the only counterpart would smell like a tyranny, which doesn't exist in any substantial form in the US...well, at least not right now. But if it did, I bet the libertarian party would expand like that annoying girl from Charlie And The Chocolate Factory.


In the future, is it possible that the classical liberals and modern progressives will find themselves on the same side of the barricades once again, protecting personal freedoms from government dictate?
Yeah, probably. But it will be an awkward friendship come economic issues.


Or will the denizens of AW find it more worthwhile to poke fun at the idea than to take it under serious consideration?
You are a monkey and your breath smells of cabbage.

Click to expand...

*

Just how would a theocracy be established? There could not possibly be any kind of Protestant bishop or pontiff. I could imagine a "technically" secular cabinet position of "Secretary of Internal Religious Affairs" to serve as a mediator of influential denominations while dispensing their concept of "Universal Morality".

Then some churches would want local and regional influence. Southern Baptists would claim Tennessee, while certain Pentecostal churches would want control of many communities west of the Mississippi. LDS Church would proclaim Utah for the Mormons, but I imagine a hypothetical Secretary of Internal Religious Affairs would be Southern Baptist and would do his best to hamstring the Mormon Church, trying to prevent Mormon missionaries from walking up to people's porch steps, or build more temples outside of Utah and Idaho.

Then the more religiously diverse and more secular parts of the country could just be puppeteered by installed religious authorities or sub cabinet officers.

Nevertheless, just so highly unlikely but slightly plausible.

Given how many crooks I see who fall into the LUA crowd(a.k.a. contracting scumbags who try to cheat the public when doing public works projects), I can't see the LUA's being any better. The reality that you may or may not accept Don, is that most of the people who work in the government, especially at the lower rungs, actually are trying to act in the interest of the average joe.

If you want a pure libertarian utopia, I'd highly suggest Somalia. There you can go into business without any oversight at all, and be absolutely free. Of course, others might disagree with you to the point of shooting you, but that comes with a truly free society.

Dommo said:

If you want a pure libertarian utopia, I'd highly suggest Somalia. There you can go into business without any oversight at all, and be absolutely free. Of course, others might disagree with you to the point of shooting you, but that comes with a truly free society.

Click to expand...

Now I'm really curious about how you come to the conclusion that Somalia is a libertarian wonderland. Why is it?

Maxinquaye said:

Now I'm really curious about how you come to the conclusion that Somalia is a libertarian wonderland. Why is it?

Click to expand...

To be fair to libertarians, they do generally specify that there has to be a government to provide security and order, but otherwise it shouldn't do anything. So Somalia is not quite a "wonderland" or ideal.

On the other hand, Somalia is a pretty good example of what a real (as opposed to ideal) libertarian state would probably degenerate into within a few generations, except that the warlords would be corporations with private armies.