Taking requests
I know I’ve written a few leftist sounding posts lately and I have a lot of my friends and family worried for me that I’m turning into a hippie, liberal commie. At least Ben (my older brother) is worried I am.
So I’ve been trying to think of a topic I could write about that would help assuage those who are worried about me. Politically and socially speaking, I think the only area where we’re on common ground has to do with economic policy. Yet, even there, I think there’s enough of a difference that I’d have people fighting against what I’m saying, even though they should agree with me on the issue!
I’ve decided I would post a few possible topics to write about and see what people think about them. Please let me know which of them sound particularly interesting. Specifically, which would you like to hear about first, second, etc? (Note: A couple days ago I posted a very short blog stating that selfishness is a virtue. That topic is off-limits for the time being, because I feel like it’s delicate enough that it will require a lot of step-by-step explanation to get my point across, and I don’t have time to write all of that… at least until the semester is over.)
- The free market would manage police departments better than the government
- The free market would manage the court system better than the government
- Roads should have no speed limits; furthermore, the free market would manage roads better than the government
- We all know FDR was the worst US president; but Lincoln comes in close second! (I could explain either of those evaluations, though I’m guessing most of my “conservative” readers will openly agree with my first statement and probably disagree with my second)
- The Sovereign Kingdom of Brandon Robison should be a feasible concept
- The only monopoly we should fear is one created by government.
- The best form of government has no branches (I don’t want to talk about that one just yet…); the second best form has one
That seems like a good start.
November 3rd, 2008 at 12:32pm
I don’t think you’re turning into a commie/lib/hippie, I think you just have an unrealistic view of this very imperfect world in which we live, and speaking from an eternal perspective, your “live & let live” attitude will keep you from progressing as far as you need/want to.
I’d like to hear about the ideal form of gubbmint (with no branches), and how it would work in this imperfect world. Just FYI, I already disagree with you. In this current world we live in, the COTUS outlines the closest thing to perfection. It is the secular tool we have been given to help achieve eternal perfection. That Satan has attacked it and made it so that ALL of our elected officials and most of the US citizenry doesn’t understand, use or feel it should be followed shows just how important it is to God’s plan. In the last days, good will be considered evil & evil, good.
My second choice is how Lincoln was the 2nd worst POTUS. I agree that FDR was probably the worst, but Carter gives him a run for his money. I’m not sure on Lincoln. He had to keep the union together, but the southern states were in the right when you consider the REAL reason the civil war was fought. That puts Lincoln in the wrong, and since he won, it can be argued that he weakened our nation. However, a split nation would also be weaker, so I don’t know that there was a winning solution to the war. It would have been better for the Lincoln white house to acknowledge the rights that states, and allowed them to operate as the COTUS intended. Since he didn’t and that decision led to a lose-lose situation, I can see the arguement that he was a bad POTUS.
I haven’t studied the Civil War & Lincoln closely, so I’d love to hear your thoughts on the subject.
November 7th, 2008 at 5:37pm
What’s up Brandon. Nice blog.
I have to say I agree with you about FDR and Lincoln for sure. Except I might switch them. FDR might not have had as much power if the Federal government hadn’t already been exalted on high by Lincoln and his followers. States rights died an unfortunate death at the hands of Lincoln. And I disagree that Lincoln “had” to keep the states together. There was no constitutional authority for stopping secession through military might. If there is anything that is at the heart of the founding it is the idea of succession. Just look at the Declaration of Independence. Also, allowing the Southern states to leave would have worked wonders in getting rid of slavery because Northerners would no longer be legally obligated to return runaway slaves to the South. The exact same thing happened in many other regions of the world and helped eliminate slavery without killing hundreds of thousands of people.
Lincoln also created a horrible precedent as far as civil rights go. He threw out habeus corpus, imprisoned dissidents, exiled State officials, shut down presses, etc.
As far as the best form of government, I might suggest something at the exact opposite end of the spectrum—an infinite amount of branches where each person is sovereign over their own life.
November 7th, 2008 at 5:46pm
Ha, Spencer, we might just be talking about the same thing, just using different examples.
November 9th, 2008 at 1:05am
Why don’t you ask some people who were actually alive during FDR’s presidency. Elected four times. Yeah, just terrible. Lincoln? I fear for future if you geniuses are in charge
November 9th, 2008 at 9:10pm
Yes, FDR being elected 4 times shows he was a great POTUS. Because you know, the people have never chosen a bad president.
As for the need to keep the union together, I wasn’t talking of a constitutional requirement, but I think anyone at any given time would feel te need to keep the union together. If several states decided to secede in current times, I think that most people in the gov’t, and specifically the president would feel a need to keep those states on, possibly by any means necessary.
Hope that clears that up. Now Brandon, I think you need to blog about this so it can be discussed. Get to writing kid…