Problem is, these same socialists etc; seek out to define conservatives NOT by historical, nor intellectual reasoning, but by simple, pure hatred for conservatives and the constitution.

If the constitution gets in the way of progressive legislation…(Obamacare) they simply find a way around the constitution.

I think you miss Levins point totally. He is for mediation by a limited government through an original constitution. Your communitarianism is nothing more than a white washed socialism. Limited government and free markets are necessary for man’s welfare.

Socialism is socialism no matter what you call it and it does not work because of the nature of man. You cannot turn a dog into a cat just as you cannot turn a man into a selfless automaton.

Levin is not as liberty minded as I would like and the criticism I have with him is that he uses certain definitions like crony capitalism to define statist methodology. They are not capitalists. However his book is a good start.

Levin is a typical NEO-CON.

First of all, don’t be alarmed by your obsession with The Great One. Over 5.5 million people listen a week. Besides, it is a good thing to be addicted to.

Second, Mark said Phillips was crony capitalism because there would be laws sending customers their direction, (the lightbulb efficiancy regulation,) in ways smaller companies would not be able to adjust to. He was not talking about any government subsidizing at all. As far as I can tell, he would not support that for any size business. And in fact it seems to be the opposite is occuring with all sorts of tax increases on larger business in the near future. By the way, Nathan’s business will probably also be hurt by these tax changes.

And it seems you do not like big companies such as Wal mart. They are one of the biggest employers in the country. If their business would be reduced, as you seem to say you would like to see, that could very easily result in many loosing their jobs. The burden is not on them to make their own prices the same as the small stores, the burden is on the small stores to find a way to compete in the market.

i am torture torture torture torture torture
i want evry arab or islamic terrorist to get the message
hamas hezbolah and cair alll other terrorist
to think 50000000000000000000000000000000000000 times
if they want to attack the U.S
so torture evry day more information the better

alberto gorin
a.gorin@planet.nl

I just read this over, and I think I may be able to help, provided I am understanding you correctly. If by “capitalism as it exists today,” you mean the quasi-capitalism of the current United States that regularly brings about giant recessions and depressions, resulting in years of suffering for millions of its citizens, there is a good answer.

A large capitalist country that is highly technological and tightly integrated cannot survive too much severely damaging government intervention before it finds itself under socialism or close. This, I would think anyway, is a core belief of Ron Paul’s.

Does this not eliminate much of the tension?

I am not, however, “against modern society”, at least not per se. I have no interest in turning back the clock; I’m more interested, in Röpke’s words, in setting it right.

http://nathancontramundi.wordpress.com/2008/07/29/a-clarification-on-my-own-behalf-we-do-not-want-to-set-the-clock-back-we-want-to-set-it-right/

(Ignore the strange obsession I had with hyphenating anything and everything at the time, please.)

Your accurate comments on capitalism are why I’m opposed thereto, why I support localism politically and economically. It may be something of a pipe-dream, but I don’t think it’s impossible without political repression. The first step, I think, simply requires an end to what Mr. Levin referred to, when speaking about Phillips, as crony capitalism. An end to the subsidization of the big over the small may not halt our “progress”, but it would certainly slow it. Part of it, too, involves conscious choice — the willingness to spend a little more at Nathan’s Hardware or William’s Grocery than at the Home Depot or Wal*Mart (my favorite bugbear).

I’ll agree that the “alternative Right” is electorally viable. I don’t think any of us expect it to be, at least en masse. A state rep here, maybe a US Congressman there. The “alt. Right”, itself, is too broad to speak of electorally, anyway, I think. You’ll find sympathizers of Buchanan and Ron Paul (one of our few electoral successes), as well as of Ralph Nader (notwithstanding, say, his seriously problematic social liberalism) and the left-conservatism of Normal Mailer.

This is why I’m not opposed to supporting the GOP, of which, technically, I’m still a registered member. I’m a “social conservative”, too — although I’m uncomfortable with the term, precisely because I believe that, ultimately, the philosophical classical liberalism underlying American conservatism is in tension with — perhaps not necessarily opposed to, though — social conservatism. Promotion of economic (classical) liberalism is one thing, but support for capitalism as it exists today, I think, strains the family and the community in ways that ultimately do greater harm than good.

Cheers.