Last night Rachel Maddow explored this topic, showing how the echo chamber rhetoric machine of conservatism nominally promotes the libertarian variety while masking its authoritarian roots. The authoritarian variety favors big, intrusive government while the libertarian favors small, leave-me-alone government. First she shows the obviously coordinated rhetorical echo chamber for the latter and then examples of the hypocrisy: Florida Governor Rick Scott's executive order to force all public workers to take drug tests, Michigan Governor Rick Snyder's financial martial law, Wisconsin's stripping of rights to collectively bargain and several others.

Views: 167

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

You can find some integral reference to this topic via "The political compass" and this IL discussion. I found this excerpt from the latter interesting:

"Broadly speaking, it appears that free-market capitalism promotes individual rights at the expense of the rights and needs of the collective (e.g. human rights) and at the expense of environmental concerns so is therefore somewhat geared toward the dominator hierarchies of premodern enthocentrism and fascism.  This is in spite of being modernist and objective and even postmodernist and pluralistic."

Part of what Maddow was getting at is that conservatives framed their agenda in right libertairan language but it masked their true intentions in authoritarian libertarianism. Their biconceptuals wanted the former but are now turning against the latter and hence if elections were held today those making such changes would not win.

At this link Chomsky discusses the way the term libertarian has been used in the US and what he means by it, since he is a left libertarian socialist in terms of this thread while the US conservatives are right authoritarian that use right libertarian rhetoric.

the term libertarian is used in France only to describe anarchists and not the liberals from the right side.

 A so called regular democrat in the US, called a leftist,  corresponds no more than to a sort of sarkozy fan or a center-right in France.


amazing differences.

at one time at lightmind i had attempted to give a phenomenological description of the semantic differences to be found between political terms used in america and europe, with special focus on the differences between american and canadian political expression. but ya know, people are stupid, and then the gadfly, who thought i was arguing in a normative manner, invaded the discussion and sidetracked it, ruining any clariity i had hoped to bring. i guess some people prefer ignorance, beligerance, and obfuscation. hahahaha

well gadfly

not specially a reference.


That old peace and war forum was a nest of closet fascists. I was so surprised at the beginning that people involved in spiritual studies were on that ideological side. ahhahhah

can´t stop learning in life.

Reply to Discussion


What paths lie ahead for religion and spirituality in the 21st Century? How might the insights of modernity and post-modernity impact and inform humanity's ancient wisdom traditions? How are we to enact, together, new spiritual visions – independently, or within our respective traditions – that can respond adequately to the challenges of our times?

This group is for anyone interested in exploring these questions and tracing out the horizons of an integral post-metaphysical spirituality.

Notice to Visitors

At the moment, this site is at full membership capacity and we are not admitting new members.  We are still getting new membership applications, however, so I am considering upgrading to the next level, which will allow for more members to join.  In the meantime, all discussions are open for viewing and we hope you will read and enjoy the content here.

© 2024   Created by Balder.   Powered by

Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service