Sowell Dreams Of Military Coup

[samsonite2100]

[ QUOTE ]
I find it curious how you, pvn, Nielsio and other freedom-loving ACists are so quick to try and make oppression more a left-wing phenomenon. Maybe I am just reading you guys wrong. If so, I'm sorry.

[/ QUOTE ]

Fwiw, I've also noticed that a lot of the ACists here seem to sound republican in non-AC threads. I don't think you're imagining it.

[Borodog]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I find it curious how you, pvn, Nielsio and other freedom-loving ACists are so quick to try and make oppression more a left-wing phenomenon. Maybe I am just reading you guys wrong. If so, I'm sorry.

[/ QUOTE ]

Fwiw, I've also noticed that a lot of the ACists here seem to sound republican in non-AC threads. I don't think you're imagining it.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, the problem is that republicans sound very libertarian.

Until they get into power. Then they act like socialists.

[Copernicus]

[ QUOTE ]


. Govt spending in the last couple decades was greatest under Reagan and Bush II

[/ QUOTE ]

Can you think of a reason or two that spending might have been necessary?

[adios]

[ QUOTE ]
The growth of govt has been spurred on by "national defense and security" more than any other cause ... you are blind if you ignore this.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you look at CBO figures medicare costs have risen nearly as much as defense spending. Also medicare spending is rising steadily as defense spending has leveled off. Admittedly government accounting is "funky" (expensing the Iraq incursion is one example IMO) but to ignore the additional costs of entitlements is disingenuous IMO. Does anyone doubt that the additional costs of social security and medicare will be enormous when the "baby boomers" reach retirement age if nothing changes (not likely that benefits will be pared back anytime soon IMO either)?


[ QUOTE ]
Govt spending in the last couple decades was greatest under Reagan and Bush II ... stop the hypocrisy already.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually spending in the Bush 41 administration easily outpaced spending in the Bush 43 administration (as a percentage of GDP).

But as we all know Congress appropriates the money for the budget so you might find it interesting that after the Republican "revolution" in 1994, when the GOP took control of Congress, spending at the federal level started a steady decline (again as a percentage of GDP) until 2001.

[Kaj]

[ QUOTE ]
But as we all know Congress appropriates the money for the budget so you might find it interesting that after the Republican "revolution" in 1994, when the GOP took control of Congress, spending at the federal level started a steady decline (again as a percentage of GDP) until 2001.

[/ QUOTE ]

Two things to consider:
-- GDP increased as economy boomed fueled by this new internets thingy (so %GDP data will be misleading)
-- The biggest cuts to federal spending over the '90s were to defense spending as the Cold War ended in 1992 and all 3 Services Departments significantly reduced manpower and slashed procurement investment

Brings up one curious phenomenon... (and I don't like Clinton, btw)...

Everything good the govt did in the '90s was the Congress's work, and everything bad was the President's. You want to credit the Congress for reduced spending as %GDP, which came in a big way thru defense cuts. Yet every right-winger I know rails about how Clinton destroyed the military. Who sets Service manpower levels, funds programs, and all defense spending? Congress, of course. Not saying it was against the President's wishes -- it wasn't. And yet today, these manpower, budget, and investment trends have continued for 6 years under a GOP pres & both houses... silence from the right on the state of the military. As soon as Dems got the Congress, you heard all about how they'd destroy the military again. I'll post another day on what the Repubs from 2000-2006 really did to the US military. As a prelude, this war costs us $320M EVERY day ... that's ~3 F-22s EVERY day we could have bought and prepared for the next war. Not only do we lose that money to recapitalize, but we are wearing the remaining systems at an incredible rate. Tanks planned for 500mi/yr are getting 10x that in desrt conditions. The military is a shell of what it was or could have been due to the Repubs. But they know that all thewir followers will continue to see them as the party strong on defense... funny thing, the military budgets are already looking better since election of '06.

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
It took big government intervention such as the Civil Rights Act and Supreme Court cases like Brown by "activist judges" to bring an end to practices like segregation, poll taxes, literacy tests, bans on interacial marriage.

[/ QUOTE ]

And it took government to *start* those practices.

[ QUOTE ]
BTW, we had a Civil War, the "States Righters", Southerners, and rednecks lost. Who resembles that description the most today, the Left or the Right? Honestly. Scoreboard. 1-0!!

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow. Might makes right + ignorant predjudice FTW.

[Copernicus]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It took big government intervention such as the Civil Rights Act and Supreme Court cases like Brown by "activist judges" to bring an end to practices like segregation, poll taxes, literacy tests, bans on interacial marriage.

[/ QUOTE ]

And it took government to *start* those practices.



[/ QUOTE ]

Wrong again. Those were the social norms of the time and had nothing to do with the government.

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It took big government intervention such as the Civil Rights Act and Supreme Court cases like Brown by "activist judges" to bring an end to practices like segregation, poll taxes, literacy tests, bans on interacial marriage.

[/ QUOTE ]

And it took government to *start* those practices.



[/ QUOTE ]

Wrong again. Those were the social norms of the time and had nothing to do with the government.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why were those practices *mandated* by *legislation*, exactly?

[HeavilyArmed]

[ QUOTE ]
... unless they are pre-disposed against Sowell and/or his idealology.


[/ QUOTE ]

Plenty of that to go around here.

Sowell is a perfect target for the left. He brings to light most every single fraud that's foundational for them. And he used to be black*, double whammy.

* joining such other famous ex-blacks like Clarence Thomas, Walter Williams, Shelby Steele, Ward Connerly, Larry Elder and most recently Bill Cosby.

[HeavilyArmed]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But, apparently, what you you really have a problem with is that I used a bit of colorful prose and said Sowell is "lusting" for a military coup. I think it's a relatively appropriate characterization, but I can tone it down a bit. Let's instead say that "Sowell wants a military coup to cleanse perceived moral depravity".

[/ QUOTE ]

"When I see the worsening degeneracy in our politicians, our media, our educators, and our intelligentsia, I can’t help wondering if the day may yet come when the only thing that can save this country is a military coup." - Thomas Sowell

It reads to me as though Sowell might wish for such an event, but it isn't clear that he wishes for it, or that he wishes for it at this point in time. To me it seems mostly as though he is trying to allow for the possibility that if things keep on their present course, a military coup might be the only thing that can "save" this country. While I do disagree with him, I think that is what he is trying to say.

So, I don't think it can firmly be concluded (based upon that quote) that he actually "wants" such a thing, although he might.

I do find his quote perplexing in other ways, such as how would a military coup actually "save" this country from degeneracy? Does Sowell presume the military to be far less compromised by degeneracy, and does he suppose that the great powers a successful military coup would bring to the top brass, would not potentiate corruption?

I also find it rather disturbing that Sowell seems to be suggesting that a military coup might actually be a viable solution to the problem (since I don't see how it could be a viable or acceptable solution). Well, at least he's not a legislator or top general [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

It just occurred to me that perhaps Sowell is not in favor of a military coup at all, either now or in the future, but is instead using hyperbole to illustrate the depths of degeneracy towards which this country's most influential people have slid and are sliding yet still. If so, he should realize that hyperbole is sometimes taken literally (did Sheryl Crowe actually mean that literally about one square? I'm still wondering).



[/ QUOTE ]

If one is a student of history it's reasonably clear that many great societies have progressed to a stage where violent political upheaval was triggered. The trigger is not always the same but solidly among the top two reasons is what I'd call losing your religion (wealth redistribution is neck-and-neck).

There's every reason to think that western society has lost much of it's religion and that loss can't, in America, be made up by lawmakers. We're pretty well screwed.