SELLING AMERICA

Monologue from Paleo Radio dealing with the loss of American values such as production, community, local identity, and national independence.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• Pat
• Buchanan
• Ron
• Paul
• Lou
• Dobbs
• free
• trade
• protectionism
• isolationism
• economic
• nationalism
• populism
• paleocrat

[pairunoyd]

America was made for ME.

Dude, you promote Americanism by living it, not by restricting it - freedom. Anything that can help us share our freedom in ways such as economic trade, is going to do more to preserve Americanism than implosion.

I also believe in man as an economic benefit and not as a liability. Some like to carry on about overpopulation, pollution, etc and always present each additional human living on the planet as something to loathe. I think 'national view' (like, 'world view?)

[pairunoyd]

restart last sentence: I think your 'national view' (like 'world view'?) is tainted w/ some of this, 'man as liability' rhetoric. I think you need to concentrate on the pluses of man just a little bit more. lol

[paleocrat]

I see the pluses in man. But I am not naive to believe that man is an island or that nations are merely creedal constructions. I think that free trade has degraded man. I think it has torn at the heart of what was once great about America. I think that economists tend to minimize man to an economic unit rather than a citizen, and reduce the nation to a market. The impact this has on our view of man and the culture our forefathers passed on to us cannot be stressed enough.

[paleocrat]

If by restricting Americanism you mean conserving Americanism, then you got me. I most certainly want to conserve various elements of American history and culture. This is what makes me a conservative rather than a deconstructionist or libertarian.

Man is an economic benefit, and I don't loath large populations. My being a Catholic and wishing to contribute to a vibrant population proves as much. But men, history, culture, and values are bigger than the market. Economy is for man, not reverse.

[labulldog5]

My hero, the elitist, monopoly-loving, unpatriotic, culture-hating man called Milton Friedman, is perhaps the most influential figure of the 20th century when it comes to trade, and he's no Austrian. You're right that it would be a big difference if we had a static job market, which is a popular but wrong assumption. Otherwise, foreign labor & capital has same implications. The way to look at int'l trade is to remember the use and value of scarce resources

About 30% done with Pat's book ;)

[paleocrat]

Elitist? Most tend to minimize the importance of jobs like farming, field work, and manufactures.

Unpatriotic? Most don't appear to even shrug at the sacrifice of national independence for global interdependence.

Culture? Most could care less, unless it involves hot-button political issues.

Monopoly-loving? Most wouldn't shed a tear for the dozens of local stores shut down to the construction of Wally's World.

KEY: This isn't absolute; hence, my use of "many" and "most."

[CoCC4America]

Wrong. Read The Paleo Conservatist.

[AzraelsJudgement]

Our current system is deffinitely unfair trade, but I am not quite sure on the best course of action we should take.

[paleocrat]

The fact that you use this argument even after I dealt with it is interesting. The difference was that these advancements were evolutionary from within. These changes opened up new jobs for them in higher fields, here in the States.

This is a far cry from outsourcing and offshoring. These jobs aren't taken by other jobs that require workers to build and maintain the things that replace them. No, what replaces them is a cheap labor markets made up of foreign laborers.

Big difference here.

[paleocrat]

George Washington didn't believe in trade? Alexander Hamilton didn't believe in trade? Abraham Lincoln didn't believe in Trade? TR didn't believe in trade? Adam Smith didn't believe in trade? Ah, nobody believed in trade until the Austrian atheists figured it out.

We had trade under the economic system under these men, and I endorse nothing other than the general principles they advanced.

Your comment is a straw-man. You're better than this.