The Framer's Coup - Video

[honorentheos]

One more reason to turn off the filter. I see Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez as A o C without the spaces.

[honorentheos]

They say that the founding fathers believed in liberty, not democracy.

One additional thought is the difference between referring to the founding fathers and the framers of the Constitution, the latter being a subset of the former. One name that comes to mind who would fit their description is Patrick Henry, famous for declaring in the second Virginia convention in 1775, "Give me liberty, or give me death!" He was opposed to the Constitution and famously at odds with Jefferson and Madison from the Constitution Convention to the end of his life. His speeches in the Virginia Ratifying Convention were as loaded with claims of liberty being lost as was his most famous speech in 1775. He refused to seek national office, and was more Virginian than American by all accounts.

It doesn't help that this period of time is flattened in our imaginings of it, nor that we think of the founders as heroes and, as such, sharing common cause when they different substantially after the Brits were defeated.

I'd be tempted to ask someone who said this to me which founder they had in mind when they offered that up.

[Res Ipsa]

They say that the founding fathers believed in liberty, not democracy.

One additional thought is the difference between referring to the founding fathers and the framers of the Constitution, the latter being a subset of the former. One name that comes to mind who would fit their description is Patrick Henry, famous for declaring in the second Virginia convention in 1775, "Give me liberty, or give me death!" He was opposed to the Constitution and famously at odds with Jefferson and Madison from the Constitution Convention to the end of his life. His speeches in the Virginia Ratifying Convention were as loaded with claims of liberty being lost as was his most famous speech in 1775. He refused to seek national office, and was more Virginian than American by all accounts.

It doesn't help that this period of time is flattened in our imaginings of it, nor that we think of the founders as heroes and, as such, sharing common cause when they different substantially after the Brits were defeated.

I'd be tempted to ask someone who said this to me which founder they had in mind when they offered that up.

Great point.

[Gadianton]

Great comments Res and honor.

That last comment really sticks out, didn't Trump recently try to say "Give me liberty or give me death!" but he botched it? Lol. It seems like that one may be the impetus but still lacking. Yeah, reading through your other responses I can't pick out what they might be referring to.

source 2)

The second source was a random YouTube 'recommendation' I clicked on about Peter Theil, a billionaire who bankrolls right-wing politics. He's mentioned in talks he's given that he's come to be pro-liberty and anti-democracy. He preaches monopolies and winning by any means necessary. It's clear what he gets out of liberty, the freedom to conquer his enemies, but how does liberty help the average person if he's just using them to secure policies that help his businesses? And that's where democracy is a problem, because if populism fails to secure victories favorable to his businesses in pursuit of monopolies, then we should do away with democracy. It makes zero sense how liberty works as an ideal for a better country, but it makes some sense as to how liberty over democracy makes it better for him personally.

source 1)

The first source was an American guy Will S. worships who peddles Russian propaganda to a relatively large following. He presents himself as an amateur historian, and he does seem to have read a reasonable amount of war history. He sucks, but unlike Will, it's apparent he does have some background to draw from. He made the point that the country was founded on liberty, not democracy. Where he seemed to be going with it was that liberty could be preserved better in an authoritarian regime (??). He provides no reasoning, and he evades questions like, "why don't you live in Russia if it's so much better?" Unlike Theil, Will and his comrades aren't billionaires or connected to anybody politically, and so the idea makes no sense for making the country better, nor granting them personal power. In fact, Dugin's philosophy seems totally against the idea also, if I understand it -- it's a honor to be bridled and used by Putin. But, he don't answer questions, so no idea what it means.

But the clear way it was put "Liberty, not democracy" from both indicates to me there's a common source somewhere. If Prager U doesn't have a soundbyte on it now, we'll see if they do by 2024.

[honorentheos]

When I read the above it strikes me that they are both using "liberty" as a substitute for, "consequence free". I had been wondering why the comments made a pair out of liberty and democracy. Democracy being a means of establishing sovereignty, it makes more sense Source 1 contrasts it with another means - authoritarianism - to claim the latter better produces the results he favors. Of course parties who have the favor of an authoritarian power enjoy greater "freedom" to do whatever they like without consequence so long as they avoid upsetting the authoritarian power.

Likewise, a robber baron is going to advocate for maximum freedom from unwanted consequences over being accountable to any sovereign, whether that be the People's law established in a Constitution, a king, or even looser forms of informal power through collective action.

Interesting. It reminds me of someone who confuses consequence - free speech with freedom of speech, proclaiming any consequence they obtained from their speech they don't like to be censoring. A person has to be a special kind of stupid to think that way, but they are down there nonetheless.