Friday, August 3, 2012
RNC Chairman Rance Priebus: "We are in a Fight for Freedom": The Limited Freedom that the GOP is Fighting For
Republican Party Chairman Rance Priebus is correct in this sense that the Republican Party is in a fight for freedom. But to listen to him talk about freedom, is much different then to listen to Barry Goldwater's 1964 Republican National Convention speech or his 1960s RNC speech. With the famous line, "that extremism in the defense of liberty, is no vice", which at the time might of sounded extreme. But is actually considered mainstream today, or Ronald Reagan's 1964 A Time for a Choosing Speech, when he endorsed Senator Goldwater for President. What they were arguing for is smaller Limited Government, to protect Individual Freedom, not Economic Freedom or Religious Freedom. Or Political Freedom for Right Wingers but for freedom in general. When Barry Goldwater, Ron Reagan or Ron Paul talk about and argue for freedom, you should take them seriously. Because they are talking about Limited Government, which leads to Individual Freedom, thats what they are arguing for. When today's GOP the Neoconservative Faction in the party talks about freedom, they are talking about Limited Freedom, not Limited Government. What they are argue for without actually admitting it, is that government is too big in some areas but too small in other areas. That we need more freedom here and less freedom there.
Today's Republican Party and there are some exceptions, with the few Classical Conservatives and Libertarians left. Doesn't believe that government is too big but that it spends too much, two different things. Barry Goldwater, Ron Reagan or Ron Paul could not win the Republican Nomination for President today, because they would all be considered to be Liberals. Especially on Social Issues, by the way as a Liberal I love hearing that people who believe in freedom are Liberals. Nice change of pace, instead of being called Socialists or something like that. But Neoconservatives would not be fans of Goldwater, Reagan and especially Paul today, even though they might. Like some of their Economic Policies, because of where they would stand on Social Issues, homosexuality where Goldwater, Reagan or Paul didn't have a problem with it. As far as government should be involved would just be an example of that where they could be considered Liberal.
If you are a Liberal such as myself, a Libertarian or a Conservative, you don't believe in Limited Freedom in as far as how people can live their own lives. You don't believe that government should try to protect people from themselves or tell them how to live their own lives. As long as we are not hurting innocent people, thats not today's Neoconservative GOP, which believed in Limited Freedom. Based on economics and religion.