Republican Jacobins?

From the NYTimes:

Among the Jacobins’ greatest triumphs was their ability to appropriate the rhetoric of patriotism — Le Patriote Français was the title of Brissot’s newspaper — and to promote their political program through a tightly coordinated network of newspapers, political hacks, pamphleteers and political clubs.

Even the Jacobins’ dress distinguished “true patriots”: those who wore badges of patriotism like the liberty cap on their heads, or the cocarde tricolore (a red, white and blue rosette) on their hats or even on their lapels.

Insisting that their partisan views were identical to the national will, believing that only they could save France from apocalyptic destruction, Jacobins could not conceive of legitimate dissent. Political opponents were treasonous, stabbing France and the Revolution in the back.

To defend the nation from its enemies, Jacobins expanded the government’s police powers at the expense of civil liberties, endowing the state with the power to detain, interrogate and imprison suspects without due process. Policies like the mass warrantless searches undertaken in 1792 — “domicilary visits,” they were called — were justified, according to Georges Danton, the Jacobin leader, “when the homeland is in danger.”

I actually think they have this right. But the mistake is restricting this criticism to the Republicans. This Jacobin repression is in the fact the essence of government action, not a perversion of it. Any truly activist government is going to fall into this trap.

Once again, I am not so much worshipful of markets as distrustful of expanding government powers.

(Nod to KL)

"Paultards"?

A very nice offer from the jack-booted thugs at RedState:

So over the last few days, we've been inundated (or is it infested?) with calls to allow Ron Paul supporters to participate here at RedState. We've had others misread Leon's post (with really impressive obtuseness) as a hatred of all lovers of liberty.

But at the same time, no one recognizes more than we do the raw passion that folks have for Ron Paul. The creativity to spot a Zionist conspiracy around every corner has to be worth something, too.

So we decided that yes, new Ron Paul-supporting comments do have a place here at RedState. So starting now - the floodgates are open. Sort of. You may shill for Ron Paul, with one condition: you must do it using the form of Japanese poetry known as Haiku. Failure to comply makes it easy to delete the comments and diaries - so have at it.

Elsewhere on RedState, we learn:

Congressional Democrats have been discovering, after 12 years out of power, that actually governing is a lot harder and less fun than griping from the cheap seats; but as long as George W. Bush is in the White House, they retain a convenient scapegoat for the gap between their rhetoric and reality.

Is it really not a problem for these folks that the 12 years that the Dems were out of power is the same 12 years that the Repubs were IN power? And that in those 12 years the Repubs repudiated every conceivable principle of conservatism?

(Nod to BR, who can write Haikus even WITHOUT Red Bull)

Ed Cone's article

Article by Ed Cone, in today's News and Record.

It raises a number of interesting questions.

Should libertarians advocate "libertopian" policies, as campaign platforms?

I think the answer is no, but reasonable people could certainly disagree.

Harry Browne used to say that the only real libertarian educational policy is the immediate elimination of all taxes. That may be true.

But I am an incrementalist. Any policy that improves choice, and puts more power and responsibility in the hands of the citizens should be supported. How much more choice? How much of a change should we press for? As much as we can get, politically.

I happen to think that a voucher program, one that is funded by the lottery, is our best bet. Keep current spending at its present level, and INCREASE spending with the voucher program.

It's true that government is still involved. I don't see any politically feasible alternative. If I'm wrong, and we can get more, let's go for it. But I expect that we will fall short even of a voucher program, or raising the ceiling on the number of charters.

I got a couple of emails about agreeing that the subsidy to the airline in Greensboro makes sense. Look: the airport in Greensboro is operated by a government authority. It is losing money, fast. First best: sell the airport! Get the government out of that business, let a private company run it if they can.

Not gonna happen, though. So....what? You have two choices: waste even more taxpayer funds on losses, or spend a little on subsidies to reduce the losses. Having the airline move in makes business sense. Having the government run the airport may NOT make business sense, but changing that is not on the table.

Why is this different from Google, or Goodyear? Both of those are private firms, and the government is NOT operating the business. All that is being bought is jobs. In the case of the airport, the government IS running the business. It has to act like a business, and give discounts to some customers.

I really appreciate the ink Ed spends on ballot access. We need to get those signatures, and then (a) get 2 %, and (b) change the law, so we never have to do that again!