tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4223398383609158624.post8584397921115680271..comments2024-02-24T00:37:43.087-05:00Comments on The Other McCain: Which Is Worse: Anti-Semitism or Protectionism?Robert Stacy McCainhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03084541621503669804noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4223398383609158624.post-63343579600029463032009-08-24T03:40:25.443-04:002009-08-24T03:40:25.443-04:00There you go again Righty64. Why is it “anti-Isra...There you go again Righty64. Why is it “anti-Israel” to be against the Iraq wars or to disagree with AIPAC on some issues? <br /><br />Don’t you realize Righty64, that by terming any disagreement with the policies that you prefer as “anti-Israel” or “anti-Semitic” that you are somewhat (understatement) poisoning the “debate”? In fact, your attitude, imported from the big time Neocons, is to prevent a debate and rational thought by smearing one side or one viewpoint, in this case the one that seeks to limit interventionism. <br /><br />For you information there is a highly respected Israeli scholar, who also happens to be Right wing, named Martin van Creveld who has taken a position similar to Buchanan’s. Yes, Creveld’s position isn’t exactly like Buchanan’s and I’m sure he reject being associated with him, but Creveld has counseled against bombing Iran and is skeptical of the use of conventional military forces against terrorists and in “nation building.” <br /><br />For your further information, it wasn’t Buchanan who started the controversy but the Neocons who you parrot. In 1989, in the Neocon “National Interest” journal, Buchanan put forth a post Cold War foreign policy program that called for American to retrench and focus on the home front. He was attacked by various Neocons, such as Ben Wattenberg (an LBJ aide and Clinton supporter). Buchanan hadn’t dealt with the issue of Israel at all in his essay, but was immediately attacked by Neocons, even though he previously had a good relationship with many of them. The Neocons wanted the USA to ramp up its global interventionism in the wake of the Cold War, rather than tone it down as Buchanan and other traditional conservatives advised. <br /><br />The late great Robert Nisbet advised the same thing in his 1988 Jefferson Lecture (published as “The Present Age: Anarchy and Progress in America”). Nisbet, whose obit was a lengthy essay in the Neocon Weekly Standard, lamented that the USA was caught up in a virtual “100 years war” between 1917 and the end of the Cold War. Russell Kirk, 25 year essayist at National Review and “godfather” of conservatives was against the first Iraq war too, and was Michigan chair of Buchanan for President. There are reasons behind Buchanan’s positions, but all so many can do is parrot the Neocon smears. Truly pathetic.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4223398383609158624.post-55203597915912255722009-08-24T03:15:58.440-04:002009-08-24T03:15:58.440-04:00Here is a list of (just some) countries that have ...Here is a list of (just some) countries that have a border adjusted Value Added Tax (VAT or BAVAT):<br /><br />Canada<br />Mexico<br />European Union (including the UK and Ireland)<br />Japan<br />South Korea<br />India<br /><br />A BAVAT operates like a tariff, except that for domestically manufactured goods that are exported, the VAT is refunded to the manufacturer. So a BAVAT operates to encourage exports and discourage imports even more than a traditional tariff. <br /><br />And the only major developed country in the world without a BAVAT is the good ole USA. Not having a tariff or a BAVAT is the equivalent of unilateral economic disarmament.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4223398383609158624.post-66342938236469413722009-08-24T00:30:59.455-04:002009-08-24T00:30:59.455-04:00OK, my beef with Pat is the tone whenever he start...OK, my beef with Pat is the tone whenever he starts down the road of being anti-Israel. There does seem to be some kind of near conspiracy tone when Pat talks about people being in the AIPAC "amen corner". On this subject, protectionism, Pat is just plain wrong. He might as well be a spokesman for labor union A or whatever. Hey, Pat is a big boy and I think understands when he is critizized for the tone that makes it appear that he is anti-Semitic. And on protectionism, he is out and out wrong.Righty64https://www.blogger.com/profile/09732939643534694274noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4223398383609158624.post-68963216941091220332009-08-23T22:24:21.458-04:002009-08-23T22:24:21.458-04:00Left wing secular movements were responsible for t...Left wing secular movements were responsible for the murder of what, over 100 million people in the Twentieth Century. Does that mean everyone associated with Left wing secularism is to be treated as if they are about to murder 100 million people? <br /><br />There were plenty of people in the period up to World War Two who didn’t approve of unassimilated Jews who also were very opposed to Hitler and Nazism. By today’s loose standard, those anti-Nazis would be labeled “anti-Semites.” <br /><br />When Buchanan argues in favor of economic protectionism, is that a sign of “anti-Semitism”? When Buchanan opposes a “pre-emptive war” (aka a war of aggression) does that make him blood thirsty? The questions answer themselves, at least to any rational, fair minded and honest person. <br /><br />Those hurling nasty smears at Buchanan are other than rational, fair minded and honest.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4223398383609158624.post-6823963320041951452009-08-23T22:05:31.679-04:002009-08-23T22:05:31.679-04:00Trade deficits are very real, as they indicate the...Trade deficits are very real, as they indicate the indebtedness of the nation-state running up the deficit. And that affects the value of the currency of the nation-state running up the debt and failing (or in the case of the USA, refusing) to produce its own goods and services. <br /><br />Beyond that, one cannot be free and be dependent. This truth goes for nation-states even more than it does for individuals. America could be close to self-sufficient if it aimed to be and it should be a goal for America to be as self-sufficient as possible, which is considerably more self-sufficient than we are now. “Free trade” is a Left wing delusion, as any true conservative knows. And most Americans will soon learn to their great regret what being dependent on other nations for manufactured goods means, even aside from the fact of the lack of employment caused by substituting foreign for domestic production. <br /><br />A final two points would be to note that those nation-states (or whose elites) that develop a contempt for making things, for working with one’s hands, don’t last very long. And any “conservative” movement that doesn’t ally itself with the legitimate interests of those folks who do make things don’t really have the right to call themselves “conservative” and certainly won’t get the votes of those who do, or of those who should be so employed.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4223398383609158624.post-64610780762602562112009-08-23T21:56:19.909-04:002009-08-23T21:56:19.909-04:00"I don't even own a banjo -- I understand..."<i>I don't even own a banjo -- I understand the sensitivity about such crude bigotry.</i>"<br /><br />Uh-huh. So what is it you have against banjos?Ranhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04684991557573080262noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4223398383609158624.post-52048165546020442542009-08-23T20:35:46.388-04:002009-08-23T20:35:46.388-04:00Antisemitism has been shown to cause the death and...Antisemitism has been shown to cause the death and suffering of large numbers of people for several thousand years. Fatchickophobia has been shown to cause loneliness and feelings of rejection, at least recently.<br /><br />There is no comparison.Your Correspondent https://www.blogger.com/profile/17440467058108985654noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4223398383609158624.post-10382825532636765662009-08-23T15:14:45.273-04:002009-08-23T15:14:45.273-04:00Not only Hayekian, but Miltonian! (I would say Fri...Not only Hayekian, but Miltonian! (I would say Friedmanian, but I like the sound of Miltonian better.)Steven Givlerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09092840809322567030noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4223398383609158624.post-32120214440576550502009-08-23T14:46:18.348-04:002009-08-23T14:46:18.348-04:00It's amazing that people still worry about &qu...It's amazing that people still worry about "trade deficits" as if they were a grave threat to America or - as you note - as if they even existed.<br /><br />These deficits date back to the mercantilist era, when European trade was primarily in gold and the sovereign was considered the owner of all a nation's gold. Jealous of their gold, governments did not wish to allow their reserves to be depleted by the purchase of foreign goods, so insisted the accounts "balance" between purchases and sales so that their treasuries remained constant.<br /><br />Then, as now, of course, it was a stupid policy which sabotaged economic growth. It does serve one useful function these days: whenever I hear someone raise the issue of "trade deficts" today, I instantly know they are completely ignorant about economic and trade issues.Estragonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10429699109866973316noreply@blogger.com