The tea party and the politics of paranoia

May 22, 2013 by Peter Kelley
The tea party and the politics of paranoia

Members of tea party claim the movement springs from and promotes basic American conservative principles such as limited government and fiscal responsibility.

But new research by University of Washington Christopher Parker argues that the tea party ideology owes more to the paranoid politics associated with the John Birch Society—and even the infamous Ku Klux Klan—than to traditional American conservatism.

Parker is the author, with fellow UW political scientist Matt Barreto, of a new book titled "Change They Can't Believe In: The Tea Party and Reactionary Politics in America," published this spring by Princeton University Press.

At the heart of their book is a nationwide telephone survey overseen by Parker in early 2011 of 1,500 adults—equal numbers of men and women—across 13 geographically diverse states. The results starkly illustrate where tea partyers and true conservatives part ideological ways.

Responses place tea party members far to the right of the mainstream Republican conservatism of Nelson Rockefeller, , and even George W. Bush—viewing President Obama as a faux citizen, a Muslim and socialist agitator, bent on America's demise.

"Tea party conservatives believe in some conservative principles, to be sure, but they are different from more mainstream conservatives in at least one important respect," Parker said. "True conservatives aren't paranoid; tea party conservatives are."

Asked flat-out if they think President Obama is "destroying the country," only 6 percent of non-tea party conservatives agreed, a number that rose to 36 percent among all conservatives regardless of tea party affiliations. By contrast, 71 percent of self-identified tea party supporters thought this extreme statement true.

"And that's just the tip of the iceberg," said Parker, a UW associate professor of political science. "It's no secret that tea party conservatives view President Obama with such contempt, but I am the first to document it empirically."

Other survey results include:

  • Three-quarters of tea party conservatives said they think President Obama's policies are politically socialist while only 40 percent of non-tea party conservatives held that view.
  • Twenty-seven percent of tea party conservatives said they think President Obama is a practicing Muslim, while 18 percent of non-tea party conservatives took that view.
  • Similarly, 46 percent of non-tea party conservatives allowed that President Obama is a practicing Christian, while only 27 percent of tea party conservatives believed it so.
  • Was President Obama born in the United States? A majority—55 percent—of conservatives allowed that this was true, but of tea party conservatives, only 40 percent agreed.

And perhaps not surprisingly, fully three-quarters—75 percent—of tea partyers said they wish Obama's policies to fail, compared with 32 percent of conservatives.

Parker called the tea party a continuation of what political scientist Richard Hofstadter in the 1960s described as "the paranoid style in American politics," characterized by exaggeration, suspicion and conspiratorial fantasy.

Parker said, "Consider me a skeptic when supporters call upon a conservative tradition to which they have but a slight claim."

Explore further: Veteran employment falls as disability enrollment climbs, study shows

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

The party in your brain

Feb 13, 2013

A team of political scientists and neuroscientists has shown that liberals and conservatives use different parts of the brain when they make risky decisions, and these regions can be used to predict which political party ...

Republicans make up for lost time on social media

Nov 03, 2012

No YouTube channel, no account on photo site Flickr and a measly 5,000 followers on Twitter—in 2008, Republican presidential candidate John McCain had a dismal social media footprint.

Recommended for you

Why are UK teenagers skipping school?

Dec 18, 2014

Analysis of the results of a large-scale survey reveals the extent of truancy in English secondary schools and sheds light on the mental health of the country's teens.

Fewer lectures, more group work

Dec 18, 2014

Professor Cees van der Vleuten from Maastricht University is a Visiting Professor at Wits University who believes that learning should be student centred.

How to teach all students to think critically

Dec 18, 2014

All first year students at the University of Technology Sydney could soon be required to take a compulsory maths course in an attempt to give them some numerical thinking skills. ...

User comments : 122

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Sean_W
2.4 / 5 (23) May 22, 2013
That was disgusting. Is this what it's come down to?
Aryeh_Z
3.4 / 5 (16) May 22, 2013
As someone looking at the US from the outside, I am amazed at the extent people will go to discredit their political opponents. This research reminds me of the saying that there are lies, damned lies and statistics. The use of the veiner of science to discredit a political issue brings disgrace and suspicion on all scientific research.
ryggesogn2
2.4 / 5 (29) May 22, 2013
The tea party was launched when the democrats passed a health care law that no one had read or understood, and that their members of congress refused to discuss with them.
Even the socialist radio talking head doesn't know what the law entails, but he defends it.
For all you socialists, what's wrong with following the Constitution as intended? Federalism, limited govt, minority rights protection, ...?
ryggesogn2
2.3 / 5 (31) May 22, 2013
It is the present socialist regime that is truly paranoid. Why else would they violate the law and attack their enemies in the tea party, and lie about doing so?
"Top IRS official to invoke Fifth Amendment, decline to testify at House hearing

Read more: http://www.foxnew...U2JWLq33
ryggesogn2
2.3 / 5 (31) May 22, 2013
"' paranoid politics associated with the John Birch Society—and even the infamous Ku Klux Klan—than to traditional American conservatism."

The tea parties must be effective. They are now being call 'racist' by the 'liberals'.
That is a sure sign the 'liberals' have no rational challenge to the tea parties.
And we will likely see the same name calling soon on this site.
AWaB
2.8 / 5 (6) May 22, 2013
I have my doubts about the validity of the polling numbers and the conclusion that was reached from them. I've lived in several different parts of the country over the last few years (SE, NE, and NW). Further, I've travelled extensively throughout most of the rest of the country. That being said, a conservative in the northeast or northwest would be considered a middle of the road liberal in the south, midwest, and southwest. I think randomly polling across certain areas of the country probably won't give you a very consistent story no matter what political matter you're investigating.
Thrasymachus
3.4 / 5 (21) May 22, 2013
Oh those poor Tea Partiers. The IRS asked them some questions to verify their eligibility for a tax shelter. And it's clearly a conspiracy against them, since the only organization that was denied their 501c4 application was a liberal one. Of course, most Tea Partiers are barely literate, so being asked to fill out a government form must have caused panic-levels of anxiety. Which was obviously the whole idea.
Czcibor
1.3 / 5 (12) May 22, 2013
BTW the "politics of paranoia" can be interpreted as a "way of critical, i.e. scientific thinking", until it will not overgrow into pathological skepticism, indeed.

I think that's simple - if I agree with them: "it's critical thinking", if I don't agree: "it's paranoia".
:D

I think, that you Americans don't have luck to your presidents - one is a hiding Muslim and communist, while another staged attack on WTC. :D

But the hypocrisy and tendency for schematic thinking is naturally more common between conservatives, rather than liberals.

When I see such claims (or exactly opposite) I can't win with a temptation to ask for scientifically accurate study to back up such claim.
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (22) May 22, 2013
Oh those poor Tea Partiers. The IRS asked them some questions to verify their eligibility for a tax shelter. And it's clearly a conspiracy against them, since the only organization that was denied their 501c4 application was a liberal one. Of course, most Tea Partiers are barely literate, so being asked to fill out a government form must have caused panic-levels of anxiety. Which was obviously the whole idea.

" it was learned that Malik was allowed to submit an application (May 23, 2011) to the IRS, which illegally granted the group's tax deductible status retroactively. According to National Legal and Policy Center, this constitutes "common law fraud and potentially even federal mail fraud.""
http://www.examin...harities
Malik is dear leader's brother.
xX_GT_Xx
3 / 5 (11) May 22, 2013
There have been hundreds of polls that show the same thing. I don't know where this guy gets off claiming he's the first.

The split is not liberal vs conservative but rather rational vs. irrational. Everybody has a little bit of both in them. From a strictly psychological point of view, people are not irrational in general but rather irrational about specific things.

The things hard liberals are irrantional about are fantasy societal ideals that, if true, would be great but aren't realistic. Like if you can't find a job you should get unemployment forever.

Hard conservatives however, which Tea Party types tend to be, are irrational about crazy things. Like the Newtown massacre was faked in order to gin up support for gun control.

There's wrong, and then there's really bizarrely not-living-in-reality wrong. That's the difference.
ryggesogn2
2 / 5 (20) May 22, 2013
Hard conservatives however, which Tea Party types tend to be, are irrational about crazy things. Like the Newtown massacre was faked in order to gin up support for gun control.


Mark Levin is a hard conservative and does not believe Newtown was faked, but he, and others point out, it was quickly used, like all atrocities and tragedies, by 'liberals' to seize more control over the individual.
'Liberals' recently blamed the OK tornado on AGW, for example.
Czcibor
1.9 / 5 (14) May 22, 2013
Hard conservatives however, which Tea Party types tend to be, are irrational about crazy things. Like the Newtown massacre was faked in order to gin up support for gun control.

There's wrong, and then there's really bizarrely not-living-in-reality wrong. That's the difference.
What about WTC being a controlled demolition? You might also try to watch Michael Moore films if you want to check that optimistic idea that in US only right wing is full of people who have lost contact with reality. Or Zeitgeist...
ryggesogn2
2.1 / 5 (18) May 22, 2013
"Even before the name of the shooter was known, a fierce debate spilled out across blogs and social media, with liberal commentators blaming the attack on the violent imagery evoked by some "tea party" candidates and conservatives during the recent midterm elections."
http://articles.l...20110109
"
Brian Ross Aurora Shooting

ABC's Brian Ross got himself into trouble on Friday when he incorrectly suggested there may have been a link between the alleged shooter in the Colorado theater tragedy and the Tea Party."
http://www.huffin...471.html
LEVI506
2.8 / 5 (16) May 23, 2013
"Me thinks thou dust protest to much". The numbers espoused seem to be PFA. The majority of the "Tea Party" folks are mom and pops who had to be able to think, rationalize and live on a budget. They are the back bone of the economy. They pay their taxes without cheating unlike so many in this administration. They don't have the money to waste on galavanting all over the world on vacations or spend millions on golf. You can't blame them when their hard earned money is wasted. You can't blame them if they aren't happy with wasting trillions. They have enough trouble feeding and raising their own families without the government taking and wasting their hard earned dollars. Come to think of it they are what mad this country great. Not the sponges who criticize them. My last question is: WHAT IS A POLITICAL PIECE OF SCAT DOING ON THIS SITE?
alfie_null
3.3 / 5 (10) May 23, 2013
Predictably, people who are aligned with Tea Party views are riled. Still waiting, however, to see any criticism of the process or conclusions, based on the science. For instance: show convincing evidence there was bias.
Doug_Huffman
1.6 / 5 (13) May 23, 2013
Only The Constitution Party represents the conservative American Country Class against the progressive Ruling Class of the demotic, repugnant, and lying Democrats, Republicans and Libertarians. While the TEA aligns with the Republicans, they are progressive and not reactionary!
ryggesogn2
2 / 5 (16) May 23, 2013
Predictably, people who are aligned with Tea Party views are riled. Still waiting, however, to see any criticism of the process or conclusions, based on the science. For instance: show convincing evidence there was bias.

"Matt A. Barreto is associate professor of political science at the University of Washington, Seattle, and director of the Washington Institute for the Study of Ethnicity, Race and Sexuality. He is the author of Ethnic Cues."
A survey of 1500 in only 13 states?
antialias_physorg
3.1 / 5 (10) May 23, 2013
Predictably, people who are aligned with Tea Party views are riled.

You know, as much as I think the Tea Party is comprised of nutters: To an outsider it looks like all US citizens are utterly paranoid (Democrats, Republicans, Tea Party, and even Green/Indy party affiliates)

Much like this discussion about left/right political spectrum in the US seems pretty bizarre to the rest of the world. To us the Democrats seem utter right wing - while the Republicans are right wing extremists (with the Tea Party being already way past the right-wing insanity horizon...and accelerating).

Heck - most any Neonazi party (whichever country you care to look at) seems positively left wing compared to any US politician.
kochevnik
1.9 / 5 (9) May 23, 2013
John Birch society founded by zionists Koch brothers. Lunatics searching for a home after the western branch of the KKK closed in Los Angeles. South California petitioned three times the federal government to divide the state into a slave colony state. Only the arrival of brilliant Russian Jews created storytelling economy which saved California from becoming Dixie

USA populace is thoroughly hypnotized by zionist bankster storytellers. At this point they are completely mailable by FBI casus belli contract killing firms working the Boston false flag. Firm even brags how violence is the best solution. Americans believe it like their mommy told them.

American populace is like the Taliban on steroids with an itchy trigger finger on the nukes and world credit
ryggesogn2
1.9 / 5 (18) May 23, 2013
most any Neonazi party (whichever country you care to look at) seems positively left wing compared to any US politician.

NAZIs ARE left wing socialists.
America was founded by those who were opposed to the tyranny of the state. Whether that state was led by a king, a dictator or a committee.
Tea parties want to return to the spirit and intent of the Constitution that was hijacked by socialists, many from Germany, over 100 years ago.
BTW, how is the 'liberal' tolerance working out regarding Muslim assimilation in Sweden and UK?
'Liberal' Euros have denied their heritage and will suffer under Islam for their apathy.
Claudius
3.3 / 5 (12) May 23, 2013
most any Neonazi party (whichever country you care to look at) seems positively left wing compared to any US politician.

NAZIs ARE left wing socialists.


Actually, you might better say they were right wing socialists. Even better to say right wing collectivists. The real distinction being between belief in collectivism vs. individualism. Just about every political movement is collectivist. The original U.S. government was an attempt to preserve individualism within a collectivist framework. Only worked for a few years, unfortunately. The collectivists won.
ryggesogn2
1.8 / 5 (19) May 23, 2013
right wing socialists.

Socialists can squabble among themselves as to the flavor or color of their socialism.
In the end its all the same, govt control over the individual.
And we see one of the results of such control in London. Brits did nothing to help a soldier being hacked to death in the street. They wait like sheep for the slaughter.
Now they may understand how so many Jews went like sheep to slaughter. They were conditioned by socialism to be dependent upon the state.
Modern 'liberals' promote homosexuality and immorality and they will be the first executed by the Muslims they apologize for.
'Liberalism' is a mental disorder.
ryggesogn2
1.8 / 5 (16) May 23, 2013
"As far as the Tea Party and it sympathizers are concerned, nearly everybody in Washington is a suspect. The Tea Party has found the enemy, and it is the Washington Establishment.

Isn't it ironic that the Tea Party now stands for the rule of law and that elements of the United States government and the Washington establishment have become the rogue, criminal element in America?"
http://www.breitb...ment-GOP
Anyone surprised a publicly funded university supports big govt?
Jimee
2.2 / 5 (5) May 24, 2013
The whole world IS nutters. The middle is strong enough to stay mostly on the side of survival. The fringe on either side is resolute. It only becomes really dangerous when the lunatics on one side outweigh those on the other.
ryggesogn2
1.9 / 5 (14) May 24, 2013
The whole world IS nutters. The middle is strong enough to stay mostly on the side of survival. The fringe on either side is resolute. It only becomes really dangerous when the lunatics on one side outweigh those on the other.

Standing for principles of liberty and prosperity is lunacy?
When good compromises with evil (to the 'middle') evil wins.
ValeriaT
2.4 / 5 (11) May 24, 2013
The Tea Party has found the enemy, and it is the Washington Establishment.
Ironically it was just Bush dynasty, which started the current financial crisis (with Afghan and Iran wars). To support it just means, that the people have shorter memory than some six years.
ryggesogn2
1.9 / 5 (14) May 24, 2013
The Tea Party has found the enemy, and it is the Washington Establishment.
Ironically it was just Bush dynasty, which started the current financial crisis (with Afghan and Iran wars). To support it just means, that the people have shorter memory than some six years.

What Iran war?
Iran attacked the USA while Carter was president.
kochevnik
2.3 / 5 (9) May 24, 2013
The Tea Party has found the enemy, and it is the Washington Establishment.
Ironically it was just Bush dynasty, which started the current financial crisis (with Afghan and Iran wars). To support it just means, that the people have shorter memory than some six years.

What Iran war?
Iran attacked the USA while Carter was president.
I read about it as a child Wasn't that called the battle of Ryggtard?
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (17) May 24, 2013
"A new book out in Germany reveals how President Kennedy was a secret admirer of the Nazis"
http://www.dailym...War.html
FDR also like Fascism. What a surprise, not.
kochevnik
2.3 / 5 (10) May 24, 2013
"A new book out in Germany reveals how President Kennedy was a secret admirer of the Nazis"
http://www.dailym...War.html
FDR also like Fascism. What a surprise, not.
Americans at the time all admired the Nazis, ryggie.
ryggesogn2
2 / 5 (15) May 24, 2013
"A new book out in Germany reveals how President Kennedy was a secret admirer of the Nazis"
http://www.dailym...War.html
FDR also like Fascism. What a surprise, not.
Americans at the time all admired the Nazis, ryggie.

Really?
"By and large, Nagorski gives most of the Americans high marks for their perceptivity and courage about developments in Germany. Despite varying degrees of intelligence and seriousness as individuals, as a whole "these Americans helped their countrymen [at home] begin to understand the nature of Nazi Germany--how it ruthlessly eliminated its political opponents; how it instilled hatred of Jews and anyone else it deemed a member of an inferior race; and how it was preparing its military and its people for a war for global domination," "
http://www.europe...mely-war
Noumenon
1.5 / 5 (31) May 24, 2013
Phys.org thinks that's "research"? Morons.

Predictably, people who are aligned with Tea Party views are riled.

You know, as much as I think the Tea Party is comprised of nutters: To an outsider it looks like all US citizens are utterly paranoid ...
Much like this discussion about left/right political spectrum in the US seems pretty bizarre to the rest of the world. To us the Democrats seem utter right wing - while the Republicans are right wing extremists (with the Tea Party being already way past the right-wing insanity horizon...and accelerating).

Heck - most any Neonazi party (whichever country you care to look at) seems positively left wing compared to any US politician.


You are uninformed, and are the victim of propaganda. You are tossing around "insanity", "extremist", " nutters",... without ever making a substantive or quantitive point. Your last sentence in particular is way over the top, which is a sign of your "extreme" ignorance wrt USA politics.
kochevnik
1.6 / 5 (7) May 25, 2013
"A new book out in Germany reveals how President Kennedy was a secret admirer of the Nazis"

What a load of crap. Nazis were admired for applying eugenics and concentration camps, invented in the USA, to their logical conclusion while the Americans lack the spine to fully carry out their own social policies. Germany was booming after Hitler cut off the banksters and issued a sovereign currency not backed by zionist debt. Rothschilds at the time considered the creation of Israel more pertinent than policing every last state. Unfortunately Jews found Israel inhospitable and returned to Germany, thus violating the Transfer Act hammered out between Hitler and the zionists

Nazis killed a lot of people but they vomited at the sight of the Croats and the Japanese, who took savage delight in massacre and mayhem
ryggesogn2
2 / 5 (13) May 25, 2013
Nazis were admired for applying eugenics and concentration camps,

One of those was Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood.
Why is no one surprised how so many 'scientists' supported eugenics?
Shootist
1.9 / 5 (13) May 25, 2013
Rick Santelli, CNBC reporter, was the genesis of the "tea party".

Most tea partiers were apolitical prior to his "rant". As with anything popular there are hangers-on, however any other explanation is prog hogwash.
Jeddy_Mctedder
2.1 / 5 (9) May 25, 2013
You cannot blame physorg for posting this obvious propoganda that is not even atremting to masquerade as social science. why?

Theyre based in the isle of man tax haven. A place of sane policy yet removed from the urban hearts of the western empire we know as the major financial centers of new york london paris and frankfurt.

Their rax haven status is now squarely in the cross hairs of anti-tax YES anti tax libertarians. As the middle class libertarian movement pushes forward against oppresive taxation and regulation. The fascist government response will require saving face. the tax havens will be pursued by the 'main stream 'fascist socialist' regimes seeking to justify the ever tightening grip of governments over their working classes
Neinsense99
3 / 5 (16) May 25, 2013
Bill Maher's New Rule To Conservatives: "You Act Exactly Like 14-Year-Old Boys"
http://blog.usw.o...ld-boys/
JohnGee
2.5 / 5 (10) May 26, 2013
It's funny how up in arms the tea partiers are over being profiled by the IRS. Hypocrites, all.
Neinsense99
3 / 5 (10) May 26, 2013
Nazis were admired for applying eugenics and concentration camps,

One of those was Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood.
Why is no one surprised how so many 'scientists' supported eugenics?


Cherry pick much?
ValeriaT
2 / 5 (8) May 26, 2013
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (12) May 26, 2013
Nazis were admired for applying eugenics and concentration camps,

One of those was Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood.
Why is no one surprised how so many 'scientists' supported eugenics?


Cherry pick much?

Eugenics was the AGW of its day. Scientists believed they could design humanity to be perfect.
Two contemporary commentaries were HG Wells "The Island of Doctor Moreau" and Brave New World.
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (12) May 26, 2013
It's funny how up in arms the tea partiers are over being profiled by the IRS. Hypocrites, all.

Why? They are trying to follow laws that apply to Media Matters and other 'progressive' groups.
Do you expect tea parties to violate the law like the 'progressive' occupiers? That would be hypocritical.
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (12) May 26, 2013
"Snobs and radicals often act in accord because they are not opposites, as some believe, but rather spiritual cousins - equally despising "the bourgeois," sharing a low view of humanity as herd animals, and sorting people not on their individual merits but by color, income, occupation, ethnicity, gender, and any other characteristic except the content of their minds. "

{Sounds like many here}

"Short of stating it explicitly, elitism implies that "the masses" are mindless, spiritless creatures without free will, always in need of the largesse of the state, and for their own good the state ought to nationalize the country's resources in order to feed its subjects."
http://thepeoples...145.html
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (10) May 26, 2013
I have come to the same conclusions thanks to the many comments on physorg.com.

"The Progressive believes in precisely two things: his own magnificence and the constructive power of brute force. "
"Where the productive man dreams of the things he might create if only left alone by his fellows, the Progressive dreams of the world he could create if only the lives and property of his fellows were at his disposal. "
http://frontpagem...t-out-2/
Howhot
5 / 5 (3) May 27, 2013
The tea party. A plutocracy in the making. So far the US congress has yet to pass anything meaningful but the do love to talk impeachment. Lol. I found this one out there and it cracked me up about the non-issue that was Benghazi.

http://www.bartco...care.jpg

Urgelt
5 / 5 (2) May 27, 2013
Can we agree that 'social surveys' are not science?

Really, they aren't. Applying a gloss of statistics on top of opinions isn't science. Mkay?

I'm not saying that we can't learn something useful from opinion surveys. I am suggesting that PhysOrg isn't the place to read about them.
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (9) May 27, 2013
US congress has yet to pass anything meaningful

The last time Congress passed anything 'meaningful' the US govt took the last step to nationalize the medical industry and have the IRS control everyone's health care.
ryggesogn2
1.8 / 5 (10) May 27, 2013
The tea party. A plutocracy in the making.

So why do so many rich give to the current socialist regime?
Wall Street banks and most lawyers all prefer a socialist regime over free market liberty.
Birger
4 / 5 (5) May 27, 2013
"Responses place tea party members far to the right of the mainstream Republican conservatism of Nelson Rockefeller, Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan and even George W. Bush—viewing President Obama as a faux citizen, a Muslim and socialist agitator, bent on America's demise."

This is hardly news, (but it is nice to have an additional survey).
Even Bob Dole recently spoke out about the surreal politics of the (Tea Party) Republicans in congress.
.
And the Murdoch media (Fox News, Wall Street Journal etc.) panders to the beliefs of this group because Murdoch et al regard them as useful tools.
BTW even our domestic far-right xenophobe party in Sweden (SD) is to the left of the Tea Party crowd.
Joker23
3.6 / 5 (5) May 27, 2013
This subject is not relevant to Physics or science in any way. To attach "science" to a subject like "Social Sciences" is a stretch at best. There are no equations that can be utilized and no laws. "Social Sciences" is statistics applied to opinion many times of subjectively chosen data base to skew the results to the opinion of the author. This article is an insult to your readers and belongs elsewhere and not in a forum for serious scientific articles.
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (9) May 27, 2013
This subject is not relevant to Physics or science in any way. To attach "science" to a subject like "Social Sciences" is a stretch at best. There are no equations that can be utilized and no laws. "Social Sciences" is statistics applied to opinion many times of subjectively chosen data base to skew the results to the opinion of the author. This article is an insult to your readers and belongs elsewhere and not in a forum for serious scientific articles.

It does relate to science in today's socialist world.
"Lysenko was consequently embraced and lionized by the Soviet media propaganda machine. Scientists who promoted Lysenkoism with faked data and destroyed counterevidence were favored with government funding and official recognition and award. Lysenko and his followers and media acolytes responded to critics by impugning their motives, and denouncing them as bourgeois fascists resisting the advance of the new modern Marxism."
http://www.forbes...2013/04/
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (9) May 27, 2013
(cont)
Link:
http://www.forbes...-theory/

This article is relevant to science, but not in the way the authors, or this site, intend.
It is just another example of Lysenkoism and for those who support real science, free from Political Correctness.
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (9) May 27, 2013
far-right xenophobe party in Sweden (SD) is to the left of the Tea Party crowd.

Tea parties understand that immigrants must be taught why the US Constitution is written, what it means and why new emigrants to the US must become Americans first.
Sweden is learning what happens when their 'progressive' chauvinism allows Muslim immigrants to create their own nation funded by Swedish socialism. I suspect most Swedes don't understand why these Muslims are biting the hand that feeds them.
This would be a great opportunity for Swedes and Scandinavians to take a serious look at what their culture is and why was their culture so successful. After all, Scandinavians set up prosperous societies in Russia, Normandy, Iceland, and more recently in the US: MN, WI, SD, ND, ...
HInt: That success was not the result of socialism or a welfare state.
Howhot
5 / 5 (4) May 27, 2013
R2; your extreme rightwinginess is showing loud and clear. Since there are no correct political views except yours, anything that challenges your concepts of *your* idea of government must be wrong. You take the progressive movement as an example. The whole idea of the progressive movement is to build better and more responsive government based on practical solutions that give a voice to the common man. To improve the general welfare, progressives support labor and improving the wages of works to build a strong middle class. We support affordable healthcare for all, and support science and technology, reproductive rights of women, environmental stewardship... etc etc. All of the stuff you hate. If that is what you think is a welfare state; it's 100,000 times better that what your offering.
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (9) May 27, 2013
The whole idea of the progressive movement is to build better and more responsive government based on practical solutions that give a voice to the common man.

And it has failed and will always fail.
So why do you continue to promote socialism?
Einstein defined this as insanity.

What HAS worked and WILL work is what Adam Smith, Bastiat, von Mises, Hayek, Locke and other have defined: a govt enforcing laws that protect private property rights.

But, as Hottie is a 'progressive' chauvinist, he can't trust the 'common' man to look out for himself, to have the intelligence to feed himself, to learn a trade.. without the help of the 'progressives' like Hottie.
We support affordable healthcare for all,

Then why do you want the govt to control it? The only way is to enslave the medical professionals, attacking their property rights.

Read more at: http://phys.org/n...html#jCp
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (9) May 27, 2013
Prime examples of 'progressive' failure Hottie supports are Detroit, California, New York, Chicago, ...and most other 'liberal' states and cities.
Even Sweden has realized they can't tax their way to prosperity and have eliminated their wealth tax hoping to lure wealthy Swedes back and Sweden uses education vouchers allowing parents to send their children to schools they choose.
Coolidge cut taxes and govt spending promoting economic prosperity. JFK and Reagan cut taxes increasing economic prosperity.
But 'progressives' can't tolerate the concept that less govt, less control improves the lives of the people they claim 'need' their help. What conceit!
ValeriaT
1 / 5 (5) May 27, 2013
In the time of economical crisis the nationalist and xenophobic tendencies become apparent, which can be interpreted like the spontaneous symmetry breaking effect during cooling. Even the liberal USA democracy isn't apparently solely immune against it. Just compare it with communistic hippie movement in the times, when the oil was laughably cheap and the USA organized adventurous flights to Moon. The lost Vietnam war had brought the first oil crisis and it ended all of it.
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (9) May 27, 2013
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."
CS Lewis
Also known as the 'progressive' agenda:
"a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims"
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (9) May 27, 2013
"According to the Competitive Enterprise Institute, the number of Code of Federal Regulations pages hit an all-time high of 174,545 last year. The Institute estimates that all that regulation had a cost of $1.8 trillion, roughly equal to the Gross Domestic Product of Canada.

This represents a cost of $14,768 per household. In terms of family budget, the only thing that costs more than red tape is housing.

And things are only getting worse.

In 2010, the government implemented 722 new regulations. In 2011, they implemented 1,010 more, an increase of 40%. And last year, they implemented 1,172 new regulations. Do you see the trend?

That's the result of crony capitalism." {It's also called 'progressivism'.}
http://sovereign-investor.com/

ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (9) May 27, 2013
"It is also a warning of what lies at the end of the road for nations that substitute individualism with any form of collectivism {aka 'progressivism}, no matter what the motives. "
"the conventional notion that the modern Chinese system combines political authoritarianism with economic liberalism is mistaken: A more accurate description of the recipe is dictatorship and cronyism, with the results showing up in rampant corruption, environmental degradation and wide inequalities between the politically well-connected and everyone else."
http://online.wsj..._LEADTop
kochevnik
5 / 5 (4) May 27, 2013
Teabaggers are so stupid they don't even know that the original Boston TEA PARTY was organized to protest the corporatist British East India Company which "assembled its own military and administrative departments, thereby becoming an imperial power in its own right" Modern teabaggers would be at war with the original Boston TEA PARTY. The 1773 Tea Act was something teabaggers would support, for it colluded the government with British East India Company, forcing Americans to buy surplus junk that Europeans wouldn't buy at artificial fixed prices. The teabaggers support corporfascism and crony capitalism
JohnGee
2.1 / 5 (7) May 27, 2013
So why do you continue to promote socialism?
Einstein defined this as insanity.


Ryggesogn, Einstein was a socialist. How do you always manage to miss that important bit of info that is right in front of your face?

http://www.youtub...KRb-aNnM (I chose the cartoon version because I thought it would be easier on you.)

"I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals." -A. Einstein
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (9) May 27, 2013
So Einstein was insane if he expected to obtain results other than tyranny from socialism.

protest the corporatist British East India Company which "assembled its own military and administrative departments, thereby becoming an imperial power in its own right"


The B.E.I.C. was a Royal monopoly or what would be described today as a nationalized industry, which is what you say it is:
corporfascism and crony capitalism

And this is socialism, govt control of private propety. Tea parties were initially formed to protest Obamacare, which is socialist health care.
JohnGee
2.3 / 5 (9) May 27, 2013
So Einstein was insane if he expected to obtain results other than tyranny from socialism.
That was such a furious hand-waving that I felt the breeze through the monitor.

I have no doubt you'll continue to invoke Einstein when it serves your purposes like this conversation never happened.
kochevnik
not rated yet May 27, 2013
protest the corporatist British East India Company which "assembled its own military and administrative departments, thereby becoming an imperial power in its own right"

The B.E.I.C. was a Royal monopoly or what would be described today as a nationalized industry, which is what you say it is:
Far more than a monopoly the BEIC was a government onto itself. This is what all companies seek: to stymy competition and merge with government. There is no free market for as soon as it is set in motion the big fish will swallow the small fish, then find their money best spent colluding with politicians
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (9) May 27, 2013

"Nevertheless, it is necessary to remember that a planned economy is not yet socialism. A planned economy as such may be accompanied by the complete enslavement of the individual. The achievement of socialism requires the solution of some extremely difficult socio-political problems: how is it possible, in view of the far-reaching centralization of political and economic power, to prevent bureaucracy from becoming all-powerful and overweening? How can the rights of the individual be protected and therewith a democratic counterweight to the power of bureaucracy be assured?"
http://monthlyrev...ocialism
Einstein, didn't have an answer for the inevitable govt tyranny.
And planned economies, fail.
JohnGee
2.8 / 5 (11) May 27, 2013
Yet he still supported it, hmmm. Maybe your precepts aren't as airtight as you think they are?

Obviously, according to you, Einstein was insane because he supported socialism. Why are you trying to support your point with the words of an "insane" man that doesn't even agree with you?

I think this is a clear demonstration that the most important aspect of your worldview is never having to admit you are wrong. Literally everything else takes a backseat to that.
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (9) May 27, 2013
This is what all companies seek: to stymy competition and merge with government

Then it is incumbent upon the govt to have limited power so there is no motivation for any individual or company to want to control the govt.
But socialism can't exist with a limited govt. can it?
Bastiat explains it all very well in "The Law", written in 1848.
The few plunder the many, many plunder the few, or no one plunders anyone. The first two are various forms of socialism where the state plunders.
Tea parties have no interest in plundering anyone and demand the govt prevent legal plunder of anyone.
kochevnik
not rated yet May 27, 2013
This is what all companies seek: to stymy competition and merge with government

Then it is incumbent upon the govt to have limited power so there is no motivation for any individual or company to want to control the govt.
The only way to effect that is to limit corporate power, for it is the aggressive maneuvering by companies and robber barons that creates crony capitalism. Most of South America is mired in crony capitalism. Special interest groups receive favors in exchange for political support, which is why most of those countries aren't wealthy.

The UCC commercial law is nothing but Vatican maritime law of the sea. Corporations are created, sanctioned and regulated by the state. By stating your preference for corporations yet disparaging the state, you contradict yourself. That is why nobody takes you seriously on the board
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (9) May 27, 2013
Why are you trying to support your point with the words of an "insane" man that doesn't even agree with you?


Performing the same experiment expecting different results was defined as insane by Einstein.
"The discovery of general laws in the field of economics is made difficult by the circumstance that observed economic phenomena are often affected by many factors which are very hard to evaluate separately."
"Second, socialism is directed towards a social-ethical end. Science, however, cannot create ends and, even less, instill them in human beings; "
"I must try, however, as best I can, although I am very conscious of the fact that our feelings and strivings are often contradictory and obscure and that they cannot be expressed in easy and simple formulas."
http://monthlyrev...ocialism
His support of socialism has no basis in science as Popper also demonstrated.
Observation of socialism shows it continues to fail to increase liberty and prosperity.
JohnGee
2 / 5 (8) May 27, 2013
You didn't answer the question. Try again.

Just to clarify: You brought up Einstein's definition of insanity and applied it to socialism. When told he supports socialism, you use Einstein's own definition to call him insane. (Why would you except an insane person's definition of insanity as valid?)

When asked why you would defend your point with the words of an "insane" man that doesn't agree with you, you dodge the question. I am asking it again. I think at least subconsciously you realize the importance of the question or you would not dodge it so diligently.
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (9) May 27, 2013
Special interest groups receive favors in exchange for political support, which is why most of those countries aren't wealthy.


A govt with limited power can't grant favors.

The FDA in the USA was created and supported at the behest of the five major meat packers of the day to limit their competition.

We now have a Regulatory State that IS out of control thanks to an unlimited govt.
"he vast majority of "laws" governing the United States are not passed by Congress but are issued as regulations, crafted largely by thousands of unnamed, unreachable bureaucrats."
"This rulemaking comes with little accountability. "
http://www.washin...y_2.html
And don't forget the 'sue and settle' racket:
http://www.forbes...-racket/
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (9) May 27, 2013
Why are you trying to support your point with the words of an "insane" man that doesn't even agree with you?


I agree with his definition of insanity. Do you?

JohnGee
2 / 5 (8) May 27, 2013
I wouldn't accept an insane man's definition of insanity that's for sure.

Do you believe Einstein was insane, keeping in mind he advocated socialism?
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (9) May 27, 2013
"The distinction between psychological illness and creative thinking is wafer thin, new Swedish research confirms, arguing that there is a feasible explanation for why the age-old myth of genius bordering on insanity could in fact be true. "
http://www.theloc...0100518/
"judged by modern diagnostic standards, Albert Einstein and Michael Faraday suffered from 'mild' psychopathology, "
http://www.psycho...h-genius
JohnGee
1.9 / 5 (8) May 27, 2013
Adam Smith was an autist, your point?
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (10) May 27, 2013
I wouldn't accept an insane man's definition of insanity that's for sure.

Do you believe Einstein was insane, keeping in mind he advocated socialism?

He was wrong about socialism, sane or insane.
JohnGee
2.3 / 5 (9) May 27, 2013
That wasn't so hard now was it? You actually answered something in an unequivocal way!
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (10) May 27, 2013
I wouldn't accept an insane man's definition of insanity that's for sure.



Do you expect that doing the same thing over and over will produce different results?

JohnGee
2.7 / 5 (11) May 27, 2013
Do you expect that doing the same thing over and over will produce different results?


Obviously in a deterministic system (e.g. controlled experiment) giving the same inputs will result in the same outputs consistently.

The world, especially geopolitics, is not a controlled experiment. For example, republics have failed numerous times over millenia. The Roman Republic failed. Carthage, many Greek City States, and the Indian Republics all failed in ancient times. More recently the Italian republics failed, which the US founders studied intently. Wiemar Germany also comes to mind.

I guess by your definition Jefferson, Washington, et al. were insane for attempting their revolution.
Howhot
5 / 5 (5) May 27, 2013
Quit the dodge maneuver @R2. So far, all you've done is to insult Einstein and claim he's a socialist. You haven't answered @JohnGee's real question yet. All you can do is come up with lame rhetorical questions that just smoke up your real feelings. Just answer the question as succinctly as you can.
Neinsense99
3.2 / 5 (11) May 28, 2013
Ryggesogn2 asks "Do you expect that doing the same thing over and over will produce different results?" Expecting that is one thing, actually doing so by repetitively posting the same debunked talking points and outright falsehoods again and again is even closer to insanity.
ryggesogn2
1.5 / 5 (8) May 28, 2013
I guess by your definition Jefferson, Washington, et al. were insane for attempting their revolution.


No.
The understood the nature of men and understood the nature of government.
They apparently optimistic to believe government could be limited and they knew it would require men with virtue to follow the law set out in the Constitution.
Unfortunately the need of the socialists to control is too great.
BTW, socialism is the modern term for the same type of tyranny proposed by Plato, Thomas Moore's Utopia.
As for Einstein in 1949, I'm sure Stalin appreciated Einstein's plug for communism. Was Eisenstein too ignorant to read Mises' "Socialism" first published in 1922?
After all, he admitted to be no expert in economics so why not refer to experts like Mises or FA Hayek?
And if socialism was so great, why didn't he return to Hitler's socialist Germany?
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (9) May 28, 2013
insult Einstein and claim he's a socialist.

Einstein said he was as a socialist.
The world, especially geopolitics, is not a controlled experiment

I agree and we have over 2000 years of experimental data to observe. Unfortunately, the socialists keep rejecting the observations that state control of the individual always leads to collapse.
Economics is an emergent system, not deterministic. Yet, there are a few basic rules of human nature combined with physical laws that can be studied and synthesized into a cogent, successful theory for humans to prosper.
Smith's "Theory of Moral Sentiments", Mises's "Human Action", Bastiat's "The Law" and "What Is Seen and What Is Not Seen". And the works of John Locke and Charles Montesquieu.
The common theme throughout is that the govt must be limited to protecting the rights and property of individuals.
Those who seek to use govt for their own plunder and power, socialists, reject those works and continue to fail.
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (9) May 28, 2013
Speaking of emergent systems, climate is an emergent system and AGWites believe they can model such a system to predict the climate in 100 years.
This belief in their ability to model an emergent climate model also leaks into modeling human society.
I'm not sure if AGWites were socialists before or after believing in AGW.
I suspect they were socialists before, believing they can use deterministic models to control humans.
JohnGee
2.3 / 5 (9) May 28, 2013
No.
But republics failed in the past. They were doing the same thing that had all ready been done expecting a different result; therefore, they were insane according to your earlier posts. I however think they were brilliant men.
BTW, socialism is the modern term for the same type of tyranny proposed by Plato,
Please provide the quote you are interpreting to mean this. I have a feeling you are taking extreme latitude with definitions as you are wont to do.
As for Einstein in 1949, I'm sure Stalin appreciated Einstein's plug for communism.
Though Lenin and Stalin were both Marxists, neither intended to create a socialist state in the short term. Lenin, as an orthodox Marxist, believed socialism must take place in the most advanced nation, at the time Germany. The USSR was a vanguard state and Lenin specifically eliminated what few socialist institutions existed as a result of the October Revolution. Lenin and to a greater extent Stalin were very far-right Marxists.
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (9) May 28, 2013
But republics failed in the past.

But not because they were republics.
JohnGee
2 / 5 (8) May 28, 2013
So, support of socialism is not de facto support of Lenin, Stalin, Mao, or anyone else you wish to name.
Was Eisenstein too ignorant to read Mises' "Socialism" first published in 1922?
Maybe, he read it an didn't find it compelling?
After all, he admitted to be no expert in economics so why not refer to experts like Mises or FA Hayek?
As you quoted above, Einstein said the world is too complicated and available methods too weak to achieve in economics the kind of success he and others have had in physics. This applies to Hayek and Mises as well. Neither have discovered any laws with the predictive power expected in physics. In fact, no one has.
And if socialism was so great, why didn't he return to Hitler's socialist Germany?
Maybe for the same reason the USSR didn't team up with the Third Reich. They weren't socialists in anything other than name. Hitler told the Germans of the day what they wanted to hear.
JohnGee
2.6 / 5 (10) May 28, 2013
"First they came for the communists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.

Then they came for the socialists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for me,
and there was no one left to speak for me." -Martin Niemöller

Sounds like Hitler had a beef with communists, socialists, and unions.

Unfortunately, the socialists keep rejecting the observations that state control of the individual always leads to collapse.
Libertarian socialism abhors state control. Not all socialism is authoritarian, it's just by far the more common type that has been tried due in large part to the influence of the Bolsheviks.

But not because they were republics.
No true republic.

Those who seek to use govt for their own plunder and power, socialists, reject those works and continue to fail.
Your definition of socialism is backwards and incorrect.
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (9) May 28, 2013
Sounds like Hitler had a beef with communists, socialists, and unions.

It is interesting how socialist regimes don't like each other.
It must be the power sharing part.
Not all socialism is authoritarian,

It must unless every single participant is a volunteer.
In fact, no one has.

Sure they have. Socialists just don't like them.

Socialism is state control of property. The state can be a dictator, a committee, a Constitutional republic and property includes real property and the individual and his labor, intellect and entrepreneurship.
JohnGee
2 / 5 (8) May 28, 2013
Socialism is state control of property.
Socialism is social control of the means of production and no other property that is currently held in private.
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (9) May 28, 2013
Socialism is state control of property.
Socialism is social control of the means of production and no other property that is currently held in private.

That's not how Mises defined socialism in "Socialism" in 1922.
And that is not how Bastiat defined socialism in "The Law".
""Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all. We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain."
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (9) May 28, 2013
Socialism is state control of property.
Socialism is social control of the means of production and no other property that is currently held in private.

So to you, society and govt are the same.
The 'means of production' are private property: land, raw materials, intellectual property, energy, labor, management, etc.
So you agree, socialism is govt control of private property.
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (9) May 28, 2013
Neither have discovered any laws with the predictive power expected in physics. In fact, no one has.


"Reviewing the economic performance—good and bad—
of more than 100 countries over the past 30 years, this
paper finds new empirical evidence supporting the idea
that economic freedom and civil and political liberties are
the root causes of why some countries achieve and sustain
better economic outcomes. :"
"These results tend to support earlier
findings that beyond core functions of government
responsibility—including the protection of liberty
itself—the expansion of the state to provide for various
entitlements, including so-called economic, social, and
cultural rights, may not make people richer in the long
run and may even make them poorer."
Policy Research Working Paper 5660
On the Relevance of Freedom
and Entitlement in Development
New Empirical Evidence (1975–2007)
Jean-Pierre Chauffour
The World Bank
Howhot
5 / 5 (3) May 28, 2013
R2 says;
Einstein said he was as a socialist.
Well there you go again.. with that label like its a bad thing or something. Well here is a mind blower for you. Libertarian-ism is nothing but facist totalitarianism disguised as a movement.
kochevnik
2.7 / 5 (3) May 28, 2013
But republics failed in the past.
But not because they were republics.
Rome fell because it became christian
Howhot
5 / 5 (1) May 28, 2013
My friend R2, who just loves to tag anyone that supports a citizen government a socialist must be off his rocker in the rightwing nut-o-sphere. He throws quote after quote after quote of stuff people have said but nothing of his own views. It's impressive that you dug up a quote from Jean-Pierre Chauffour from The World Bank. But the only point I get is you either support some weird isolationist survivalist form of post apocalyptic self governance or your just one of *them*.

I've wondered and still wonder if the tea party is nothing more a bunch of dejected white people that lost the big election back in 2008. The kind of people that feel they are entitled.to a higher class status. That demographic won't last long.
Thrasymachus
3 / 5 (4) May 28, 2013
He's an unrepentant anarcho-capitalist. He's got this weird belief that markets and property rights precede the laws that define them.
JohnGee
2.3 / 5 (9) May 28, 2013
I think I'm going to read some Noam Chomsky and I suggest anyone tempted to argue with Ryggesogn do the same. It is surely time better spent.
ryggesogn2
1.5 / 5 (8) May 30, 2013
Neither have discovered any laws with the predictive power expected in physics. In fact, no one has.


"Most of the credit, however, must go to capitalism and free trade, for they enable economies to grow—and it was growth, principally, that has eased destitution."
http://www.econom...ould-aim
The 'liberal' Economist states capitalism and free trade, NOT socialist lifted a billion people out of poverty.
ryggesogn2
1.6 / 5 (8) May 30, 2013
But republics failed in the past.
But not because they were republics.
Rome fell because it became christian

Rome's began to fall when it stopped being a Republican and became an empire and had to provide 'bread and circuses' (welfare and TV) to keep the citizen occupied.
"In 46 BC, Caesar won the civil war and was named dictator of Rome. "
I suspect Constantine observed the political power of Christians and 'converted' to keep power.
The Holy Roman Empire then helped to save western civilization for the next 1000 years.
ryggesogn2
1.6 / 5 (7) May 30, 2013
He's an unrepentant anarcho-capitalist. He's got this weird belief that markets and property rights precede the laws that define them.

Markets and property rights DID proceed formal, govt laws.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
"That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed"
Rights existed before the State.
ryggesogn2
1.6 / 5 (7) May 30, 2013
Libertarian-ism is nothing but facist totalitarianism disguised as a movement.

And your supporting data....?
Fascism IS socialism and no libertarian supports socialism or totalitarianism.
ryggesogn2
1.6 / 5 (7) May 30, 2013
Neither have discovered any laws with the predictive power expected in physics. In fact, no one has.


"But the biggest poverty-reduction measure of all is liberalising markets to let poor people get richer. That means freeing trade between countries (Africa is still cruelly punished by tariffs) and within them (China's real great leap forward occurred because it allowed private business to grow). Both India and Africa are crowded with monopolies and restrictive practices."

http://www.econom...ould-aim

Free trade is anti-socialist and traiffs are socialist (govt control of property).
ryggesogn2
1.5 / 5 (8) May 30, 2013
"As Desrochers demonstrates in his research, capitalists' pursuit of profit leads them not only to expand output and lower price but also to seek ways to reduce waste. The result is a cleaner, more efficient economy than government regulation can produce. The historical record is clear: Capitalism creates a powerful slip stream that pulls other societal values along in its wake. Among these is environmental quality."
http://www.forbes...llution/
Oil refiners were dumping waste from their process of making kerosene. Rockefeller, hated waste and found a use for gasoline, among other by-products.
JohnGee
1.9 / 5 (8) May 30, 2013
The Holy Roman Empire then helped to save western civilization for the next 1000 years.

Where did you learn history? Liberty University?
ryggesogn2
1.5 / 5 (8) May 31, 2013
The Holy Roman Empire then helped to save western civilization for the next 1000 years.

Where did you learn history? Liberty University?

Where did you, a 'liberal', mulch-culuteral school that attacks Western Civilization?
" It was in fact the Church that stepped in the vacuum and maintained a modicum of order within a crumbling civilization. As Christopher Dawson aptly writes: "The Church had to undertake the task of introducing the law of the Gospel and the ethics of the Sermon on the Mount among peoples who regarded homicide as the most honorable occupation and vengeance as synonymous with justice.""
"By the establishment of Western monasticism by St. Benedict of Nursia at Montecassino Italy (some fifty miles south of Rome) in 529 AD. St. Benedict's immediate intention was not to do great deeds for European civilization but that was the result."
http://www.metane...lization
ryggesogn2
1.6 / 5 (9) May 31, 2013
"Besides praying and working out their salvation and preaching the gospel, what else did monks pursue in those monasteries? The practical arts, agriculture were two of their most significant enterprises. They literally saved agriculture in Europe. "
"But there was one occupation of the monks which, perhaps more than any other, helped in the preservation of Western Civilization: that of the copying of ancient manuscripts. It begins in the sixth century when a retired Roman senator by the name of Cassiodorus established a monastery at Vivarium in southern Italy and endowed it with a fine library wherein the copying of manuscripts took center stage. Thereafter most monasteries were endowed with so called scriptoria as part of their libraries: those were rooms where ancient literature was transcribed by monks as part of their manual labor."
http://www.metane...lization
Neinsense99
2.1 / 5 (7) May 31, 2013
But republics failed in the past.
But not because they were republics.
Rome fell because it became christian

Rome was sacked centuries before it became Christian, was in decline long before Constantine and the eastern empire lasted many centuries more as a Christian stronghold. As much as I despise the holy rollers, those are facts.
ryggesogn2
1.5 / 5 (8) May 31, 2013
As much as I despise the holy rollers, those are facts.

What gratitude for saving the world for Western Civilization!
Or maybe you prefer Eastern tyranny?
Howhot
5 / 5 (1) Jun 01, 2013
Speaking of R2; @John Gee says;
Where did you learn history? Liberty University?
Lol.
No I bet he was more like homeschooled.

R2 says;
Oil refiners were dumping waste from their process of making kerosene.
They have done a lot more than that. In fact it's not just oil refineries dumping toxins into pristine waters and lands. It's places like Wallmart, the just paid a chump-change $82 million dollar fine for dumping tones of crap chemicals (bleach, paint, oils, acids, cleaners ...) it couldn't sell into the sewers and streams that were convenient. It now is "re-training" it's employees. It's to bad we gave corporations the same rights as people without the responsibility to society or to the social welfare.

ryggesogn2
1.5 / 5 (8) Jun 01, 2013
it's not just oil refineries dumping toxins into pristine waters and lands. It's places like Wallmart


But the most prolific polluters are govts.
Nealy every decommissioned military base has pollution to clean up.
USSR has a 'stellar' environmental record.
And, the city school district of Niagara forced Hooker Chemical to sell Love Canal so the city could build houses and increase the tax base.
kochevnik
3.7 / 5 (3) Jun 01, 2013
it's not just oil refineries dumping toxins into pristine waters and lands. It's places like Wallmart


But the most prolific polluters are govts.
Nealy every decommissioned military base has pollution to clean up.
USSR has a 'stellar' environmental record.

Yet you are the first to advocate every fucking USA war, ryggie. War is the most collectivist action a government can undertake. Can you visualize your own retardation or do you need a mirror?
And, the city school district of Niagara forced Hooker Chemical to sell Love Canal so the city could build houses and increase the tax base.
But that's the FREE MARKET. Are you suggesting a socialist solution?
Howhot
not rated yet Jun 03, 2013
And, the city school district of Niagara forced Hooker Chemical to sell Love Canal so the city could build houses and increase the tax base.

I can't tell how much of that is truth and how much is just rightwing conspiracy legend. I suppose somehow the AGWsareright are supposed to be upset about something that was settled many years ago with huge lawsuits and huge fines and expensive government cleanup. All due to greedy polluting companies.

R2, You say;
But the most prolific polluters are govts.
I would argue that no... it's the consumer. The consumer is the dupe in the middle that makes this profitable for all parties.

Your point about gov is well taken and I can name many examples of extreme environmental damage done by governments. However, governments are beholden to their citizens and will *eventually* do the will of the people or die off. So eventually it comes down to ethics of the citizenry, the knowledge that the citizenry has, and their needs.
Inspector Spacetime
1 / 5 (1) Jun 19, 2013
tj10
1 / 5 (6) Jun 27, 2013
Just curious, but how does leftist news like this relate to the purposes of Phys.org, a science site?

Is this a political organization?

WHy is it that science sites so often are left-leaning?

Perhaps it is a result of the mind evolution gave them? They can't help themselves because they are slaves to the chemical processes occurring in their brains?

I just find it interesting that leftist ideology and science seem to go together so often!

Anyone want to research the evolutionary factors that make that so?

Perhaps a brain mutation afflicts people and turns them into scientists and gives them a liberal perspective?

Perhaps we will find the "leftist" gene some day. Sounds like a great project to me!

It might be hard to narrow down though given the complicated interaction of the genome, the various codes found in it, and the epigenetic code that acts on top of it.

ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (6) Jun 27, 2013
I just find it interesting that leftist ideology and science seem to go together so often!

I suspect it relates to the deterministic process of modern science combined with arrogance.
The Eugenics craze from ~100 years ago illustrates how the scientists of the day wanted to make people better. After all, they had ALL the answers.
Engineers have been around much longer than scientists and have developed a truly more liberal mindset as they have had to make things work without a complete understanding of why. "A Discussion of the Method" by Koen is a good book here.
Hayek discusses how the 'intellectual' tends towards socialism because of arrogance, (they are so much more intelligent), and envy. They have a product few are willing to pay for so they must use coercion (university tenure, public funding) to force others to pay for their work.
Socialists that post here have been consistent to these observations.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (6) Jun 27, 2013
All due to greedy polluting companies.

Hooker Chemical was NOT a greedy polluting company. They knew the hazards of their chemicals an obtained approval by the govt to bury them in the abandoned Love canal.
When the city wanted to build houses on that land, Hooker WARNED them but were forced to sell. They sold it for $1.00. What greed?
The greed was located in the city of Niagra that wanted more land for more houses to expand their tax base. And they forced Hooker to sell Love Canal to them.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (6) Jun 27, 2013
But that's the FREE MARKET. Are you suggesting a socialist solution?

The city of Niagra FORCING Hooker Chemical to sell a toxic waste dump is a FREE MARKET?
Hooker did NOT want to sell and they sold it for $1.00.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (6) Jun 27, 2013
tj:
Written in 1848:
"The claims of these organizers of humanity {scientists} raise another question which I have often asked them and which, so far as I know, they have never answered: If the natural tendencies of mankind are so bad that it is not safe to permit people to be free, how is it that the tendencies of these organizers are always good? Do not the legislators and their appointed agents {scientists} also belong to the human race? Or do they believe that they themselves are made of a finer clay than the rest of mankind? "
"Apparently, then, the legislators and the organizers have received from Heaven an intelligence and virtue that place them beyond and above mankind; if so, let them show their titles to this superiority.

They would be the shepherds over us, their sheep. Certainly such an arrangement presupposes that they {scientists} are naturally superior to the rest of us. "
"The Law", Bastiat
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (5) Jun 29, 2013
WHy is it that science sites so often are left-leaning?

"If warmists had to justify their work to clients with business decision-making interest in their results — instead of needing to keep politically vested true believers at the EPA, anti-progress environmental lobbyists at "public-interest groups," and radical wealth distributionists happy — they wouldn't be influential anymore.

They would have long ago been forced to objectively reexamine their assumptions and to modify their models to explain the lull, or be fired for incompetence and replaced by those performing more reliable work."
http://pjmedia.co...age=true
Just as Hayek and Bastiat noted decades ago.
VendicarE
not rated yet Jun 29, 2013
"The tea party was launched when the democrats passed a health care law" - RyggTard

The U.S. tea party was launched in Jan 2009.

Obama's new health care law wasn't passed through congress until 2010.

Once again RyggTard is caught telling a whopper.

I have never encountered a Randite/Republican/Libertarian or TeaPublican who wasn't a congenital and perpetual liar.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.