pull down to refresh
20 sats \ 22 replies \ @Bell_curve 31 Jul \ parent \ on: Deconstructing Mileinomics econ
Ronald Reagan said the same thing, not exact words but the gist.
The fight for liberty and freedom is never ending.
Only takes one generation for socialists to defeat capitalism and freedom.
Absolutely. It's an eternal truth that freedom is an eternal battle.
reply
"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same."
-- Ronald Reagan
reply
His speeches are the most libertarian stances I have heard from a president after Washington. Reagan is also the only president to have delivered a speech praising the father of our (originally) libertarian constitution, Juan Bautista Alberdi (the one Milei praises and seeks to re-establish):
reply
Amazing speeches, unimpressive administration. He gave a speech in 1964, while campaigning for Barry Goldwater, that is probably the greatest speech I've ever heard.
reply
I fully agree. I appreciate Reagan words, but accompanying such sacred words with such a bad administration had the catastrophic consequence of people associating the bad consequences to the ideas he promoted.
reply
Reagan was great. Memory is selective. People forget how terrible Carter was and the 1970s stagflation and gasoline ⛽️ lines and shortages
Which of Reagan successors have been more impressive? Bush? Clinton? Obama?
reply
Being not as bad as Bush, Clinton, or Obama is not the standard for doing a good job.
reply
Fair enough
edit:
You raise an interesting point: maybe the Revolution led by Newt Gingrich was more impressive
How would you grade Speaker Newt who was backstabbed by his own party in 1998 (fucking idiots/traitors)?
The Carter years were horrible. Reagan changed that. Inflation fell to 5 percent after a decade of double digit inflation. The economy grew by 7 percent in 1983 and 1984 after a decade of stagflation. The Berlin Wall fell in 1989 after he said tear down that wall in his 1987 speech in Berlin. The Cold War ended because the Russians were scared by Star Wars defense initiative. On his first day in office Iran freed the hostages.
He made Americans feel great again and confident about the future. He fixed the crisis of confidence in America
reply
Being not as bad as Carter doesn't mean he lived up to his rhetoric. The budgets were out of control. The military industrial complex metastasized.
The Cold War ended because central planning doesn't work and the Soviet Union collapsed under the weight of their accumulated misallocations.
reply
Spending was high because he increased defense spending which became dangerously low under detente
of course central planning doesn't work and yet it continues no thanks to academia
The end of the Soviet Union has increased support for capitalism and freedom? lol, the opposite
Kamala Harris: equality isn't enough, we need equity and equal outcomes
reply
Viva La Reagan Revolucion!
reply
This is likely why we get generational political cycles. Second and third generations tend to squander their inheritances.
reply
Absolutely. This is why I think that a culture of "indoctrination" on freedom must take place. It's the only way to ensure that the ideas survive those tendencies, while freedom provides the much needed disciplining factor to keep new generations strong. As much as I hate boomers, their fathers, the same, industrious ones that got so much built from nothing, where solely responsible for laying the foundations of the socialist collapse.
reply
I'm not sure that can work. Maybe I'm being overly pessimistic, but I think liberty may only be appreciated by the generation that wins it.
reply
Maybe that could be a more explicit part of the culture, already in place, on earning a living, also understood as earning financial freedom (i.e. non-dependence on a subsidy, specially if it comes from the state). Thus each new generation will earn to appreciate their freedom as they mature in normal life. A reason state-dependence is being seen as "freedom" by the USA youth is because of the rigged economic system the state itself has implemented, making capitalism being seen as an "oppressor", so to fight to earn "true freedom" is understood as state-control. So the problem is not the act of "fighting for freedom" only, as that's something unavoidable in life as you grow and seek financial freedom, but rather to understand correctly who's freeing you and who's oppressing you. That basic compass is reverted 180° in the USA youth, so they attack what makes them free, believing they're fighting for freedom.
reply
I just don't think it would last. Parents want to provide nice lives for their kids. Most just are not going to push hard lessons on them, unless they know first hand how important they are.
reply
I agree but even then, at some point, the kids must face the reality of life. There's an advantage on that regard about the time the youth is expected to start to develop financial freedom, and that's about the pride they held so high at that age, where it's so important to show off. My lil brother was sadly pretty spoiled, yet as he passed his twenties, he started getting increasingly ashamed at not being financially independent, to the point he even moved near the first place where he found a barely decent job, abandoning the comfort of my fathers home. The youth that gets spoiled in a context of abundance is common and does damage, but doesn't drives the needle. Here what caused the needle to spin 180° was the affirmation and unavoidability of financial dependence from the state to survive, via subsidies and state-positions (can't call them "jobs"). Many Argentinian provinces have rates of state-derived income as high as 90%, maintained by the provinces that do work. What's key here is that that scheme wasn't forced in the hard-working provinces, but those very same provinces where the ones who voted for those schemes, out of socialist indoctrination. The provinces that became used and thus dependent on that income degenerated over time into distopic wastelands. Bottom line is that, while accommodated people do play a role, it's not a driving role, and what killed the country was sheer ignorance.
We have to fight socialism aka the enemy continuously
reply
Amen Sr
reply