The Shotgun Blog
Monday, February 25, 2008
WS Radio: Jonah Goldberg interview
UPDATE: Jonah both links over here from his blog, and calls us eggheads to boot. We'll take that as a compliment.
The discussion ranges from the right definition of "conservatism" (and whether or not what Jonah means by "conservatism" is better described as "libertarianism"), the human rights complaints against Mark Steyn, Maclean's and Ezra Levant, to Jonah's take on Ron Paul (he's sympathetic, but he thinks Paul gets military history wrong, keeps bad company, and should give it a rest already with the goldbuggery), Mike Huckabee (he dislikes his conservative progressivism, and his willingness to use the state to push "heaven on Earth") and John McCain.
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference WS Radio: Jonah Goldberg interview:
It was a great surprise to discover how down-to-earth and laissez-faire Goldberg turned out to be, and consistent and principled in his criticisms of the left and the right. This interview should deal with the concerns of anyone who was upset to see a libertarian talk show interviewing a National Review guy, and is a great example about how you can have political allies you never expected - you don't want to write off a guy just because he's from a particular group or publication.
I'm tearin' up. Group hug?
Posted by: Janet | 2008-02-25 5:08:57 PM
I don't know Janet. I'm leary about inconsistent libertarians.
Posted by: Veteran | 2008-02-25 5:18:03 PM
If we're debating ideas or basing laws on flawed logic, then I'm awfully leery of inconsistency. If we're fighting to stop the spread of the state then I say we need all the allies we can get.
If we started with the biggest problems and worked our way down, I think we'd be in a much better situation than we are now by the time I disagreed with Jonah Goldberg on whether or not taking a particular step would make things better for us.
Posted by: Janet | 2008-02-25 6:06:14 PM
I see your logic, but we could get a tyrant of a different color and end up like the left vs the right. Both have some libertarian elements, but they fail in the big picture. I get the jitters when someone will be a libertarian except for...
Posted by: Veteran | 2008-02-25 6:22:41 PM
Scratch a liberal, find a fascist
Posted by: jukin | 2008-02-25 10:51:38 PM
If libertarians ever want to have any real influence on this country they have to accept an alliance with people who agree with them on basic philosophy and 95% of all of the issues our country is facing today. If somebody agrees that we need to get rid of hundreds of federal programs, privatize Social Security, shrink entitlements, and they are federalist then it is nothing but suicidal and pointless to oppose them because they are merely very libertarian as opposed to a pure libertarian. If we had the common sense to ally with those with libertarian tendencies rather than just pure libertarians we could have 25-50% of the country identifying as libertarians in a fairly short amount of time, but the more strict you make that definition the less moderates, conservatives, and confused liberals we can get to decide they are actually libertarians!
Posted by: Greg | 2008-02-25 11:14:44 PM
If you disagree with Goldberg then write a book and get it published. Otherwise, stay put in your puny intellectual hellhole, no one cares.
Posted by: Doug | 2008-02-25 11:27:16 PM
Erudite interview. Gives me hope that with the passing of William F. Buckley that there is still room for 'eggheads' outside of the progressive academic hegemony. Thank you for making this available.
Posted by: Laura | 2008-02-28 8:50:52 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.