Author Topic: The Libertarian Temptation  (Read 9446 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

MissusDe

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 221
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
The Libertarian Temptation
« on: November 16, 2008, 06:46:16 PM »
John Derbyshire

A reader who, if not disgruntled, is certainly very far from being gruntled:

    Mr. D ? As a 'young intellectual conservative' mulling over factions in the coming Big Conservative Brouhaha, I'm thinking of jumping the USS GOP in favor of the Libertarian party. 3 quick reasons

        * It's ideologically coherent. Or, at least, built on a strong foundation of promoting individual liberty and, y'know, actually deferring to the Constitution.
        * It's 'cool'. Libertarians are generally viewed as either uncompromising personal freedoms/open market zealots, or in the case of those just looking for a political party that justifies their bad behavior, party animals. Both are preferable to the 'sexually repressed bigoted fundamentalist freakshow' image the Republican party now engenders, thanks largely to the media and, well, Republicans in general lately.
        * Compassionate conservatism sucks. I don't want a holy-roller welfare state any more than I want a degenerate welfare state.

    I'm not under the illusion that we're somehow going to see the end of the two-party system, and of course I take pause with some of the nuttier Libertarian policies, but what on earth is nuttier than Republicans nationalizing swaths of the economy hither and thither?

    Right now, the Republican brand is in shambles, mainly having ignored its own principles. The party that most unabashedly protects those principles I hold paramount ? individual liberties, respect for the Constitution, and free markets ? is the Libertarian party. Either way, I suspect conservatives will be out in the wilderness for a while, and if you're going to be a bear, you might as well be a grizzly.


Hmm. As the parent of two teenagers, I come out in hives when someone tells me something is "cool." As for "sexually repressed bigoted" etc.; I thought Sarah Palin kicked that pretty decisively into the ditch, as an emblem ? I hope she won't mind my saying so ? of happy reproductive vigor in the framework of traditional companionate marriage. And if it's "freakshow" you want, check out some of the lefty blogs. "Fundamentalism" is just American religion, and always with us. It does no great harm that I can see, and some of its strains ? Mormonism, for instance ? are wonderfully encouraging of good citizenship and reproductive success. Libertarianism ought anyway to be able to make some kind of appeal to fundamentalists. Liberty includes tolerance of religious diversity: that is almost the first thing it meant in these United States! Why that wouldn't appeal to religious minorities of all sorts, beats me.

I certainly agree about "compassionate conservatism." I came in for some obloquy on this very blog a few years ago for calling it "turkey poop," but in retrospect I think I was too kind. At least one of its aspects ? the determination to show kindness to poor people by making it easier for them to buy houses, by chucking sane credit standards out the window ? contributed mightily to our current economic mess. And there are certainly people in the GOP who think our error has been that we weren't "compassionate" enough. In fact that is probably George W. Bush's thinking, and John McCain's too. I'd like to see the GOP get its green-eyeshade image back; but alas, green eyeshades in the kind of deep recession we are entering are snowflakes in hell, politically. We must hunker down and look to the future.

For political power ? i.e. for actually getting anything done ? third parties are a poor bet. There's a lot to be said for sticking with the devil you know, and hoping to trim his horns.

Although, if Sarah were to defect to the Libertarian Party ?

[For more on libertarianism, check out my recommendation that libertarians take a leaf from Stalin's book.]

Religious Dick

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1153
  • Drunk, drunk, drunk in the gardens and the graves
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The Libertarian Temptation
« Reply #1 on: November 16, 2008, 07:51:00 PM »
John Derbyshire

A reader who, if not disgruntled, is certainly very far from being gruntled:

    Mr. D ? As a 'young intellectual conservative' mulling over factions in the coming Big Conservative Brouhaha, I'm thinking of jumping the USS GOP in favor of the Libertarian party. 3 quick reasons

        * It's ideologically coherent. Or, at least, built on a strong foundation of promoting individual liberty and, y'know, actually deferring to the Constitution.

Um, yeah, if you don't notice that they keep changing the definition of "individual liberty" to accommodate whatever particular hobby-horse they're riding today.....

The problem is, they never specifically define what they mean by "individual liberty". Absent a useful definition of liberty, I can take any side of an argument and argue it as the "pro-liberty" side. You want to be free of the exploitive capitalists, free of hunger, free of bourgeois cultural oppression? Vote communist!

In the case of the so-called modal, or life-style libertarians, liberty apparently means the  American people are free to have everything they don't want shoved down their throats.

       * It's 'cool'. Libertarians are generally viewed as either uncompromising personal freedoms/open market zealots, or in the case of those just looking for a political party that justifies their bad behavior, party animals.

Remember the New Left? Think of the Libertarians as the New Left, Inc.

Although, if Sarah were to defect to the Libertarian Party ?
Not gonna happen.

[For more on libertarianism, check out my recommendation that libertarians take a leaf from Stalin's book.]

A fine article, and already posted. Derbyshire has it right, of course.

As one wit once put it, the problem with libertarianism is that no libertarian has ever proposed anything that would actually have the consequence of increasing anyone's liberty.

Of course, there are libertarians, and there are libertarians. I'd vote for Ron Paul in a heartbeat. But if you fancy living in the kind of world the Reason and Cato crowd promotes, you might as well just vote for an honest socialist. That would be the practical consequences of their policies, anyway.
I speak of civil, social man under law, and no other.
-Sir Edmund Burke

Universe Prince

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3660
  • Of course liberty isn't safe; but it is good.
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The Libertarian Temptation
« Reply #2 on: November 16, 2008, 07:53:21 PM »
http://www.reason.com/news/show/130054.html
         Moreover, as economist Tim Leonard points out, progressives believed in a "powerful, centralized state, conceiving of government as the best means for promoting the social good," a belief that directly contributed to the widespread progressive support for eugenics, racial collectivism, and various coercive "reforms." Progressive darling Theodore Roosevelt, for instance, held notoriously racist and imperialist views, including the notion of "race suicide," which held that the white race faced the risk of being out bred by its "little brown brothers." He also believed that the 15th Amendment should never have been ratified since the black race, in his words, was "two hundred thousand years behind" the white.

In opposition to all that stood libertarians like Moorfield Storey, the great lawyer and activist who helped found both the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and the Anti-Imperialist League. A proponent of the gold standard and laissez-faire economics, Storey argued and won the NAACP's first victory before the Supreme Court, a 1917 decision that relied on a defense of property rights to squash a residential segregation law.

http://www.reason.com/news/show/130098.html
         Given the Brooks analysis, here's the real problem for the Republicans: The Traditionalist defenders of capitalism wind up out of touch with America and grounded in rhetoric rather than political principle. Meanwhile, Reformers who want to "appeal more to Hispanics, independents and younger voters" have to abandon the small government model and become the conservative wing of the Democratic Party.

None of that spells long term success for Republicans. What the GOP needs are libertarians, those who believe not only in small government, but also in individualism and the truly liberating power of free markets. If the Ron Paul movement tells us anything, it's that the Republican Party can be more than a party of old white guys with bad hair cuts.

[...]

A new conservative movement that takes libertarian ideas seriously could use the inertia created by the nation's new progressivism to slingshot itself into the future on a platform of reduced government, lower taxes, and limited interventionism, while also respecting climate change (adjusting the tax code to encourage green reform without any expense to taxpayers) and reforming the immigration system (opening the borders as the market demands labor without sacrificing security).

The Republican Party has a chance to transform itself into something it has never been: a party of small government based on classical liberal principles. It doesn't have to be one of David Brooks' visions of the GOP. In fact, if the Republican Party wants to return to power it will recognize the flaws in both approaches, avoid them like Road Runner toying with Wile E. Coyote, and embrace libertarianism instead.
Your reality, sir, is lies and balderdash and I'm delighted to say that I have no grasp of it whatsoever.
--Hieronymus Karl Frederick Baron von Munchausen ("The Adventures of Baron Munchausen" [1988])--

Universe Prince

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3660
  • Of course liberty isn't safe; but it is good.
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The Libertarian Temptation
« Reply #3 on: November 16, 2008, 08:17:35 PM »

Um, yeah, if you don't notice that they keep changing the definition of "individual liberty" to accommodate whatever particular hobby-horse they're riding today.....

The problem is, they never specifically define what they mean by "individual liberty". Absent a useful definition of liberty, I can take any side of an argument and argue it as the "pro-liberty" side. You want to be free of the exploitive capitalists, free of hunger, free of bourgeois cultural oppression? Vote communist!

In the case of the so-called modal, or life-style libertarians, liberty apparently means the  American people are free to have everything they don't want shoved down their throats.


Complete nonsense. Do you and Xavier just make up any old nonsense and say this must be libertarianism? Seems like it.


the problem with libertarianism is that no libertarian has ever proposed anything that would actually have the consequence of increasing anyone's liberty.


More nonsense. This sort of dismissive wishful thinking is bogus. This is sort of like saying if we get rid of Prohibition we'll just be giving in to the drunkards and our society will become a nation of drunkards. The general idea is not to make a reasoned argument, but to simply try to scare people into shunning without thinking. Not to mention the fact that the quoted statement above is historically untrue.


But if you fancy living in the kind of world the Reason and Cato crowd promotes, you might as well just vote for an honest socialist. That would be the practical consequences of their policies, anyway.


Yes, because smaller government and increased protection of property rights is (not to any thinking person) indistinguishable from larger government that owns everything. Allowing people liberty, Religious Dick would apparently have you know, is the same as tyranny. "Freedom is slavery" is apparently his message. And given his attempt to scare people into dismissing libertarianism without thought, I can only conclude he also thinks "ignorance is strength". Can "war is peace" be far behind? The one promoting something that looks a lot like socialism is Religious Dick. He's playing a game of misdirection and deception. If he hands you a thick disk of something brown and tells you it's a giant chocolate cookie, it's probably just adult male bovine excrement.
Your reality, sir, is lies and balderdash and I'm delighted to say that I have no grasp of it whatsoever.
--Hieronymus Karl Frederick Baron von Munchausen ("The Adventures of Baron Munchausen" [1988])--

Religious Dick

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1153
  • Drunk, drunk, drunk in the gardens and the graves
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The Libertarian Temptation
« Reply #4 on: November 16, 2008, 08:41:35 PM »

the problem with libertarianism is that no libertarian has ever proposed anything that would actually have the consequence of increasing anyone's liberty.


More nonsense. This sort of dismissive wishful thinking is bogus. This is sort of like saying if we get rid of Prohibition we'll just be giving in to the drunkards and our society will become a nation of drunkards. The general idea is not to make a reasoned argument, but to simply try to scare people into shunning without thinking. Not to mention the fact that the quoted statement above is historically untrue.

Yes, we see....
I speak of civil, social man under law, and no other.
-Sir Edmund Burke

Plane

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26993
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The Libertarian Temptation
« Reply #5 on: November 16, 2008, 10:20:07 PM »
If he hands you a thick disk of something brown and tells you it's a giant chocolate cookie, it's probably just adult male bovine excrement.[/color]


Not a farm boy are you?


Hamilton was an advocate of hard money Jefferson favored easy credit Jackson favored easy credit as did Davy Crocket , Williams Jennings Brian campaigned for decades against the hard money policys of the Republicans.

I don't think this question has gone away , but who exactly is for which position now?

MissusDe

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 221
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The Libertarian Temptation
« Reply #6 on: November 16, 2008, 10:41:28 PM »
Quote
A fine article, and already posted. Derbyshire has it right, of course.

(Just to clarify, that last line - For more on libertarianism, check out my recommendation that libertarians take a leaf from Stalin's book - was from Derbyshire's post, not added by me.)

I doubt I'm the only Republican who is dissatisfied with the options presented by the present two-party menu, and I'd venture to say that a lot of young conservatives would be curious enough to explore what the Libertarians have to offer.  I'm wondering if we've finally reached the point where we're going to see the political arena open up enough for real gains by third party candidates.

I've been reading a lot since the election about how the Republican party needs to redefine itself; that it hasn't done a good enough job in addressing the concerns of the average voter and that it's just plain out of touch. The Republicans got smacked upside the head this time around, and the Libertarians would be crazy not to take advantage of that.  It's a perfect time for them to push hard, get their message out and start building their base for 2012. 

Plane

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26993
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The Libertarian Temptation
« Reply #7 on: November 16, 2008, 10:56:28 PM »
It's a perfect time for them to push hard, get their message out and start building their base for 2012. 

True as far as this , but observe the tight ship that Obama ran to acheive his election, do Libertarians plan and exicute massive organisation like that?

Xavier_Onassis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27916
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The Libertarian Temptation
« Reply #8 on: November 16, 2008, 11:10:57 PM »
I'm all for the Libertarians even quintupling their percentage of the vote.
Not that I think it would happen. When Americans heal that the government will discontinue all the goodies, they will flee like the proverbial rats abandoning the equally proverbial sinking ship. That woul be if they ever were tempted by a government that does nothing to start with.
"Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana."

Religious Dick

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1153
  • Drunk, drunk, drunk in the gardens and the graves
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The Libertarian Temptation
« Reply #9 on: November 16, 2008, 11:24:00 PM »


But if you fancy living in the kind of world the Reason and Cato crowd promotes, you might as well just vote for an honest socialist. That would be the practical consequences of their policies, anyway.


Yes, because smaller government and increased protection of property rights is (not to any thinking person) indistinguishable from larger government that owns everything. Allowing people liberty, Religious Dick would apparently have you know, is the same as tyranny. "Freedom is slavery" is apparently his message. And given his attempt to scare people into dismissing libertarianism without thought, I can only conclude he also thinks "ignorance is strength". Can "war is peace" be far behind? The one promoting something that looks a lot like socialism is Religious Dick. He's playing a game of misdirection and deception. If he hands you a thick disk of something brown and tells you it's a giant chocolate cookie, it's probably just adult male bovine excrement.

Since when are the Pink Hankie Libertarians from Reason in favor of smaller government? Apparently, their objection isn't so much to the government as it is to the nation. When it comes to imposing their particular version of freedom, Ol' Pink Nick and the Gang seem to be perfectly fine with the government.

I notice one freedom they seem to be light on - the freedom of a people to political self-determination. Liberty, as defined by Reason, mostly amounts to unilateral disarmament of normalcy.
I speak of civil, social man under law, and no other.
-Sir Edmund Burke

Xavier_Onassis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27916
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The Libertarian Temptation
« Reply #10 on: November 16, 2008, 11:40:26 PM »
Jennings Brian campaigned for decades against the hard money policys of the Republicans.

I don't think this question has gone away , but who exactly is for which position now?
===================================================
Bryan represented a dwindling rural population that needed easy credit to buy equipment and seed used in the Spring planting. The farm population is now less than 5% of the population, and most of the crops are raised by under 2% of the population. Farmers opposed the deflation of the period between 1865 and 1920, when the dollar was increasing in value. They borrowed cheaper dollars and were forced to not only interested, but also with more costly dollars, in their case this meant that they borrowed what would be to then ten bushels and woud have to be repaid with thirteen. This is why they wanted to reestablish the silver standard: because the country had lots of silver and if silver were honored as money, then they could pay their debts with cheaper dollars. The Republicans were dominated by bankers who favored deflation and the gold standard, at least until 1907.

Silver was monetized under FDR and it became illegal for citizens to own gold other than as jewelery.

By 1932, the dollar had a constant rate of inflation. No major party favors the gold standard (and there is not enough gold in the world to make this work, anyway). No country has a silver standard, either, not since the Bretton Woiods Accords.

So, yes, this particular issue is defunct.


Realtors LOVE it when real estate has a boom, no matter how unjustified it is, and are now bitching about the grotesquely inflated prices of houses declining.

"Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana."

MissusDe

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 221
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The Libertarian Temptation
« Reply #11 on: November 17, 2008, 01:24:29 AM »
Quote
True as far as this , but observe the tight ship that Obama ran to acheive his election, do Libertarians plan and exicute massive organisation like that?

I have a feeling that Obama's campaign will be studied, dissected, and used as a blueprint by all future political hopefuls from now on.  Others might not be able to achieve what he did on the same scale, but there's still plenty to be learned from his campaign's approach and delivery.

Xavier_Onassis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27916
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The Libertarian Temptation
« Reply #12 on: November 17, 2008, 01:45:28 AM »
Most people are agreed that Obama's campaign was the best any candidate has run in many years.

Strangely, most of the McCain supporters in this forum seemed to think that McCain was a better campaigner.

Nothing, as they say, succeeds like success.
"Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana."

BT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16141
    • View Profile
    • DebateGate
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: The Libertarian Temptation
« Reply #13 on: November 17, 2008, 01:49:17 AM »
Quote
Strangely, most of the McCain supporters in this forum seemed to think that McCain was a better campaigner.

I thought McCain ran an uneven campaign.


Xavier_Onassis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27916
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The Libertarian Temptation
« Reply #14 on: November 17, 2008, 01:55:17 AM »
His "suspending" his campaign to buzz off to DC to help with the financial crisis and then unsuspending it was a tad silly. He actually had nothing much to contribute to the plan, and ended up jilting Dave Letterman to appear on another media show, which certainly made him look even sillier.

Obama paid him no mind and prepared to go to the debate and debate an empty podium if necessary.

That was certainly uneven.

It was really unwise to stand up Letterman. I bet no one repeats that.
"Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana."