Skip to main content

An except from The True History of Libertarianism in America: A Phony Ideology to Promote a Corporate Agenda written by Mark Ames originally for NSFWCORP:

Every couple of years, mainstream media hacks pretend to have just discovered libertarianism as some sort of radical, new and dynamic force in American politics. It’s a rehash that goes back decades, and hacks love it because it’s easy to write, and because it’s such a non-threatening “radical” politics (unlike radical left politics, which threatens the rich). The latest version involves a summer-long pundit debate in the pages of the New York Times, Reasonmagazine and elsewhere over so-called “libertarian populism.” It doesn’t really matter whose arguments prevail, so long as no one questions where libertarianism came from or why we’re defining libertarianism as anything but a big business public relations campaign, the winner in this debate is Libertarianism.

Pull up libertarianism’s floorboards, look beneath the surface into the big business PR campaign’s early years, and there you’ll start to get a sense of its purpose, its funders, and the PR hucksters who brought the peculiar political strain of American libertarianism into being — beginning with the libertarian movement’s founding father, Milton Friedman. Back in 1950, the House of Representatives held hearings on illegal lobbying activities and exposed both Friedman and the earliest libertarian think-tank outfit as a front for business lobbyists. Those hearings have been largely forgotten, in part because we’re too busy arguing over the finer points of “libertarian populism.” 

Milton Friedman. In his early days, before millions were spent on burnishing his reputation, Friedman worked as a business lobby shill, a propagandist who would say whatever he was paid to say.  That's the story we need to revisit to get to the bottom of the modern American libertarian "movement," to see what it's really all about. We need to take a trip back to the post-war years, and to the largely forgotten Buchanan Committee hearings on illegal lobbying activities, led by a pro-labor Democrat from Pennsylvania, Frank Buchanan.

What the Buchanan Committee discovered was that in 1946, Milton Friedman and his U Chicago cohort George Stigler arranged an under-the-table deal with a Washington lobbying executive to pump out covert propaganda for the national real estate lobby in exchange for a hefty payout, the terms of which were never meant to be released to the public. They also discovered that a lobbying outfit which is today credited by libertarians as the movement’s first think-tank — the Foundation for Economic Education — was itself a big business PR project backed by the largest corporations and lobbying fronts in the country.

It starts just after the end of World War Two, when America’s industrial and financial giants, fattened up from war profits, established a new lobbying front group called the Foundation for Economic Education (FEE) that focused on promoting a new pro-business ideology—which it called “libertarianism”— to supplement other business lobbying groups which focused on specific policies and legislation. […]


Blast from the Past. At Daily Kos on this date in 2012Powerful women took center stage:

As I looked at the faces of women, so many women, on the stage and in the hall at the Democratic National Convention this last week, I cheered through my tears—filled with emotions that are hard to put into words.

Change has been a long time coming. Lest we forget, this year we celebrated the 90th anniversary of the 19th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which gave women in the United States the right to vote.


Tweet of the Day:

OK. George Zimmerman did threaten to shoot his wife. But what about all the black on black instances of domestic abuse!?! - Fox News tonight
@MattBinder



On today's Kagro in the Morning show, Syria's on all our minds today, and as usual we differ from the framing we're offered by the punditry. Greg Dworkin rounds up the home stretch of the NYC elections, the choosing up of sides on Syria, and how Marco Rubio is writing himself out of 2016. CNN on the new hotness in recreational shooting: exploding targets. #GunFAIL in Yellowstone. Thanks, Sen. Coburn! An exploration of the meme that a no vote on Syria in Congress dooms Obama's 2nd term. Discussions of Nicholas Kristof's "Pulling the Curtain Back on Syria," and David Cay Johnston's "Failed Policy — The 401(k) Shrinks In A Growing Economy."



High Impact Posts. Top Comments.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  "Hummingbirds" Blogathon - Day 1 (25+ / 0-)

    There were four diaries posted today by boatsie, Susan Gardner, WarrenS, and TheLittleOne. Please rec and comment in them.

    About our last diarist, TLO™: She is the youngest person ever to post a diary on Daily Kos.  More on her in this comment of mine.  She posted her first one earlier this evening - Hummingbirds: Make the World a Better Place. Please drop by and offer words of encouragement to nine-year old TLO™ in her diary.  

    Thanks for your support.


    TLO™ protesting California’s Prop. 8 at age four.  Photograph from this recent diary by her dad, Glen The Pumber



    "Hummingbirds" Blogathon: September 9-September 13, 2013
    Diary Schedule - All Times Pacific



    This blogathon presents stories about climate impacts and/or solutions that are meaningful to or influence our lives in some way.  More details are in this diary posted by Aji on Sunday, September 8th - Hummingbirds: Announcing This Week's Blogathon on Climate Change Impacts.

    Please use hashtag #Hummingbirds to tweet all diaries posted during the week and feel free to link to your Facebook pages.

    • Monday, September 9

    11:00 am: Hummingbirds: God Gave them Wings ... And Then Took Away the Sky by boatsie.
    1:00 pm: Hummingbirds: They're going to make me lonesome when they go by Susan Gardner.
    3:00 pm: Hummingbirds: A Few Words Between Songs by WarrenS.
    5:00 pm: Hummingbirds: Make the World a Better Place by TheLittleOne.  (Only 9 years old, TLO™ is the youngest diarist in the history of Daily Kos!)

    • Tuesday, September 10

    11:00 am: rb137.
    1:00 pm: VL Baker.
    3:00 pm: John Crapper.
    5:00 pm: rb137.

    • Wednesday, September 11

    11:00 am: Bill Mckibben, Founder of 350.org.
    1:00 pm: James Wells.
    3:00 pm: swidnikk.
    5:00 pm: JaxDem.

    • Thursday, September 12

    11:00 am: Don't Just Sit There DO SOMETHING.
    1:00 pm: Patriot Daily News Clearinghouse.
    3:00 pm: citisven.
    5:00 pm: Kitsap River.

    • Friday, September 13

    05:30 am:: A Siegel.
    11:00 am: Aji.
    1:00 pm: remembrance.
    3:00 pm: peregrine kate.
    5:00 pm: catilinus.

    Our Daily Kos community organizers are Patriot Daily News Clearinghouse, boatsie, rb137, JekyllnHyde, citisven, peregrine kate, John Crapper, Aji, and Kitsap River.


    Please remember to republish these diaries to your Daily Kos Groups.  You can also follow all postings by clicking this link for the Climate Change SOS Blogathon Group. Then, click 'Follow' and that will make all postings show up in 'My Stream' of your Daily Kos page.

    Support Small Business: Shop Kos Katalogue - A Riddle Wrapped in a Mystery Inside an Enigma

    by JekyllnHyde on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 08:30:46 PM PDT

  •  976,173 registered users on dKos now. (16+ / 0-)

    Here are the 10 newest registered users on dKos.  Hope to see their comments and diaries here soon!  (If they're not spammers.)

    Here since 02
    Pablo Bocanegra (user #976,165: already banned)
    Mamanerd
    artadiromeo (user #976,167: spammer)
    therightiswrong99 (user #976,168: already banned)
    costume10
    ameliakatty (user #976,170: spammer)
    jensmolka
    suzlido14 (user #976,172: spammer)
    candicerolling


    And since our society is obsessed with numbers that end in a lot of zeros as milestones, here's a special shoutout to user #976,100: crystalcoral.

    We've added 107 more users in the last two days.  We're no longer being flooded with all those fake users.


    And for your Diary Rescue music pleasure, here's Train's "When I Look to the Sky".

  •  Polls and Democracy (8+ / 0-)
    Dean Rusk: "We're eyeball to eyeball, and I think the other fellow just blinked."---Cuban missile crisis 1962
    Back then, the stakes were thermonuclear annhialtion. On Oct 22, 1962, Kennedy's blockade plan was approved of by 84% of those that had heard of the plan, according to Gallup.

    http://www.gallup.com/...

    Today, so many (including Syria) want to surrender. Not so, the administration. I'm with the President on this one. This one. I'm with him for humanitarian reasons and for our future warriors. Once a bad idea takes hold, it's hell to defeat it, if at all. I'm in the minority.
    Yet, I applaud all the questions. It has been one of the finest examples of democracy in action I've witnessed since Watergate.
    Wonder what the polls will like be in the next few days, especially after tomorrow night. I have no idea.

     

    Betchu REALLY wanna vote, now.

    by franklyn on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 08:35:01 PM PDT

    •  Where Has a Humanitarian Benefit Been Suggested (7+ / 0-)

      plausibly?

      We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

      by Gooserock on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 08:44:39 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Where? All I know is me. (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Jeff Y, The House, MartyM

        I think the dead and future victims just may, possibly, kinda, sorta,  might suggest it.

        Betchu REALLY wanna vote, now.

        by franklyn on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 08:57:42 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  The victims of which side? Both or only one? (6+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          basquebob, Not A Bot, caul, KJG52, JeffW, Brecht

          The rebels are killing civilians too and have been for some time.

          A Maaloula resident said the rebels, many of them sporting beards and shouting God is great, attacked Christian homes and churches shortly after moving into the village overnight.

          "They shot and killed people. I heard gunshots and then I saw three bodies lying in the middle of a street in the old quarters of the village," said the resident, reached by telephone from neighboring Jordan. "So many people fled the village for safety."
          ,,,
          He said the gunmen declined to allow fleeing people to take five dead bodies out of the village with them.

          He said one of the churches, called Demyanos, had been torched and that gunmen stormed into two other churches and robbed them.

          Most of the gunmen are foreigners, he said, adding that he heard different dialects, mainly of Tunisians, Libyans, Moroccans and Chechens.

          Another resident, a Christian man, said he saw militants forcing some Christian residents to convert to Islam. "I saw the militants grabbing five villagers Wednesday and threatening them (saying): 'Either you convert to Islam, or you will be beheaded,'" he said.

          "The law is meant to be my servant and not my master, still less my torturer and my murderer." -- James Baldwin. July 11, 1966.

          by YucatanMan on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 10:19:34 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  And, in McClatchy: (5+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Not A Bot, DeadHead, caul, KJG52, JeffW
          A coalition of Syrian rebel groups that includes members of al Qaida took control of one of the oldest Christian villages in the world on Sunday, raising concern about the potential destruction of ancient shrines and churches.
          ....

          A statement from the Syrian Military Council, the group through which the West funnels aid to more moderate rebel groups, vowed to protect both the sites and “religious minorities” residing in the village.

          ...
          But the military council doesn’t command either the Nusra Front or Ahrar al Sham, and both groups have fought pitched battles with military council-affiliated groups before. Nusra and Ahrar al Sham generally are considered the anti-Assad movement’s most effective and aggressive rebel fighters, making it unclear that the military council would be able to enforce its pledge to protect the area.

          "The law is meant to be my servant and not my master, still less my torturer and my murderer." -- James Baldwin. July 11, 1966.

          by YucatanMan on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 10:25:44 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  You're just full of good news. nt (0+ / 0-)

            Betchu REALLY wanna vote, now.

            by franklyn on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 10:27:30 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  YucatanMan (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            YucatanMan

            You make a point , a point that is hard to miss indeed

            But what is lost at this point is how this all started in Syria , Assad's forces gunning unarmed protesters down ...There are actual people who started all this , and there are actual people just trying to " NOT BE KILLED " by Assad and the gang , certainly you would not begrudge people for doing that ?

            On the American front , The Obama team has failed in "dick cheney fashion "  imo , apparently in obamas world , there has never been a Democrat who could sell a military action that saves people and stops a blood bath

            But maybe all this saber rattling will get both sides in Syria to knock it off

            Beer Drinkers & Hell Raisers

            by Patango on Tue Sep 10, 2013 at 12:07:03 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I agree that Assad is evil and that he started it. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Patango

              However, when we go looking for a "good side," there isn't one to be had.  

              Yes, there are reasonable Syrian leaders of civilians. However, they do not have control of the militias and rebels.  

              I don't know what the answer is, but I definitely think the USA can help insure:

               1)  That all refugees have sufficient shelter, food, water and medical treatment.

               2)  All nations are pressuring hard for peace.

               3)  All nations need to stop supplying arms and ammunition which is dragging out the killing everywhere.

              More than that, should the US bomb, and what will the consequences of our bombing be?  We cannot know, but since some/many of the rebels are intent on their own ethnic/religious cleansing, we should be very cautious.

              We know for sure that our bombs will kill more people. Will they all be Assad's people? Or some of the innocent civilians?

              When there are no good choices, the best choice is the one that does not include bombing.  (just my opinion, it is obvious everyone's mileage varies)

              "The law is meant to be my servant and not my master, still less my torturer and my murderer." -- James Baldwin. July 11, 1966.

              by YucatanMan on Tue Sep 10, 2013 at 09:52:01 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

    •  poll (5+ / 0-)

      I think they will stay the same or get more against. (I am against.)

      And, I also have no idea. ;

    •  I think...and sometimes that gets me in trouble :) (10+ / 0-)

      If we really want to win 'hearts and minds' in Syria (Middle-East) we would start bombing the millions of Syrian refugee's who are living in tent cities right now, with food, household supplies and medical aide.

      And all of it (food, etc.) should have giant pictures of the American flag on the boxes that they're in so that the refugee's would know exactly where they came from.

      ------"Load up on guns, bring your friends. It's fun to lose and to pretend."------- Kurt Cobain

      by Jeff Y on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 09:00:28 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  about Dean Rusk (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Aunt Pat, Not A Bot, caul, KJG52

      Presumably he didn't know that Kennedy had made a back-channels deal to remove missiles from Turkey.  If he had known that, his quote looks bizarre.  As it stands, it looks uninformed.

      Keep praising yourself for your willingness to bomb people for humanitarian reasons.  

    •  Franklyn, it's going to take a whole lot of work (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      YucatanMan, caul, KJG52, JeffW

      to convince me that there is a faction in Syria worthy of our military assistance, and even more work to convince me that bombing the place is going to help the common folks.  Maybe a smart bomb through Assad's breakfast nook window would do the trick, but what comes next?  Installation of a stable government like we did in Iraq and Afghanistan?  Another nutcase Muslim Brotherhood takeover, with help from al Qaeda?  A military coup?  A few more decades of civil war?

      The fact is, nobody on this planet, not President Obama, not a soul in the State Department, and not you or I, has a clue what will happen if and when Assad is gone, and whether the people of Syria will be better or worse off.  On top of that, there is no way to predict possible regional spillover.  I have daughters and granddaughters living easily within range of artillery and missiles from a number of Arab/Muslim/Persian nations that would like nothing better than an excuse to drag Israel into a regional conflict.  No thanks.

      The President, Kerry, and the other newborn warmongers can take this war and shove it.  Folks like you, who obviously are promoting a new war as eagerly as did supporters of Bush and Powell and Rumsfeld, appear to have no clue as to the precariousness of the stability in that part of the world, nor, I assume, do you have kin on the ground.

      I could be wrong.

      Romae in die non combureretur.

      by Not A Bot on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 10:03:54 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Upon rereading my post, (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        caul, JeffW

        I hope it doesn't come across as a personal attack, Franklyn.  It wasn't meant that way.

        Romae in die non combureretur.

        by Not A Bot on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 10:07:58 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Yes, you could certainly be wrong. (0+ / 0-)
        Folks like you, who obviously are promoting a new war as eagerly as did supporters of Bush and Powell and Rumsfeld...
        I'm sorry you feel that way. Feel, as opposed to know.

        Betchu REALLY wanna vote, now.

        by franklyn on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 10:12:19 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  All I know about you is what you've written, (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          franklyn, caul, KJG52

          and that you're named after a fellow who flew kites, and that you somehow seem to believe that bombing Syria is going to make things better for Syrians.  I haven't read your every post, but those I have read offer no indication of proof (or even plausible hope) of positive outcome, nor any explanation of how bombing Syrians is going to help Syrians, nor of what happens after we unseat Assad, if, G-d forbid, we involve ourselves in yet another war.

          I did offer some realistic concerns in my lengthy post above, and you addressed none of them, except with what I think younger folks call "snarky" comments, just as you made the silly ass-u-me comment up yonder.  

          How about discussing your ideas?  How, specifically, will starting a new war in the midst of a civil war help the Syrian people?  How will it, as you mentioned above, be of any assistance to our warriors?  Do you have any idea what happens next in Syria, after we start bombing?  Do you know whether or not there will be spillover?  

          Anything?  Anything at all?  

          Romae in die non combureretur.

          by Not A Bot on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 10:47:02 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Thanks for asking. (0+ / 0-)

            I have called  for the report of the UN to determine if chemical weapons were used prior to action. This was to bring the rest of the world on board on that account. I have no doubt as to the results.
            Next, who had the weapons and who had the motive? Puhleeze. Monumentally less circumstantial evidence has sent men to the death chamber.
            For 88 years this behavior has been outlawed by an entire world. This law has not been adhered to. Because of that, Syria has bucked the system.
            It is time to enforce the law. Because we didn't enforce international law before is not a reason to continue that folly.
            As we all know, an idea, once unleashed, can become eternal. That includes horrific ideas. Ideas like permissible genocide. Ideas to be resisted with all our being.
            What to do?
            We can throw our hands up and accept the seeming fate of it all. Or we can resist.
            The big question is how, of course.
            We can wait on a diplomatic solution. I'm sure Syria would like that.
            Or, we can strike strategically with the military. Go in and hit the weapons, and the weapons development sites.
            Collateral death would assuredly occur. I do not deny that.
            I cannot. Therein lies the sickening dilemma.
            Collateral death, now, or in the future, and yes, including our own military.
            Do you see what the man  so many of have championed is going through? Right now? This minute?
            As far as future involvement, I, myself, would have to be convinced of that in no uncertain terms.
            Let us hope that todays developments render this academic.

            Betchu REALLY wanna vote, now.

            by franklyn on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 11:54:37 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  Personal attacks not warranted. Neither the (4+ / 0-)

        President or Franklyn are warmongers.

        Quite the opposite. Some folks actually respect President Obama, myself included, and are willing to trust he is doing his level best to keep the peace.

        Sometimes that means making hard choices, not to bomb people, but to take out capability for future missile and air attacks of chemical weapons and to send a message to those who would push the limits of use of weapons of mass destruction.

        No easy calls here.  And no need to insult the President or those who give him some respect and support.

        •  Thank you /nt (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Tortmaster

          "I don't love writing, but I love having written" ~ Dorothy Parker // Visit my Handmade Gallery on Zibbet

          by jan4insight on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 11:03:17 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  I didn't call Franklyn a warmonger (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          caul

          I might have lumped him in with supporters of warmongers.  There's a difference.

          My opinions on President Obama and John Kerry are my own -- opinions about politicians are not personal insults, not according to the rules here.  If I believe Obama and Kerry are warmongering, that's just how I see it.  Others see things differently.  Of course, my opinion might have been influenced by the two of them spending several weeks trying to, well, for lack of a better phrase, drum up support for a war that most of this nation and most of the world doesn't believe is warranted.  

          Romae in die non combureretur.

          by Not A Bot on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 11:32:14 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  That you apparently don't ... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            willrob

            ... even consider the possibility that President Obama was, to paraphrase your own terminology, "drumming up support for" peace is quite telling. And now, after talking tough, America seems to have a new ally in the effort to destroy Syria's chemical weapons in Putin's Russia.

            The President had cred built in for his threats based upon his decision to take out bin Laden in Pakistan. He has, at least, seemingly made a believer out of Putin and you.

            Who knows what will happen from here on out, but the table has been set by President Obama for a satisfactory end to a situation many thought was unwinnable. Your opinion to the contrary is noted.
             

            Rand Paul is to civil liberties as the Disney Channel is to subtle and nuanced acting.

            by Tortmaster on Tue Sep 10, 2013 at 12:43:02 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  A ray of hope in Syria? (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Aunt Pat, Jeff Y, LinSea, begone, MartyM

    Chris Hayes talked Syria with Neera Tanden, Sam Stein, and Lara Setrakian.

    Lawrence had on David Axelrod, Howard Dean, Steve Clemons, Keith Ellison, and Nia-Malika Henderson to discuss Syria.

    He then TORE into neocon Norman Podhoretz's op-ed in the Wall Street Journal about Syria, where Podhoretz stupidly brought up even Reverend Wright!

    Clips from Rachel's show are not online yet.

  •  tweet of the day (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Aunt Pat, Jeff Y, Eric Nelson

    Matt Binder is Sam Seder's producer at Majority.fm. Also, tech and occasional fill in show host.

  •  Two things: On libertarianism, I always thought (10+ / 0-)

    that libertarianism was about an unbridled capitalism, with all the stops pulled out.

    Occasionally, you have a "growth movement," like est (now called Landmark, I believe), that in essence tells us that you can screw people if you want to, since we're "all responsible for our own actions," including any perceived "sucker" or "mark," or willing victim. They did it to themselves. Right?
    So you can feel perfectly okay about yourself. So you have basically a very American, Randian creation that nicely dovetails into (or has been created especially for)  a libertarian nation.

    Two: This is the basic Fox response illustrated in that tweet:

    "Look at what Bush did."

    "So what? Look at what Obama did."

    "Answer my charge."

    "Not until you agree with me on Obama."

    "They come, they come To build a wall between us We know they won't win."--Crowded House, "Don't Dream It's Over."

    by Wildthumb on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 08:44:42 PM PDT

    •  I've always thought that libertarianism (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      political mutt

      is about the individual being able to live free of unjust government intrusion. Those who would define libertarianism as unrestrained capitalism should, in my opinion, find a different label for unrestrained capitalism. Maybe "unrestrained capitalism" could work... or perhaps "oligarchy."

      "Have a good time... all the time." -Viv Savage

      by The House on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 10:00:52 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  and, not incidentally, I do not (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Eric Nelson

        recognize corporations as individuals, and do not think anyone should.

        "Have a good time... all the time." -Viv Savage

        by The House on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 10:04:16 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  but what is "unjust government intrusion"? (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        tardis10, Wildthumb, Eric Nelson

        According to Libertarians and the Kochs.....evil government regulations that monitor and protect our clean air and clean drinking water that prevents corporations from making big bucks.
        Waaaaaa!

        "Tax cuts for the 1% create jobs." -- Republicans, HAHAHA - in China

        by MartyM on Tue Sep 10, 2013 at 03:28:33 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  The big issue with Libertarians (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MartyM, Wildthumb

          Is just that. I 'm on board wth a lot of the ideas of it when it comes
          to your body. Not so on board with the economic theory. They never
          adequately address the inequality issues capitalism always produces.

          That being said, I don't quite get the "under the table " quote. Was Freedman not reporting his fees to The IRS?

          •  If they do "address the inequality issues," it's (0+ / 0-)

            usually, "well, some will be rich and some will be poor, and each will be responsible for their economic state." And they might cite "nature" as supporting their ideas. In nature, some creatures win and some creatures lose. Remember the Republican debates? It's sink or swim with a lot of these types. "Liberty" is the issue for them, not "inequality."

            "They come, they come To build a wall between us We know they won't win."--Crowded House, "Don't Dream It's Over."

            by Wildthumb on Tue Sep 10, 2013 at 08:06:30 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  The Comedy act of Wolfowitz and Lieberman (11+ / 0-)

    I just couldn't figure out which one was the ventriloquist and which one was the dummy

    I want 1 less Tiny Coffin, Why Don't You? Support The President's Gun Violence Plan.

    by JML9999 on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 08:46:29 PM PDT

  •  Hayes on Zimmerman (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Jeff Y, JeffW, Lying eyes, caul, MartyM

    Played the 911 tape and talked with Joy Ann Reid.

  •  Libertarianism Has Always Been A Con (15+ / 0-)

    Wealthy patrons pay to hear about schemes to repeal the federal income tax, often involving Georgist tax schemes.

    More recently there is the heavy overlap between Libertarianism and the national conspiracy subculture. This even forced Ron Paul to tell his fans to tone down the talk about "FEMA camps."

    Of course, the conspiracy subculture always put you no more than two mouse clicks from the ultimate CT, Nazism.

    Libertarianism (and survivalism) appeal to Nazis and white supremacists because they have been preparing for an apocalyptic race war for the last 50 years.  The white supremacists believe that Libertarians eliminating the social safety will instantly trigger a national race riot in the cities, which are populated entirely by brown people, Jews, homosexuals, and single mothers, all of whom are being supported by the taxes paid by farmers.

    But the anti-Semitism goes back at least to the 1930s when Jews were considered the real Enemy Within, as I described in this diary:  "The Jewish Problem In America" Libertarianism (1941)

    Men are so necessarily mad, that not to be mad would amount to another form of madness. -Pascal

    by bernardpliers on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 08:54:17 PM PDT

    •  A View of Libertarian Con by Its Own Logic. (10+ / 0-)

      The motto of libertarianism is that we should be free to swing our fist until we reach the point of injuring other peoples' noses.

      But if you pay any attention to the lobbying and messaging of libertarianism, you should soon realize that it's about minimizing the measuring of nose-bruising, while maximizing the freedom of fist-swinging.

      My position is that, at any point of technological development, society's ability to measure nose-bruising was so far advanced compared to society's ability to swing fists, that any ethically honest "libertarianism" at any point in history would have demanded vastly more strict government regulation of fist-swinging than any American era of governance ever gave us. Certainly far more regulation, protection of noses, than we had in our extremist New Deal thru Great Society era.

      We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

      by Gooserock on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 09:11:03 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Giving libertarianism too much credit.. (6+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        basquebob, Patango, 714day, Tortmaster, caul, KJG52

        It's goes beyond range of fist swinging. The regulation barring nose hitting was never part of the plan.

        Extrators steal what is not theirs using infrastructure that they won't pay for and natural resources that they don't morally or truly "legally" own.

         So ethically honest which is inimical to the cause and an oymoron to boot, doesn't concern a group that doesn't stop at hitting noses high or low tech.
        They'll break and kill without compunction if the profit is there - hundreds of years proving that

  •  Stand aside, Rick Astley. (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    RickD, annieli, Eric Nelson, tardis10, Brecht

    You Can't Touch This.  Whatever this is...

    Iraq was a "surgical strike", wasn't it?

    by here4tehbeer on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 08:55:51 PM PDT

  •  Direct Links Between Ron Paul And NeoNazis (13+ / 0-)

    Remember how Ron vanished without a trace from the 2012 primaries?

    http://littlegreenfootballs.com/...

    Anonymous Hacks White Supremacist Site, Finds Direct Links to Ron Paul
    Ron Paul’s connections to neo-Nazis revealed
     Charles Johnson
    Politics • 2/01/12 11:31:47 am • Views: 63,047
    The “anti-fascist” wing of the “Anonymous” hacker group has broken into a website run by the white supremacist American Third Position (A3P), and released a document dump consisting of private forum messages, emails, organizational notes, and other personal information.

    The documents show numerous connections between Republican candidate Ron Paul and these racist Neanderthals; they’re heavily involved in campaigning for Paul, and according to the messages, have held regular meetings with Ron Paul himself: Ron Paul, the American Third Position Party and Stormfront.

    Also revealed: Ron Paul has held meetings with A3P and Nick Griffin, leader of the British National Party — the notorious UK fascist group with neo-Nazi roots.

    Men are so necessarily mad, that not to be mad would amount to another form of madness. -Pascal

    by bernardpliers on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 09:02:36 PM PDT

  •  Lawrence interviews Anthony Weiner. (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    annieli, viral, Jeff Y, MartyM

    And it's already had BuzzFeed calling it "amazing".

    And here's the web-only segment they filmed after the show ended.

  •  Libertarianism, Smibertarianism... (14+ / 0-)

    it all just gives me the willies.

    It was a long time ago, but most of my reactions to it remain the same.

    The hucksterism agenda that Ames highlights is a new dimension to ponder for me, however.

    Not surprising, but nice to see documented.  I also like the point about how it's an easy assignment for a major media outlet to pick up: it meets the needs of a "two sides to every story" kind of world view, very simply with not much extra thought that needs to be put into the analysis beyond that frame.

    Words can sometimes, in moments of grace, attain the quality of deeds. --Elie Wiesel

    by a gilas girl on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 09:15:54 PM PDT

    •  I didn't come here, intending to reply to all your (8+ / 0-)

      comments. All both of them. It just happened.

      I agree with you about the Birth of Libertarianism story. Ugh.

      I kind of liked Libertarianism. I'm more of a progressive/liberal, and would look beyond that to Democratic Socialism for good ideas. But I like to think outside the box, and enjoyed saying that Libertarianism made some good points.

      I can't say that anymore. In any case, the US leans so far to the right, and worship of the rigged free market, that we actually do need a few percent more big government socialism here, and a lot less libertarianism.

      "Every man has a right to utter what he thinks truth" Samuel Johnson

      by Brecht on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 09:54:03 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I've always leaned in the (5+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Brecht, Patango, Tortmaster, MartyM, Just Bob

        progressive direction (even in my early political-ideologically forming years) and thus did the anti-social and hyper-individualistic underpinnings of libertarianism make me wary.

        That hasn't changed as I've gotten older.  My eyes have become more critical of naive progressivism, but I've yet to much that is endearing about libertarianism that I can't also find in another political package that is more progressively oriented.

        Being "not as authoritarian" as right wing politics isn't enough for me.

        But I recognize YMMV on this, so it's all just my personal position.

        ;)

        Words can sometimes, in moments of grace, attain the quality of deeds. --Elie Wiesel

        by a gilas girl on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 09:58:50 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I guess it's the wild lure of Freedom, the same (5+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          a gilas girl, Patango, 714day, MartyM, Just Bob

          thing that made me like the anarchist symbol back in college.

          For decades, like most Americans, I thought Freedom was all about Freedom From; and didn't see how essential or difficult Freedom To was, to attain and share throughout society.

          Structurally, we've been ripping the floorboards from under the poor, and are now jackhammering the foundations of the middle class. So perfect ideals are kind of moot, we just need to rebuild the house.

          If we get to a more equitable culture, then we can work on the social needs/individual freedoms balance. Maybe something more communitarian, to attempt a participatory democracy of 300 million plus, that can actually move forward?

          "Every man has a right to utter what he thinks truth" Samuel Johnson

          by Brecht on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 10:12:23 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Brecht posts (5+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Brecht, 714day, Eric Nelson, Tortmaster, MartyM
        But I like to think outside the box, and enjoyed saying that Libertarianism made some good points.
        Same here , in my youth I heard and read about it here and there , and they would only tell you the wonderful things about it of course , then when I got the opportunity to study and debate it , it was so offensive and full of holes I just scream SNAKE OIL when ever someone tries to sell it

        It does not hold up to any kind of scrutiny , and when you set it next to The U S Constitution , libertarianism does not even qualify as toilet paper

        I am sure  folks have heard this

        Libertarians are people who insist everyone must live a certain way , everyone but THEMSELVES that is , the libertains have every excuse in the world for why THEY can not live up to their own ideals

        i e wall st and the chamber of commerce

        Beer Drinkers & Hell Raisers

        by Patango on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 11:40:10 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Ain't that The American Way? Snake Oil + Sugar. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Patango, 714day

          We are a spoiled teenager. Only these days, 90% of us don't even get to be spoiled.

          1930s - '70s our culture was growing up. But that takes a lot of work, and self-awareness sometimes makes you feel guilty and uncomfortable. So the 1% decided to put USA into retrograde. We have to take our country back.

          "Every man has a right to utter what he thinks truth" Samuel Johnson

          by Brecht on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 11:56:57 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  "Libertarians are Republicans on crack" (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Brecht

          Don't know who coined the phrase, but it fits well.

          "Tax cuts for the 1% create jobs." -- Republicans, HAHAHA - in China

          by MartyM on Tue Sep 10, 2013 at 03:37:03 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  "And Libertarianism does nothing to encourage (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Not A Bot

      a sense of social belonging or mutual responsibility  It seeks, instead, to undermine such an approach." I think the term has been co-opted greatly. And in response to your quote, I think that a Libertarian is not against acting collectively, it's just that he or she wants to be convinced to act collectively, not forced.

      Of course this would never be easy. But in this milieu nothing is.

      "Have a good time... all the time." -Viv Savage

      by The House on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 10:29:49 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I think you nailed it (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Patango, The House

        For any political system to work well, citizens need to believe that they have a responsibility to one another -- no system will work for the benefit of all without acceptance in one form or another that we are all our brother's keepers.  Along with that comes the concept of stewardship of our planet and resources.  Selfishness gets in the way far too often and in the end benefits no one.  But, and this is the catch, it's darned hard to force people to accept some degree of responsibility to the larger society.

           

        Romae in die non combureretur.

        by Not A Bot on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 11:14:43 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Force people? (0+ / 0-)

          Care to rephrase that statement? You sound dangerous with a quote like that.

          •  I'm pretty undangerous (0+ / 0-)

            And there's no need to rephrase.  Expand upon, maybe.  From what little I understand, almost every law (good or not) ever penned by man has been in one way or another an attempt to force people into behavior they wouldn't choose of their own accord.  In a just society, laws are written in an attempt to benefit society as a whole.  I'm not talking religious behavior or anything like that, but simply behavior that places others at least at the level of importance that we accord ourselves.

            That we run stop signs or understate our income on tax returns are symptoms of an innate selfishness that a lot of us don't even bother thinking about.  So, we implement laws in an attempt to force upon our particular civilization better (hopefully) behaviors.

            That's what I meant.  

            Romae in die non combureretur.

            by Not A Bot on Tue Sep 10, 2013 at 07:38:45 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  For your listening pleasure... (6+ / 0-)

    ... on Netroots Radio, The Justice Department: Musique sans Frontieres presents "Victor Jara's Last Poem."

    Player, playlist and other items of interest at the link so you can also roam the Big Orange and beyond.

    Listen to The After Show & The Justice Department on Netroots Radio. Join us on The Porch Tue & Fri at Black Kos, all are welcome!

    by justiceputnam on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 09:18:16 PM PDT

  •  Sad (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Brecht, LinSea, Jeff Y, Eric Nelson, Not A Bot

    small word, looks harmless in the subject line.

    big feeling.  bigger than it's letter count.  potentially overwhelming, in fact.

    don't know that there's an internet/blogging antidote to it.

    Words can sometimes, in moments of grace, attain the quality of deeds. --Elie Wiesel

    by a gilas girl on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 09:21:23 PM PDT

  •  Libertarianism, as a philosophy, (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Jeff Y, Just Bob

    isn't entirely bankrupt, and has some ideals worthy of contemplation.  As a political party, maybe not so much.  Unfortunately, to misquote Ames, when you pry up the floorboards on either of the prevailing political parties in our system, you find the same corporate money flowing through pipes in the cellar.

    It's a result of the darker side of human nature that even high ideals can be twisted by too much self interest (yetzer hara, my folks might call it), which can certainly be said of the corporate libertarianism that Ames describes.

    He's an interesting writer, but has tended toward the sensational in some of his work.  A few crooks, or even a boatload of them, who claim a philosophy as their own don't necessarily negate the good in it.  Maybe I'm reading too much into the opening Ames quote.  It's been a long day.

    Romae in die non combureretur.

    by Not A Bot on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 09:23:15 PM PDT

  •  CDC Addresses Gun Violence (6+ / 0-)

    Hugh Jim Bissellpublished CDC Addresses Gun Violence today, kicking off our policy reporting.

    This summary merely scratches the surface of the IOM/NRC report.  Interested readers can read the entire original report for free, but downloading a copy requires purchase.  In addition, the IOM has prepared a Report Brief, which is free and presents an overview of findings.  Williem Saletan at Slate Magazine has written a nice article highlighting what he thought are the “top ten” take-away points from the IOM/NRC report.
    TThe Daily Kos Firearms Law and Policy group studies actions for reducing firearm deaths and injuries in a manner that is consistent with the current Supreme Court interpretation of the Second Amendment.  We also cover the many positive aspects of gun ownership, including hunting, shooting sports, and self-defense.

     To see our list of original and republished diaries, go to the Firearms Law and Policy diary list. Click on the ♥ or the word Follow next to our group name to add our posts to your stream, and use the link next to the heart to send a message to the group if you have a question or would like to join.

    "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

    by LilithGardener on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 09:26:07 PM PDT

  •  omfg Eagles + Chip Kelly <3 (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Jeff Y, KJG52

    Playcalling! Energy! Defense! Clock management! A running game! Candor during the press conference! Etc!

    What the hell was that formation where they had 3 only linemen (!) and spread everyone else out, holy smokes

    "See? I'm not a racist! I have a black friend!"

    by TheHalfrican on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 09:28:32 PM PDT

  •  why there should be no college degrees in PR (9+ / 0-)

    Uncle Miltie and the Foundation for Economic Education

    Many libertarians have credited Read's effort as one of the bases for the international post-War libertarian movement. For instance, Friedrich Hayek was apparently inspired partly by FEE when he formed the Mont Pelerin Society in 1947.
    Would that more undergrads would read Stuart Ewen's books like Pr!: A Social History Of Spin (1996) before considering this sad path to propaganda production.
    According to Stuart Ewen, we live in an age of "virtual factuality," an Age of Public Relations in which the construction of "reality" has become a diagnostic feature of American life. Examining the evolution of public relations and the relentless filtration of our mental environment, he asks the bedeviling question: "Is there any reality anymore, save the reality of public relations?" This question, and EwenÕs meticulously researched examination of its long-term implications for American society, stand at the heart of this urgent and thought-provoking book.

    PR! presents a gripping picture of the forces and ideas that shaped and influenced the growth of public relations in the twentieth century. In eloquent strokes, Ewen shows how the craft of PR has been employed to steer the "public mind" and has, in the process, distorted the meaning of American democracy.

    Ewen deftly escorts readers through the social conditions that led to PR, the ideas that inspired public relations pioneers, the escalating employment of images as tools of persuasion, the promiscuous advent of consultants, pollsters, "astro-turf" organizers, and other PR specialists. Public relations practitioners of today, along with other readers, will be fascinated by Ewen's account of the patriarchs of modern publicity (Ivy Lee, Edward Bernays, Elmo Roper, and others) and how they masterminded campaigns-some successful, some not-to shape the way America perceived major corporations such as AT&T and Standard Oil of New Jersey (known today as Exxon)...

    How Standard Oil of New Jersey (SONJ) launched a comprehensive public relations program to counteract embarrassing revelations that the company had colluded with the Nazis in the early 1940s.
    How a corporate public relations program provided the vehicle that transformed Ronald Reagan from B-movie actor to President of the United States.

    Warning - some snark may be above‽ (-9.50; -7.03)‽ eState4Column5©2013 "I’m not the strapping young Muslim socialist that I used to be" - Barack Obama 04/27/2013

    by annieli on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 09:29:31 PM PDT

  •  Interesting - at the link (8+ / 0-)

    Every couple of years, mainstream media hacks pretend to have just discovered libertarianism as some sort of radical, new and dynamic force in American politics.
    It’s a rehash that goes back decades, and hacks love it because it’s easy to write, and because it’s such a non-threatening “radical” politics (unlike radical left politics, which threatens the rich). The latest version involves a summer-long pundit debate in the pages of the New York Times, Reason magazine and elsewhere over so-called “libertarian populism.” It doesn’t really matter whose arguments prevail, so long as no one questions where libertarianism came from or why we’re defining libertarianism as anything but a big business public relations campaign, the winner in this debate is Libertarianism.

    Pull up libertarianism’s floorboards, look beneath the surface into the big business PR campaign’s early years, and there you’ll start to get a sense of its purpose, its funders, and the PR hucksters who brought the peculiar political strain of American libertarianism into being — beginning with the libertarian movement’s founding father, Milton Friedman. Back in 1950, the House of Representatives held hearings on illegal lobbying activities and exposed both Friedman and the earliest libertarian think-tank outfit as a front for business lobbyists. Those hearings have been largely forgotten, in part because we’re too busy arguing over the finer points of “libertarian populism.”  

    "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

    by LilithGardener on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 09:30:05 PM PDT

  •  Excellent: FEE an education that "little people".. (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Tortmaster, KJG52, tardis10, JeffW, Just Bob

    ..need not concern themselves with learning...

    FEE -

    Foundation for Economic Education — was itself a big business PR project backed by the largest corporations and lobbying fronts in the country.
    ..Or couldn't possbly understand the lofty goals of the titans of business and industry (F.I.R.E et al.)
    Leonard Read, the legendary (among libertarians) founder/head of the FEE, argued that the public should not be allowed to know which corporations donated to his libertarian front-group because, he argued, the public could not be trusted to make “sound judgments” with disclosed information:
    "The public reporting would present a single fact—the amount of a contributor’s donation—to casual readers, persons having only a cursory interest in the matter at issue, persons who would not and perhaps could not possess all the facts.

    These folks of the so-called public thus receive only oversimplifications or half-truths from which only erroneous conclusions are almost certain to be drawn.

     If there is a public interest in the rightness or wrongness of corporate or personal donations to charitable, religious or education institutions, and I am not at all ready to concede that there is...,


     - emphasis added
    That is rich. Blaming us for what they the corporatists do - propaganda  - "Oversimplification or half truths"
    ..........................

    Something I've been trying to start as a new meme:

    We Dems must avoid or stop describing the GOP agenda and/or libertarianism or "movement conservatism" as an "ideology".

    It just is not.

    It's an advertizing coup. A myth that has been debunked many times over yet the language remains in use  

    We use "ideology" to describe the GOP like we use these words: like ping pong (table tennis balls) or Kleenex (tissue) or sawsall (reciprocating saw) and a million more

    Libertaranism (greedy fucks who who think of nothing but extracting profits) and also who strip mine, frack, "harvest" all of our natural resources  and infrastructure (including medicare, SS, etc.) like parasites unwilling to contribute and calling that "freedom"

    Break that lie in half and dump it

    ...................................

    the article's concluding paragraph:

    There's no idealism here. The notion that libertarian ideas have captured the political imagination of millions in this country is a root problem: if we're going to escape the corporate oligarchy that is running this country--their ideas can't possibility be the alternative solution. This movement has to be recognized for what it is.
     
    ..it's just plain old greed.

     So good to hear this called out. Reminds me of the work that I based my last Diary on.

    That the teabagger so-called NEW grassroots movement is quite an old tried and tested gambit. The  1%ers corralling of gullible teabagger types to vote against their own interests in servive to the uber-rich has a long history too

    Thx MB

  •  Zeitgeist (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    viral, KJG52
    By Environment Correspondent Deborah Zabarenko
    WASHINGTON | Mon Sep 9, 2013 6:46pm EDT

    (Reuters) - The United States will destroy its six-ton stockpile of elephant ivory as a way to combat wildlife trafficking, an international fight that often has law enforcement outgunned by well-financed crime syndicates, White House panelists said on Monday.

    The ivory - raw and carved whole tusks and smaller items seized by or abandoned to U.S. agents over the last 25 years - will be crushed as part of a push to publicize the illegal trade that threatens wild elephants, rhinoceros, tigers, great apes and other iconic species, said Interior Secretary Sally Jewell.

    Emphasis Mine.  Uhhhhhh.....  Say again?
    The United States will destroy its six-ton stockpile of elephant ivory as a way to combat wildlife trafficking...
    Hmmmmmm.... Yet another Argumentum Non Sequitur?

    Destroy the Ivory to Save The Animals!  (?!)

    If civilization is to survive we must cultivate the science of human relationships : FDR

    by Kepler on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 10:30:31 PM PDT

  •  Da game is on! (0+ / 0-)

    Evolution IS Intelligent Design!

    by msirt on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 10:41:38 PM PDT

  •  REAL Libertarias (0+ / 0-)

    Clap On, Clap Off, The Clapper!

    by ActivistGuy on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 11:19:50 PM PDT

  •  More junk reporting on libertarianism. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    tardis10, Just Bob, Brecht

    There's a strong and, I guess, irresistible urge by those of us on the left that want to disavow libertarianism to want to turn it into a strawman with a strawman history.

    Take this latest "history" for example.  What exactly distinguishes a propaganda shill from somebody who espouses something they believe in?  The implication is one of insincerity.

    There are so many people here who imagine libertarianism as a bunch of Wall Street guys like Larry Kudlow smoking cigars and talking about how they deserve their money and everybody else deserves to wallow in their poverty.  I suspect that somebody reading the previous sentence is getting their dander up, too, thinking that I'm going to rehabilitate libertarianism when I say that.  No, that's not my intent.  My intent is to say, that's a simplistic delusion that doesn't serve you well if you want to know the history of all this.

    Libertarians as I have known them, and I was very actively involved for many years, are strange, offbeat, intelligent, argumentative, stubborn, and a bit paranoid.  If that also describes me, well, I acknowledge that, liberal that I still am, but I also know that the people I knew were a lot like this.

    Detailing the history of libertarianism usually starts us at Ayn Rand, because of the publication of Atlas Shrugged, which was successful enough to be a game-changer.  Before that, though, I think you can trace it back to philosopher Herbert Spencer.  Interesting.  Wiki describes him as "a prominent classical liberal political theorist of the Victorian era."  The word liberal has so many meanings it's worthless.  Spencer was a Social Darwinist.  He believed in survival of the fittest.  Government, in so much as it interfered with survival of the fittest, hampered society by subsidizing weak businesses and weak social practices.  I've never read anything complete by Spencer, so I feel uncomfortable getting too deep into a discussion of him.

    But I bring him up for another reason.  A rich guy by the name of Andrew Carnegie read his writings and fell in love with Spencer.  "By George!  This guy is saying all the kinds of things I've always thought!"  (I imagine him saying something like that in between cigar puffs.

    This is kind of a model for what has always happened.  There are people like Carnegie and Rand and others that are somewhat less involved in the day to day real world and more interested in their UTOPIAN ideas (and libertarianism is purely utopian) than in how to get rich.  People like Carnegie -- and the Koch Brothers -- don't understand or care about the details of how these utopian dream states are to be achieved, and if they did, they'd probably be horrified.  Lacking that, sure, "Here's some more money! I love hearing you pointy-headed guys tell me I deserve my money!"

    So where is the real history?  People like Carnegie and the Kochs?  Or people like Spencer and Rand?  I think if you focus on the people that it's easier to understand and hate, like the Kochs, then you don't have to try to understand it at all.  

    Not that you really need to understand libertarianism -- it's just a good idea to understand something if you want to discuss it and debunk it.  Certainly, it wouldn't be very useful to engage in a debate about how horrible communism is if your understanding of communism is only Josef Stalin.  Many people would say knowing about Josef Stalin and his reign would be all you need to ever know about communism to form a judgment about it, but that depends on how serious you are about actually knowing what you're talking about.

    •  You gotta hand it to libertarianism (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Dumbo

      that it did the near impossible of making being center Right seem- at least superficially- interesting, intellectual, idealistic, and radical.  An adventure.  Rather than what it is in practice- pretty much the opposite.

      I'm fan of Mike Huben's Non-Libertarian FAQ, btw-
      http://www.std.com/...

    •  It has been my experience of "Libertarians" that (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      tardis10, Eric Nelson, JustBeKos

      there is a broad spectrum of beliefs ascribed to "Libertarianism," that are just amalgams of other systems grafted onto a word: libertarian, that if taken by itself is meaningless.  Ayn Rand was not a "libertarian," she claimed to adhere to a philosophy (apparently concocted by her) that she called "objectivism," Libertarians adopted her, not the other way round.

      Racism, Social Darwinism, Hayek's anti-socialism, the "free market" nonsense of the Chicago School spouted by Friedman and anarchism, have all been incorporated into the current political polyglot that rides under the name of "Libertarianism." No matter what its antecedents it has transformed from a series of cranks' fantasies about personal liberty and the right of the "producers" (not terribly well defined) to live unrestrained by social convention and especially by government, into a Nietzschean celebration of the uber menschen who have the right to do anything they please because they are the foundation of wealth production and intellectual greatness in a drab world populated by proles trying to contain their greatness by restraining them with social norms enforced by an intrusive government. This is not utopian, it is dystopian...

      The rubbish spouted by today's libertarians is not about freedom and liberty, it is about narcissistic self interest as the be all and end all of human consciousness. It is bunk and nonsense and falls apart under the most cursory of examinations.

      P.S. I think you need to read Herbert Spencer a little more closely and within the context of his times, I think you may have misunderstood his philosophical viewpoint, as many of his contemporaries did.  

      "Intelligence is quickness in seeing things as they are..." George Santayana

      by KJG52 on Tue Sep 10, 2013 at 03:03:59 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  It's nice that you are arguing (0+ / 0-)

        against being a libertarian, but your arguments are junk.  And the junk starts here:

        No matter what its antecedents it has transformed from a series of cranks' fantasies about personal liberty and the right of the "producers" (not terribly well defined) to live unrestrained by social convention and especially by government, into a Nietzschean celebration of the uber menschen who have the right to do anything they please...
        Because now you're picking and choosing in order to characterize libertarianism in a distasteful way that is not informative.  It's like if I described communism as "a system of total government control of the individual with the purpose of crushing their souls and turning them into robotic engines of the state economy."  Even if you hate communism, that too is not informative.  That's a critique, not a description, and it's not even a very good critique.  More of a rant.

        Do you really think people become libertarian because they want to be Nietzschean supermen above all norms and laws and so the government is in their way?  Is that the kind of thing that motivates people into angry assertive group political action?  No.  Almost all political movements that have a driving ideology and aren't just motivated by diverse scattered wishes have some conception of justice.  The libertarian conception of justice is different from the liberal conception.  I think it's useful to back off and look at that objectively.

        I think the worst delusion of the left about libertarianism is the one that it's a bunch of rich guys justifying their own wealth.  Obviously, there's that, too, but there is also this different conception of justice and it has an appeal that reaches a different group of people than the very rich.

        I was involved for a long time in libertarianism back in the 70s and 80s.  Forgive me.  We all go through our own cycles.  But I got to know a lot of people, and the people that I knew that attended the seminars were NOT rich people.  If anything, they were middle class, tending towards the lower part of that range.  And that was in Orange County California, which tends to have demographics skewed towards the upper middle class.  A lot of them reminded me of Sheldon on Big Bang Theory.  Not the Koch Brothers.

        I've struggled to find a common thread to the people I met at libertarian meetings and I think the single biggest commonality was paranoia about the government.  Not, "The government won't let me strip mine my back yard."  It was a fear that the government wasn't really serving people like us.  That's a common sentiment in just about all political movements, I suspect, that the government is serving somebody else.  That the government consists of a bunch of elite "statists" who pretend to have their best interest at heart but only really want to extend their power until they crush our souls and turn us into robotic machines in service to the state economy, etc., etc., yadda yadda yadda.

        I'm a philosophical relativist, and I use that word not to distinguish myself from the Objectivists, but because that's probably the core of my own personal philosophy and metaphysics, as I have described many times elsewhere. I think it's possible for multiple internally consistent theories to constitute truth, even though they contradict each other, and that it depends on the framing that you begin your argument from.  Libertarianism starts from this different framing of the dangers and goals of government.  

        And I still share some of that fear.  It's one of the sources of friction around here, when we argue about the NSA, for instance.  Somebody will point out that libertarians oppose NSA domestic spying because they fear the government, and thus those of us on the left that oppose it must be anti-government libertarians, ergo, we are wrong to worry about it and oppose it.  That's simplistic and dumb.

        As for Spencer... he went through his own evolution.  I know libertarians embrace him but I doubt many of them read him.  I've considered a few times writing a diary about Darwin and his influence on other areas than biology in the late 19th century, so I've done some necessarily research on Spencer.  Nietzsche, Freud, Marx, even Arnold Schoenberg's music, are all influenced by Darwin whether directly or indirectly.  Interesting stuff.  

        •  You speak about argument and start with (0+ / 0-)

          dismissive cant. The defense of Libertarianism vs Liberalism that you are positing is not my position. I am not a liberal in the classic sense, as Spencer was. The Nietzschean aspects of the Libertarianism spouted by its most public proponents in Reason magazine and the rants of its most famous standard bearers Ron Paul and Rand Paul are indisputable.

          The social construct of total consent is unworkable, there is no society in the recorded history of humanity that has operated in this way. It is a structural and social impossibility no matter what the philosophical frame.

          Orange County has been and continues to be a hot bed of radical anti-government paranoia since the John Birch society reared its ugly head there in the 1950's. That you would find arch-conservatives there willing to embrace the nonsense that is libertarianism is no surprise. The Fair Housing Act of 1964 was an affront to those who formed the vanguard of the paranoid "white flight" to Orange County in the 60's and 70's and is fertile soil for the government hatred sown there in that era, that continues to this day.

          The concerns of "government oppression," that blossom in the so called "philosophy," or "politics," of libertarianism are just the age old cries of the socially privileged, both racially and economically when economic and societal change demand government action to redress inequality. It is fear, nothing else, and to dress it up in the cloak of freedom by calling on people to stand up to "oppression," and oppose social and political action to address common societal problems without universal consent is simply a retrograde movement by a minority in order to preserve their self-interested agenda.

          I am trying not to make this personal; however, your characterization of yourself as a "philosophical relativist," is a non-sequitor, essentially meaningless and brings nothing to the discussion. That opposing views can survive in argument, is the nature of argument. What cannot stand in an argument is the proposition that all views are "relative," it is simply nonsense and I would submit that if you truly held yourself to be what you state you are, we wouldn't be having this exchange.

          Simply stated my position is this: there is no Libertarian position that merits serious consideration in the political framework of a Democracy. Libertarianism as its current proponents characterize it  makes it impossible to construct a society that would actually function, as the requirement for universal consent can never be met. The struggle for personal freedom versus the needs of community action to address societal needs and to define both, is not addressed adequately by the so called "libertarian thinkers," and is simply a patina of verbiage to conceal the selfishness, greed, and fear of those who can't accept the process of historical and social change, if it disadvantages them.  

           

          "Intelligence is quickness in seeing things as they are..." George Santayana

          by KJG52 on Tue Sep 10, 2013 at 08:25:38 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Half right, half wrong. (0+ / 0-)
            The struggle for personal freedom versus the needs of community action to address societal needs and to define both, is not addressed adequately by the so called "libertarian thinkers," and is simply a patina of verbiage to conceal the selfishness, greed, and fear of those who can't accept the process of historical and social change, if it disadvantages them.
            Bolded part is right.  Unbolded part is just rant.  "Selfish and greedy" libertarians is a silly trope.  The philosophy may enshrine selfishness, but the people are pretty much like you and me.  And the ones I have known weren't afraid of historical and social change.  Property-oriented contract-oriented Libertarianism is more utopian than Marxism.  It's a political philosophy that calls for enormous, absurd levels of change.  It's not "conservative" in the sense of returning to traditional values or an older, better way of life.

            Whatever.  This is getting a bit hostile here.  I'll have a diary up on Friday about Fredrick Pohl and C.M. Kornbluth's 1954 novel The Space Merchants, which is one of the best satires on laissez-faire capitalism written.  I'm not a libertarian.  I just get tired of dealing with boring memes about libertarians.  Like, "They're selfish and greedy."  They're divorced from reality, not selfish and greedy.

            •  I am not talking about individual Libertarians, I (0+ / 0-)

              am going to the root of their "socio-political" argument and how its proponents, like the editors of Reason, justify their positions with the memes of "producers" and "taxation is theft," etc... It is detached from reality, but gives those who are selfish and greedy, as well as racist and classist, the cover they need within the confines of the label "libertarian," to further their agenda. Libertarianism and its cousin, Ayn Rand's "objectivism," which libertarians embrace, is a pernicious dystopian vision of the world of the "all against all," which leads to nothing but chaos and rule by the very coercive measures that libertarians claim to despise. If each man stands against the other for their own "good," violence is the only arbiter of social disagreement. Whether it be the violence of the state or the individual is irrelevant, chaos is the result.

              "Intelligence is quickness in seeing things as they are..." George Santayana

              by KJG52 on Wed Sep 11, 2013 at 04:28:54 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

    •  Shockwave gave me this link recently (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Eric Nelson

      Adam Curtis: The Century of the Self
      http://vimeo.com/...

      It's four hours and worth your time, imho.

      Thank you, Shockwave.

      Others have simply gotten old. I prefer to think I've been tempered by time.

      by Just Bob on Tue Sep 10, 2013 at 08:28:52 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Eh four hours... (0+ / 0-)

        Want to give me a synopsis?

        One way to attack and discredit libertarianism and its political goals is to engage on the issue of collectivism versus individualism.  That's where Rand comes in, because her philosophy really is individualism taken to the extreme.  Her political and economic theories seem to arise very sincerely out of this deeper aesthetic and metaphysical view of what constitutes the individual and his dignity.  It doesn't make her right -- it just helps to explain her political positions.  I doubt people like the Koch Brothers have the slightest idea what the word collectivism means.

        •  Freud says people are animals driven by base (0+ / 0-)

          emotions and therefore can't be trusted to govern themselves. Democracy can't work. However, Madison Ave can use those same base emotions to make people want things or to vote for whomever the ruling class wants.

          There's no mention of the upper class being animals driven by their emotions. Aren't you glad the ruling class has no emotions like greed, fear, or desire and will take care of us?

          In 4 hours there's a bit more. It's an award winning four part series from 2002.

          Others have simply gotten old. I prefer to think I've been tempered by time.

          by Just Bob on Tue Sep 10, 2013 at 04:22:57 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Milton Friedman is evil (0+ / 0-)

    The entire "chicago school of economics" is evil.

    I said before on this blog that I have no idea what populist libertarianism is.  That is because it does not exist.  Some confuse civil libertarianism with populist libertarianism.  Civil libertarianism is all about the supremacy of civil liberties.  It's not a complete political philosophy but rather a point of view that in general civil liberties should trump government policy.

    "The real wealth of a nation consists of the contributions of its people and nature." -- Riane Eisler

    by noofsh on Tue Sep 10, 2013 at 04:17:12 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site