Skip to main content

Here's an entertaining one minute video on Somalia: Libertarian Paradise  - Libertarian magic dust indeed!

Libertarians are magical thinkers, relying on the kindness and altruism of the necessarily sociopathic corporate leviathans we have created and fed, at our tremendous peril. Libertarians don't know a damn about economics, and are oblivious that the so-called Free Market altars they worship at are far from free, relying on the fantasy of equal power, wealth, and knowledge of both buyers and sellers. ‘Corporate people’ - the Fortune 500 in particular - spit in the face of flesh-and-blood (or to use the legalese, ‘natural people’) on all three counts. Somalia is an unlikely parallel, but our democratic government is the only thing that keeps us from being China or Russia - poisoned and robbed by the rich and powerful much more than we already are. Thank God the GOP is pissing off everyone but straight Anglo males over 30.

Libertarians typically haven't noticed that they are lied to by Big Media, poisoned by Big Energy, conned by Wall Street, and fattened and sickened by Big Ag - but if they have, they think that less regulation will magically fix those problems, that the vast majority of Americans will reallocate their copious free time to keep tabs on Exxon and Goldman Sachs and be more effective at it than our federal government. Alternatively, they believe in a false equivalence between Democrats and Republicans, in the face of over three decades of GOP reverse-Robin Hood policies and deliberate incompetence. Government is only the problem when the GOP is in charge - and that is their intention.

Libertarians think that schools, Medicare, and Social Security should be privatized, increasing our reliance on the monopolists and the plutocrats, and leaving nothing for the police to do but enforce the property rights of the wealthy and powerful. Leave the poor, sick, and the old to fend for themselves: it will reduce the surplus population. Libertarianism is the road to serfdom.

Military aside, if you don't think a substantial government the size we have now is a boon to the common good, to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness, you're willfully ignorant, a know-nothing, and part of the problem. Now if we had strong anti-trust laws and corporations were much smaller and could be sentenced to death, I might - just might - be willing to shrink government. I'm not holding my breath on those anti-trust laws, though. In the meantime, you have cholera.

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

  •  China and Russia are strange choices for (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jan4insight, Sparhawk, Pluto

    libertarian paradises.

    •  I'm not so sure about that - Russia in particular (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Tom Lum Forest, FG

      with the fall of the CCCP - the robber barons own Russia. Literally.  The pensions and safety net of the soviet era are gone, old people starve and freeze to death in their homes, the poor will do almost anything to survive.  But the power brokers who own the utilities have gold plated yachts and buy the Duma. They cry against regulation and label anything not in their interest as a return to communism.

      Give China some time and they will be in the same space - even with a nominally communist government.  The growth of private enterprise in China is not oppressed, it is embraced - the strange bedfellows of private manufacturing and communist rule are frantic lovers there.  China has almost no regulation at all, part of what makes it so attractive to western markets as a  manufacturing centre.  Who cares about polluted water as long as it's not ours?  It's not going to end well for us or anyone else.

      •  That's how Russia used to be in the 90s. That (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Sparhawk, VClib, Pluto

        was long time ago. Now the government controls Russia and to a significant extent its robber barons. Of course, the government is corrupt and often works together with robber barons (who are often government officials).

        In China government never lost control of the country to begin with. Businesses are embraced if their owners play nicely with government officials.

        So in both countries we have strong government that often works hand in hand with big business. That's not really what libertarians dream of. In fact, a significant part of Russian opposition has a libertarian worldview.

    •  If you like government... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      VClib

      ...you can always go to North Korea. All the government you'd ever want.

      (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
      Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

      by Sparhawk on Thu Oct 31, 2013 at 10:32:23 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Like Tea Pee-ers, Libertarians are ideaologues (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Mortifyd

    ... who love their beautiful ideas irrespective of the consequences. It's not a reality-based community: policies are not to be evaluated for their efficacy. Goals are irrelevant, as are results. All that matters is that the intellectual edifice is built - no matter how much offal and carnage may result.

    •  libertarians: consistent but extremist (0+ / 0-)

      Libertarians live in an imaginary world of political theory. There is a certain philosophical or theoretical consistency in being laissez-faire on social issues as well as economic issues.

      Thomas Jefferson, the architect of American democracy, was politically laissez-faire on all religious belief AND disbelief, saying: "The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts as are only injurious to others. But it does no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.”

      Rather than advocate a return to alcohol Prohibition along with the current prohibition of other drugs in order to be consistent in the drug war, libertarians like Milton Friedman, being laissez-faire on social issues as well as economic issues, have called for drug legalization.

      Nearly 75 percent of the drug war is directed solely against marijuana, which is safer than alcohol and/or tobacco.

      And polls show a majority of Americans (58 percent) now favoring an end to marijuana prohibition.

      Even conservatives like William F. Buckley have called for an end to marijuana prohibition.

      Jim Frey of Berkeley Pro-Life, a nondrinker like myself, claims he's a libertarian and not a Republican.

      He graciously accepted back issues of James Dawson's pro-life / animal rights / libertarian 'zine Live and Let Live from me, as well as contact information on Libertarians For Animal Rights (LFAR), which is pro-life as well as pro-animal.

      When I told him someone wrote in to Live and Let Live in the late '90s, referring to libertarians as "Republicans who do drugs," Jim merely reacted with mild amusement, saying it's a common misconception to equate libertarians with Republicans...

      ...whereas Rachel MacNair, a vegan, Quaker pacifist, past president of Feminists For Life, and a political liberal, broke up laughing when I related these words to her!

      And Rachel didn't understand what distinguishing abortion from arguably victimless crimes like drugs and prostitution had to do with nonviolence or peace towards animals and humans...

      On the other hand, Carol Crossed of Democrats For Life could appreciate the distinction: many on the religious right link their opposition to abortion to a religious agenda (e.g., school prayer), and to many of us on the secular left, this makes abortion look like a "religious" issue, rather than a secular human rights issue.

      Conservatives claim to oppose the "nanny state," or "big government" intervening in the bedroom and/or bathroom (electronic surveillance), but religious right issues like school prayer and intrusion into the internal affairs of minority religions indicate they're anything but laissez-faire on religious belief AND disbelief!

      By 2003, I'd already written extensively on political issues: in letters to my local newspapers, the Tri-Valley Herald and later in the Oakland Tribune; in Harmony: Voices for a Just Future, a "consistent-ethic" periodical on the religious left, and in the Stanislaus Connections, a monthly peace and justice newspaper out of Modesto, CA.

      Conservatives led an effort to remove pro-choice Democrat Gray Davis from office as governor of California. A recall election to replace Gray Davis took place in 2003.

      I thought about running for office in the 2003 recall election (only a small fee of a few hundred dollars was required), and mentioned that in passing to my friend Ruth, and her response indicated among the porn stars and other celebrities others running for office, I'd be a virtual unknown!

      I voted for Daniel Ramirez, a pro-life Democrat out of San Diego in the 2003 California recall election. He came in 43rd place out of 135 candidates. Not bad.

      On the other hand, Jim Frey was pleased when the California recall election in 2003 pushed pro-choice Democrat Gray Davis out of office, even though Gray Davis was replaced not with a pro-lifer, but with pro-choice Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger.

      If pro-life Republicans and/or pro-life libertarians prefer pro-choice Republicans over pro-life Democrats, this strikes me as mere partisan politics.

      If pro-lifers really want to end abortion, opposition to abortion is going to have to come from across the political spectrum (Democrats, Greens, etc.), and not just from the far right.

      I personally find the libertarian position distasteful, because although like liberals, libertarians are laissez-faire on all religious belief AND disbelief and are laissez-faire on social issues, I disagree with the libertarians being laissez-faire on economic issues.

      I would refer you to Tom Hartmann's 2003 book, What Would Jefferson Do?, which is a response not just to the religious right (which is too often tied to the economic right), but to economic conservatives as well.

      Tom Hartmann points out that our tax dollars support an infrastructure we Americans take for granted:

      ...public education, schools, roads, state hospitals, environmental protection, occupational safety, etc.

      Libertarianism would abandon Americans to a heartless individualism...

      Rose Evans, editor and publisher of Harmony: Voices for a Just Future, a "consistent-ethic" periodical on the religious left, specifically cited the example of libertarians wanting to abolish public education as an example of libertarianism being an extremist philosophy...

      ...whereas at a Berkeley Pro-Life meeting about a decade ago, Jim Frey and the beautiful pro-life activist Teddi Ivey (I'm thinking she's a Republican?) said abolishing public education was a good idea!

      Bill Maher is on the board of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), he says he's libertarian and not liberal, and as an atheist, he attacks all religion...

      Whereas PETA websites:

      www.jewishveg.com
      www.jesusveg.com
      www.islamveg.com

      ...are clearly aimed at the Abrahamic faiths, courting the religious community for inspiration, blessings and support.

      A Christian wrote in to www.jesusveg.com around 1999 or 2000, asking PETA: how can you focus on some parts of Scripture while ignoring other parts?!

      I dunno. Christians do this all the time!

      Like revering the apostle Paul for dismissing his previous adherence to the Law as "so much garbage," while ignoring verses from the Pauline epistles like "flee fornication," and "do not make provisions for the flesh to gratify its cravings," etc.

      Boy, they "believe"!

      During the 1980s, Dennis Mikinzi, an agnostic schoolteacher in Ohio, published Biblical Errancy, a newsletter debunking the Bible by pointing out its flaws and contradictions, while giving equal time for biblical apologists to air their views.

      (unlike pro-lifers, flooding the airwaves -- no pun intended! -- with anti-veg and anti-animal sound bites, without giving equal time to animal rights as a serious moral, political, and theological issue.)

      At one point, Dennis told a Christian who had written in, "It's possible to discuss one's cherished beliefs with one's opponents without resorting to personal attacks... Just ask Reagan and Gorbachev!"

      Quite true. I've had many friendly conversations over dinner, and at the Berkeley Pro-Life meetings with Jim & Liza Frey and the beautiful Teddi Ivey!

      And if we're all opposed to abortion, we shouldn't be opponents, but merely advocating different strategies to end the crisis!

      Democrats For Life of America, 601 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, South Building, Suite 900, Washington, DC 20004 (202)220-3066

  •  Libertarianism makes you stupid! (0+ / 0-)

    by Seth Finkelstein
    http://www.sethf.com/...

    Critiques of Libertarianism
    by Mike Huben
    http://world.std.com/...

    Humiliate libertarians with cold logic.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site