??? You mean the farmers in Saskatchewan who elected the Co-operative Commonwealth Federation as the first socialist government in North America? The farmers in Saskatchewan who implemented universal healthcare to extend a safety net to everyone in the province? Whose leader Tommy Douglas pushed the federal government into extending the same safety net to the whole country?
I meant Sam Stone’s homespun story on how self reliant those prairie Canadians are.
Does that make him a Prairie Stone Canadian?
Libertarian philosophy brought us Enron, the Gulf disaster and the baking crisis that shook the world. We don’t need no stinking regulation. Yeh right.
The market is self correcting. If left alone it will create a good for all. Sure it will.
Those bastards and their muffin tin-philosophy…
Minor fluctuations. You’re not looking at it with enough perspective. In the BIG picture, it all self-regulates. If it doesn’t you’re not getting enough distance.
:smack:
Voyager 1 obtained the necessary distance about two weeks ago, and has decided to eliminate error.
Septimus, I agree with you, but understand that there are probably 16 different kinds of libertarian & as many different kinds of anarchist, and two libertarians may both believe zealously in “liberty” while being absolutely diametrically opposed on every conceivable point of political & philosophical contention.
But yeah, “libertarian” is a catchy word in the USA, just like “conservative” is. Both terms get used and abused by crypto-fascists & garden-variety corrupt assholes, to provide cover for whatever wankery they want.
CNBC has a libertarian program. they call it “American Greed”.
Yes, I understand. There was a time when I might even have described my own beliefs as “libertarian” – socially pro-liberty, and favoring free market solutions but with enlightened government interventions.
But in 21st-century America the lunatics have taken over the asylum! It’s impossible to read about, e.g. the right-wing driven “reconstruction” of Iraq without concluding that the same schools preaching “communism doesn’t work” need to also point out that libertarianism in its stupidest versions doesn’t work either.
Eh, there’s a solution. When somebody Bravehearts out about how we “cannae take our freedom!” I just say, “OK, your life then.”
Didn’t Nietzsche say something about the ability to reshape the world as you see fit, and the responsibility to do that wisely? Or was that Robert Hewitt Wolfe?
I don’t have to be nice to radical consensualists. Man is a creature to be overcome. Simply slaughtering tax protestors en masse is not nice; but it turns out the more paranoid hard individualists expect all authority to be out to get them anyway, so why disappoint?
Of course, once presented with the implacable face of someone whose political education was more Pol Pot than Sam Rayburn, perhaps they may accept some social democracy as a compromise with “evil.” More likely they’ll just have to be killed, I expect, but I make a lousy democrat.
At least, I may as well try this approach, because sputtering about acceptable Rousseauvian limits on freedom isn’t working, & I’m not convinced my “equality of freedom” argument (which I actually believe in) would penetrate. Better to be feared if you can’t be loved, right?
Bemoaning the party’s takeover is a start I guess, and leaps and bounds ahead of where they are now, but they need to actually begin doing something to take the party back, and sooner than later.
I think that war is already lost. FOX and the conservative movement have successfully redefined ‘liberal’ as an insult; a nebulous, catch-all term to disparage and embarrass anyone with whom a conservative disagrees. It’s sad, but it is what it is, and there’s no sense wasting any more time on it.
I think progressive is a better term. It is the opposite of conservative. Liberal is the opposite of totalitarian. Far from being a bad word, liberal should be a good one: Americans love talking about freedom.
I’m actually more progressive than I am liberal.
Not going to happen for this reason: their idiotic idea is to use the wackos to get as much power as possible, then attempt to wrestle it away from them by choking off support. “The ends justify the means” is now so deeply imbedded in the Republican philosophy that it cannot be removed.
Not to jump on the small l side here, but wouldn’t food safety be regulated just fine by the market? Nothing could be worse for business than killing 4 or 5 patrons. Why would it be beneficial for a business to cut corners?
That assumes that:
A) The deaths are traced to the bad food;
B) The deaths are reported as linked to the bad food in the area the company operates in;
C) Everyone who patronizes that shop sees the report.
A is pretty tough all on its own. First you have to figure out that, yes, this couple who died ate at this restaurant several hours before. Then you have to figure out what they ate. Then you have to test for any spoiled or poisonous ingredients in the food they ate. Who is going to be doing all that?
B we can stipulate as a given, provided the company and the local news station haven’t worked out a backroom deal to keep it off the air.
C is the biggest reason a true libertarian state can’t work. Nobody has time to educate themselves 100% on every possible company and product they might ever come into contact with. That’s why the FDA is in fact important; by mandating a base level of safety, people can trust that the food they eat isn’t going to kill them and they can devote the time it would have taken to ensuring their food is safe to more productive purposes.
Really, everyone except the wealthy would have to spend so much time just ensuring their own survival in such a society that they would never be able to advance to the upper tiers of Maslow’s hierarchy. That’s a pretty awful life.
Well, sure, its brutish, nasty and short, but you get all that freedom!
Any child that would trade the freedom of choking to death on glass in his burrito for government inspection is a natural born communist!
Sorry I missed the earlier thread because I would have come in to agree. I think Libertarianism and Marxism are kind of two sides of the same coin – political philosophies based on fundamentally flawed conceptions of human nature.