Like the others, I agree that a completely unfettered market would wind up with utterly vile practices like these. Pure capitalism, after all, is a race to the bottom, and all regulation does is define the floor.
“Freedom from insult” is pretty stupid, though. But you’re right, it doesn’t compare to the screwhole gibberish Keyes is generating on what seems like an hourly basis.
I’m not sure how it wouldn’t. Even with the fetters we currently have on the market, there are plenty of desperate people out there. Do you really think that, with no fetters on the free market, there wouldn’t be people willing to sign themselves into slavery? People willing to put their children to work in awful conditions?
If so, I’d be interested in why you think this is the case: certainly history doesn’t support such a rosy view of humanity.
Yep–I raised the question because Mr. Moto suggested there was Nutjob Parity, and I was curious as to whether that’s accurate. So far, I think the Democrats are winning on the Sane Political Candidates-o-meter.
But that could change! Bring it on!
Daniel
I think it it’s strong to say that the free market will necessarily lead to child labor (I think modern society finds slavery regugnant enough that it wouldn’t be an issue) but if we redegulated as much as some people would like, I could easily see it happening. I mean, my econ professor recently railed against the evils of OSHA.
Remember the Libertarian smurf guy? He was entertainingly nutty, too.
“Jesus wouldn’t vote for Obama.”
Yeah, but what if his only alternative were voting for Keyes? That’s really backing Jesus into a corner.
(courtesy of the Daily Show)
???
That would be Stan Jones, Libertarian candidate for Senate in Montana in 2002.
Took lots of silver nitrate internally, believing it would keep him healthy. Turned his skin a fairly uniform shade of sickly light blue.
Google blue + skin + libertarian = http://www.centredaily.com/mld/centredaily/4198142.htm
Sorry, I meant colloidal silver.
Not a Democrat, but a damn funny cite nonetheless. One more demerit for the Libs, I’m afraid.
Really? Do you seriously doubt that there are, say, 1,000 families in this country horrible enough that they’d be willing to send their kids down the coal shafts if doing so would net them an extra couple grand every year? I just don’t think humanity has improved that much over the last century.
As for slavery, consider how many people there are who are desperately addicted to drugs right now. I just about guarantee you that I could go to any major city, offer folks $1,000 cash to sign a contract that binds them into slavery for five years starting next week, and get several hundred folks to sign up within a couple weeks. $1,000 is probably more cash than I’d need to offer.
There are desperate people out there, willing to do desperate things. The fact that slavery contracts are illegal is what prevents them from existing.
Daniel
You guys started it. You keep him.
“fundamental right to freedom from insult” google nets one result. I think that if she had said just that there would be more references to it. Try again.
We may be IL, but we don’t need an MD.
I don’t know why that didn’t show up on any bumper stickers. Guess Obama didn’t care. Maybe the Sun-Times will run it as a headline.
They should have let Jack Ryan stay in the race.
Not to hijack, but this seems like a false analogy to me (although I agree with your point that a totally free market could very conceivably lead to such atrocities as slavery). I’m sure you’d agree that nobody initiates drug use with the intent to become addicted. And the initiation of drug use doesn’t count as “consent” to addiction, either; I have used several highly addicting drugs and had no problem ceasing or reducing my use of all of them, and I know many people in similar situations. That is to say, drug use does not inevitably lead to drug addiction, but rather, addiction is an involuntary side effect of some drugs; thusly drug use does not constitute a willful acknowledgement of future addiction.
Again, though, I agree with your point, which is that it’s entirely conceivable that slavery would happen if there weren’t a Constitutional amendment forbidding it (it probably still does happen, anyway).
Cringe before my awesome Googling skills!
From rotten.com
Not exactly “freedom from insult” so I’m going to retract that one. Well, try as iImight, I can’t find any Democrat nominated for the Senate who is even remotely as insane as Alan Keyes.
Not a false analogy at all, since I wasn’t trying to make an analogy in the first place :). I was suggesting that I could go find myself a few hundred crackheads, offer them each a thousand bucks cold hard cash if they’d sign this little piece of paper, and get myself a few hundred signatures on slavery contracts. Do you think I’m wrong?
Daniel
See, I knew about that one–we Tarheels kept pretty up-to-date on our own Nutty Republican. I mean, what kind of asshole tells a woman that he’s just met that he’s going to try to irritate her until she cries? That’s what passes for a Southern Gentleman?
Daniel
Oh, so you’re saying that you would find willing slaves in the drug addict population because these people are in desperate need of money. Is that it? Because if it is, I agree, and I’m sorry for the misunderstanding. (Although you could certainly find many other kinds of people in such desperate need of money–the homeless, for example, or perhaps some college students or ex-students with heinous loans to pay off, or people who have ticked off the mob or something. And yes, I realize that all three populations have their fair share of drug addicts.)
Oh, and don’t forget alcoholics. Many of them can be as addicted to their drug of choice as your average Requiem character; they just happen to do it legally.
Ugh. I agree. It’s another disgusting example of diehard federal government sexism. I suppose for each few steps forward there is another step back.
In discussing this bit about slavery, child labor, and the free market…
How many of you remember that many of the primary arguments given by anti-abolitionists were economic in nature?
If the free market had its way, with no regulations, we know exactly where we’d be: check out some of the industrial scandals and various labor problems from the late 1800s.