The Wrong Narrative
- Thread starter Ponca Dan
- Start date
The theme itself:
"People of goodwill don’t impose themselves on others politically any more than they do militarily. Libertarianism, with its goal of radically diminishing the scope of government and politics in our lives, offers a path to a more peaceful future. Only libertarians can claim the mantle of anti-authoritarianism, because only libertarians would deny government the power and size to become authoritarian. The political world isn’t working, so why do we insist on more politics to fix it?"
Presupposes that that if there was no politics/government there would be no ability or desire for people not of goodwill to impose themselves on others. It's the entire underlying problem with idealistic anarchy. It doesn't address the Hobbesian notion that people not of goodwill exist...and in large numbers. It doesn't address the fact that without some sort of social contract (and authority to enforce said social contract) life may very well be "Solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short".
Last edited:
Pretty hard to take the article seriously due to the inclusion of Romney. It is almost as if the author thinks Romney is Trump.
That's why I consider myself a "pragmatic" libertarian at this point. I've moved from "the government that governs bets, governs least" to something like "the government that governs best, governs as little as possible to maintain the society".
Idealistic libertarianism and idealistic anarchy basically assumes if there are no rules, no state, everyone will play nice and be of good will to others. It assumes all people are of fundamentally nature. That it is the state that corrupts. That is not the state I see many people being in an anarchic situation.
Idealistic libertarianism and idealistic anarchy basically assumes if there are no rules, no state, everyone will play nice and be of good will to others. It assumes all people are of fundamentally nature. That it is the state that corrupts. That is not the state I see many people being in an anarchic situation.
The anti-government stuff is so simplistic I can't get my arms around it. What government? Local? Federal? Atomic energy regulation? Interstate highways? Social security checks? I guess I wanna get two points off my chest and then go back to work.
1. Government does bad things. So does every other institution ran by humans. But a democratic government does about x 1,000 more things competently or more or less fairly. We can list those things it does well, but it would take all day. It's always low hanging fruit to criticize the efficiency of any large operation administered by imperfect humans.
2. Private industry gets a free ride, I guess. For every sin of government, I can match or double it with sins from private industry. Nobody says private industry is bad, though. Plenty of places don't have much government. Go get it.
3. @Ponca Dan is a good man that has bought a professionally-packaged narrative hook, line and sinker.
Actually the theme was explained very early in the essay when he said "The only solution of political violence is to make politics matter less." Everything else he wrote was attempting to build on that theme. The presupposition you speak of is yours, not his.
I quoted his conclusion VERBATIM.
But hey, if you want to stay in your idealistic utopian anarchy bubble...no skin off my nose.
I have a libertarian question: How come its the only political philosiphy that is evaluated to its most extreme position. We don't assume every democrat/socialist is pushing towards a nearly communistic, "all outcomes for all people are equal" position. We don't assume that all Republicans/Capitalists believe that the government should have zero involvement and that the free markets will work everything out. Yet when people argue against Libertarian ideals they are extrapolated to the point of reaching 'idealistic anarchy'.
Well, in my case a person is perfectly reasonable to argue against the "idealistic anarchic society" because I am a wild eyed, hair on fire radical libertarian anarchist. When my medications are at the right dosage I tend to calm down and admit the idealistic society is just that, an ideal to work toward, not in any way possible in today's world.
The author of the essay at hand, Jeff Deist, tends more toward the minarchist branch of libertarianism, or, as JD would call it, a pragmatic libertarian. Which is ironic, because nowhere in the essay does he call for the elimination of all government, as JD claims. His thesis is that politics has invaded virtually every aspect of our lives, and we would all be better off if we lived and let lived.
Last edited:
The sins of institutions outside of government are punishable, either by the market or by law. THERE is also oversight, in most cases, from the government at some level.
Free People have the choice to interact or not with non-government institutions.
Sins of the government give it power to influence any or every single individual it wishes. Further, what is the metric by which we can know that the appropriate level of government oversight or transparency exists? Lastly, people and institutions pay huge sums of money for influence at the government level. I'm at a loss to identify something remotely similar affecting non-governmental institutions.
"Sins of government" are also punishable by law and at the voting booth. No private enterprise is punishable or fireable by the general public, like government. Sins of private enterprise are only addressed if the goverment isn't controlled by private enterprise, and if a neutral court system and jury says it'll be enforced. That's hard.
Yes and no regarding a choice to interact with non-gov't institutions. You gotta have an internet provider. Cell phone. Electricity. Dr. Food. Gasoline. Insurance.
"Sins of the government give it power to influence any or every single individual it wishes." So does AT&T. Plus, municipalities have more daily authority and they're more closely controlled. Municipal jurisdiction stops at the city limits. Inside any governmental entity are voters that may change the government. Who a majority of the citizens listen to is their prerogative.
For every government that killed someone, there was a private factory that manufactured the gun or missile. Broad anti-government generalities can be lodged against business just as easy as government.
Damn brother. Why you gotta go steal my thunder. I worked hard for that Philosophy degree and you go and preempt me?
Three legislators were ran out of office this year in OK. Multiple elected officials charged with crimes. More will be voted out.
Of, yes. What example are you trying to present?
Do you have others?
And most ardently, what about the remainder of my post? Without addressing the broader context around the paragraph you selected to quote on its own, any counter you serve up doesn't move the needle much for me.
Trying not to put words in Medics mouth, but I'm concerned about the vast bureaucracy of government that isn't in the news. Most recent example is the continued leaks. Leaks that are not intended in a whistleblower capacity, but geared toward dealing political damage.
As for your example, that's good. But for every three that believe they may be above the law and get caught, how many more are smart enough to not get caught?
Good luck getting people to not leak, gossip, talk, etc. Human nature.
I'd say the per capita % of politicians that get away with stuff is about the same % of private industry that gets away with stuff.
Veterans Administration. Find me a private sector example that is comparable that wasn't held accountable.
I know one of the three OK legislators was the pedophile. That's hard to sweep under any rug. Who were the other two?
Sexual harasser in the Capitol was run off.
Drunk über driver sexual harasser run off.
Two campaign funds embezzlers also run off...and convicted.
Off the top of my head. a big number of nursing homes. They warehouse those old indigents and there's not much anyone can do about it -- tort reform has worked like a charm. I also think there's potentially an astounding antitrust violation with health insurance companies carving up the country. The securities fraud and insider shit is off the charts -- the SEC was neutered during the Bush administration. Property insurers routinely charge for coverage and pricing and don't provide the benefit --- nothing is done due to the filed rate doctrine. Auto liability insurers have valuee vehicles with fictitious comparables generated by affiliated third parties for years. Insurance commissioners usually have the ability to do something about it, but don't because they're all from the industry. I can do this until sunrise.
One was from Owasso Tulsa area (grab-assing the help) and another was from NW oklahoma (Woodward maybe?) and allegedly did something to an uber driver.
