Tuesday, July 5, 2016

Retooling LIbertarianism

Libertarianism as many libertarians think of it is a clever but inadequate idea. All too many of the naive variety of libertarian think that if you explain libertarianism to people they'll glom right on to it. One such has big plans to translate libertarian literature into Spanish and hand it out to the illegals as they stream across the border. They'll read it, you see, and proceed to reject any and all government handouts and spend the rest of their lives fighting for libertarian principles. This is a splendid example of wishful thinking and self-deception.

And the Mexicans we're talking about are just a bunch of relatively benign third-worlders. The wouldn't go for libertarianism in a hundred years, but this "explanation" idea really gets ridiculous when you think about how well it's going to work with the real enemies of liberty — Muslims and communists.

No, talk isn't enough. Some things, like invaders, have to be opposed by violence. Dorm-room bull-session type libertarianism isn't going to do it. At the very least, we need George Washington/Patrick Henry style libertarianism, you know, the kind with guns and rules about who does and who doesn't get into the country.


A guest post by Katie Boundary:

" What do you get when you combine:

- Absolute separation of state and culture
- A non-interventionist foreign policy
- Universal suffrage?

Answer:

- The total destruction of your culture and freedom by foreign regimes who use their powers of taxation to subsidize the spread of their own authoritarian values in your country, giving them an unfair advantage in your culture's marketplace of ideas, all while your own values prohibit you from doing anything to resist them.

Libertarianism might be a near-ideal way to run a country, giving it a distinct advantage over other ideologies in any kind of fair competition in the marketplace of ideas... but it has absolutely no means of competing with ideologies that DON'T fight fair. It provides the porcupine with spines, but not with an immune system. If liberty is to survive the threats posed by Communism and Islam, then libertarianism must be retooled for ideological warfare - and the threats must not merely be kept outside our borders, not merely contained inside their own borders, but rolled back until they exert no power outside of mosques and gender studies classes."
-------------
P. S. I just got a great comment from Jehu, that I've added as the second quibcag. This is, of course the big red pill that most goofy libertarians just can't bring themselves to swallow: Most of the human species is simply not inclined towards libertarian-style thinking at all. What Jehu says is a very good first approximation of the reality of it all. Through some combination of genetics and cultural development, you need that Anglo ethnicity, with a little German added, to even think about setting up a libertarian society. I'm assuming Jehu would include a little British Celt in his Anglo category, which I think belongs there, and I'd stretch the German category to include Germanic people, that is, Dutch, Scandinavian, Swiss, etc. And of course a smattering of all kinds of people could fit in, but if it's not dominated the way Jehu calls for it to be, it's not going to work. Consider this. After the Anglos in the New United States set up their libertarian constitution, it was imitated all over the place, especially in Latin America. But the blood and culture just didn't add up, and the libertarian constitutions of all these other new countries had little or no connection with their actual sociopolitical natures.
-------------
Quibcag: Number one llustrated by a little Communist girl you can find all over the net, and one of the girls from K-On! (けいおん! Keion!) , cosplaying as a jihadi.. jihadette? Number two, versions of England and Germany from Hetalia: Axis Powers (Axis Powers ヘタリア).

6 comments:

  1. Michael Humemer has two critiques on Ayn Rand which seem relevant. Ed Feser also has a few things to say about libertarian ideas.
    The best approach I have seen in Kelley Ross who ran as a libertarian at some point but also has had some problems with the movement.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Fisk Ellington Rutledge IIIJuly 6, 2016 at 11:12 AM

    Mexicans aren't "benign" at all. They are third-world savages who will never be Americans. Anywhere they settle and become even a significant minority begins to resemble a violent, drug-ridden third-world hell. They are only marginally better than Blacks, who will also never be Americans. Mexicans are natural Leftists and parasites. They ALL need to be sent home; even those who are citizens.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No disagreement, but that's why I wrote "relatively benign," to emphasize the fact that other groups — Muslims, Africans in general — are overwhelmingly worse.

      Delete
  3. If you want a more libertarian society, by which I mean a society where people are left alone as much as is possible and sustainable while maintaining order, you need the power to be held primarily by men of Anglo and some German extraction, of somewhat greater than average intelligence, and of a somewhat aspie bent. The proof of this can be seen at any upper or lower case libertarian-ish gathering.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I have no idea about Mexicans. The main problem seems to be Muslims and Blacks.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Not surprisingly I am of Scot-Irish-German ancestry.

    ReplyDelete