Why even Robert Nozick, the philosophical father of libertarianism, gave up on the movement he inspired.
Recently, I overheard a fellow Amtraker back off a conversation on politics. "You know, it's because I'm a libertarian," he said, sounding like a vegetarian politely declining offal. Later that afternoon, in the otherwise quite groovy loft I sometimes crash at in SoHo, where one might once have expected,say, Of Grammatology or at least a back issue ofElle Decor, there sat not one but two copies of something called The Libertarian Reader. "Libertarianism" places one—so believes the libertarian—not on the political spectrum but slightly above it, and this accounts for its appeal to both the tricorne fringe and owners of premium real estate. Liberty's current bedfellows include Paul Ryan (his staffers are assigned Atlas Shrugged), Glenn Beck (he flogged The Road to Serfdom onto the best-seller list), Slate's Jack Shafer, South Park, the founder of Whole Foods, this nudnik, P.J. O'Rourke, now David Mamet, and to the extent she cares for anything beyond her own naked self-interest—oh, wait, that is libertarianism—Sarah Palin.
With libertarianism everywhere, it's hard to remember that as recently as the 1970s, it was nowhere to be found. Once the creed of smart set rogues, H.L. Mencken among them, libertarianism all but disappeared after the Second World War. What happened? The single most comprehensive, centrally planned, coordinated governmental action in history—that's what happened. In addition to defeating fascism, the Second World War acted as a magnificent sieve, through which almost no one, libertarians included, passed unchanged. (To pick one example: Lionel Robbins, the most prominent anti-Keynesian before the war, served as director of the economic division of the British War Cabinet; after the War, Robbins presided over the massive expansion of the British higher education system.) By the '50s, with Western Europe and America free, prosperous, happy, and heavily taxed, libertarianism had lost its roguish charm. It was the Weltanschauung of itinerant cranks: Ronald Reagan warming up the Moose Lodge; Ayn Rand mesmerizing her Saturday night sycophants; the Reader's Digest economist touting an Austrian pedigree.
#1: Deckard To: Gatlin (#0)
Yeah, you really had to crawl through the sewer to find that article, didn't you?
One must assume that you identify with the other liberals who trust Slate to be an unbiased news source.
Deckard posted on 2016-05-20 22:01:02 Reply Private Reply
#2: Gatlin To: Deckard (#1)
Gatlin posted on 2016-05-20 22:04:25 Reply Private Reply
#3: Deckard To: Gatlin (#2)
Deckard posted on 2016-05-20 22:12:11 Reply Private Reply
#4: Gatlin To: Deckard (#3)
Gatlin posted on 2016-05-20 22:14:59 Reply Private Reply
#5: tpaine To: Gatlin, posts that Ronald Reagan was an itinerant crank, ----- Y'ALL (#0)
Gatlin posts that Ronald Reagan was an "itinerant crank", ----- -- warming up the Moose Lodge.
tpaine posted on 2016-05-20 22:19:11 Reply Private Reply
#6: Deckard To: tpaine (#5)
In addition, he dismisses Reagan's words on libertarianism.
“If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. I think conservatism is really a misnomer just as liberalism is a misnomer for the liberals — if we were back in the days of the Revolution, so-called conservatives today would be the Liberals and the liberals would be the Tories.
The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is.”
Deckard posted on 2016-05-20 22:25:43 Reply Private Reply
#7: tpaine To: Deckard, gatlin, - about to get a hissy fit, --- Y'ALL (#6)
I predict that before long, -- Trump will say more or less the same thing about libertarianism.
Which will give gatlin a hissy fit...
tpaine posted on 2016-05-20 22:34:17 Reply Private Reply
#8: Gatlin To: tpaine (#7)
Everyone on the right these days claims Ronald Reagan. Neoconservatives, libertarians, social conservatives, moderates, and the rest each have a favorite quote.
He was a complex man with complex thoughts, allowing every ideologue to pick out-of-context phrases.
Ronald Reagan Was No Libertarian
Gatlin posted on 2016-05-20 23:08:12 Reply Private Reply
#9: Gatlin To: tpaine (#7)
Your predictions are as unreliable and inaccurate as was an United Artists executive when he said "Reagan doesn't have that presidential look” after rejecting Reagan as lead in the 1964 film The Best Man.
Gatlin posted on 2016-05-20 23:13:01 Reply Private Reply
#10: ConservingFreedom To: Gatlin (#0)
False, as Nozick explained in writings subsequent to the 1989 quote that Salon distorts.
ConservingFreedom posted on 2016-05-20 23:14:44 Reply Private Reply
#11: Deckard To: Gatlin (#8)
Uh - wrong, as usual.
Nothing was taken out of context.
You just don't like the fact that he said good things about the libertarian philosophy.
Ronald Reagan Was No Libertarian
I never claimed he was.
Deckard posted on 2016-05-20 23:27:30 Reply Private Reply
#12: Gatlin To: ConservingFreedom (#10)
Julian Sanchez (now a Cato colleague) interviewed Nozick and had this exchange:
I guess "gave up" is a relative term ... perhaps saying he became a "weak dick" on libertarianism would be better.Gatlin posted on 2016-05-20 23:33:22 Reply Private Reply
#13: Deckard To: tpaine, Gatlin (#7)
I'd like to see that, but judging from his campaign so far, I don't think he will.
What's telling about the article Gatlin posted is the title The Liberty Scam
That alone speaks volumes about the "Major's" political beliefs.
Major "Gatlin" Burns:
Deckard posted on 2016-05-20 23:35:14 Reply Private Reply
#14: Gatlin To: Deckard (#11)
Put down the glass pipe ... at least for the rest of the evening.
Gatlin posted on 2016-05-20 23:35:17 Reply Private Reply
#15: Deckard To: Gatlin, ConservingFreedom, tpaine (#12)
Do you even read what you post?
"...the rumors of my deviation (or apostasy!) from libertarianism were much exaggerated."
Deckard posted on 2016-05-20 23:37:57 Reply Private Reply
#16: Gatlin To: Deckard (#13)
Nothing speaks for the "MAJOR."
"The "MAJOR" speaks for HIMSELF.
Gatlin posted on 2016-05-20 23:38:36 Reply Private Reply
#17: Deckard To: Gatlin (#14)
Check it again - I answered YOUR post.
Deckard posted on 2016-05-20 23:39:22 Reply Private Reply
#18: Gatlin To: Deckard (#15)
Do you read what I post?
He said his belief was "weakened."
If you can't believe STRONGLY in something, then you really have only a "half asses" belief in it.
So, he became a "half ass" believer in libertarianism.
Gatlin posted on 2016-05-20 23:41:32 Reply Private Reply
#19: Gatlin To: Deckard (#17)
Why should I ever expect you not be be confused ... I have no reason to.
Gatlin posted on 2016-05-20 23:42:45 Reply Private Reply
#20: Deckard To: Gatlin (#16)
Yes - and as your posting history will attest, your views are eerily similar to the the ones that the fictional Major Burns espoused.
Deckard posted on 2016-05-20 23:43:40 Reply Private Reply
#21: Deckard To: Gatlin (#19)
Negative, I used my screen name.
Is it your contention that I may only make comments to posts which are only addressed to me?
That's not how a forum works - posters are free to respond to any posts made.
Trying to enforce your own rules now?
Why should I ever expect you not be be confused ... I have no reason to.
It appears to me that you are the one who is confused.
Deckard posted on 2016-05-20 23:48:37 Reply Private Reply