31 votes

Rise of the Libertarians!

10 reasons why Slate, Salon and the progressive media are afraid
by Max Borders | FEE.org

A lot of people are messing with libertarianism. We get it. If you see an alternative worldview gaining currency as your own is starting to lose out: attack, attack, attack. Strategically, it’s probably smart.
When Jane Mayer wrote that sloppy hit piece for The New Yorker against the Brothers Koch a few years back, it was way more strategic than personal: These are the folks who give money to organizations that don’t agree with you about lots of things. If you want to weaken those groups, villainize the funders by any means necessary to make their donations toxic.

Well played. The bigger problem for progressives, however, is that libertarianism has grown far larger than any billionaire's money. So you have to do still more to kill the movement. At the very least that means using heaping helpings of intellectual dishonesty. Can you swiftboat a movement?

In a recent New York Times piece profiling Rand Paul, Sam Tanenhaus and Jim Rutenberg write that libertarians are a bunch of “antitax activists and war protestors, John Birch Society members, and a smatter of truthers who suspect the government’s hand in the 2001 terrorist attacks.” Why would the Times not instead describe folks like Times columnist Tyler Cowen, Nobel Laureate Vernon Smith, Whole Foods CEO John Mackey, or investor Peter Thiel? That’s not part of the narrative.

Let’s get to the heart of the matter: Progressives are afraid. Just when they seized the ring, their power is ebbing. Outlets have to make libertarian voodoo dolls so they act as pricks. But why is libertarianism gaining so much traction? What is the true source of the prog media’s fear?

For the 10 reasons, continue reading at The Freeman



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Is this supposed to be some kind of an insult?

“antitax activists and war protestors, John Birch Society members, and a smatter of truthers who suspect the government’s hand in the 2001 terrorist attacks.”

I am proud to stand side by side with anti-tax activists, war protesters, John Birch Society members, and even the villified "truthers" who don't accept official narratives at face value given the fact that elements within our government have had plans in the past to stage terrorist attacks in US cities.

"Libertarianism is real Communitarianism"

Now I understand the image of clenched fists in front of a rising sun at the beginning of this article.
The term Communitarianism is a word describing the lifestyle of those living in communes.
The premise of a commune requires members to shed their individuality and individual rights for the "reward" of collective rights issued by the collective - protection/food/shelter.. etc.
I am trying to think of something more diametrically opposed to Libertarianism than Communitarianism... Maybe Communism?

I like

lib·er·tar·i·an

lib·er·tar·i·an [lìbbər térree ən]
(plural lib·er·tar·i·ans)
n
1. advocate of individual responsibility: somebody who believes in the doctrine of free will
2. advocate of individual freedom: somebody who believes in the principle that people should have complete freedom of thought and action

[Late 18th century. < liberty ]

NOSHEEPLE

The only way to beat an idea

Is with another more attractive idea. Libertarianism is that idea. The political strategists on both sides are doing their best to pollute it.

PattyFromTexas

One other way to beat an idea...

Take stuff from one segment of society, then distribute it to the voters all wrapped up in a pretty bow.

The Trading Sector, Voluntary Sector, and Governmental Sector

To my libertarian way of looking at society, I don't see it like its often described, "the poor, the middle class, and the rich". Those 3 tiers don't really add up for me.

What does add up for me are these 3 tiers: The Trading Sector, the Voluntary Sector, and the Governmental Sector. In the Trading Sector you have mom & pop businesses and McDonalds all trading value for value. That is there are lots of businesses selling goods and services and these companies have a wide range of business talent, capitalization and market share.

In the Voluntary Sector you have all the thousands and thousands of churches, Little Leagues, Girl Scouts, Meals on Wheels, Walk for Cancer, and more, all doing real altruistic charity for one reason or another.

And in the Government Sector we have towns, cities, counties, states and the biggest baddest of them all, the Federal Government. To my way of thinking, it is this sector, the Government Sector, that is encroaching upon the other two sectors. And that is not a good thing.

Beware of the "Mutant Hybrids!!!". These are an invasive species really, and they are growing inside the normally pure Trading Sector and Voluntary Sector, which is even scarier than just a large growing Government Sector. For example, what do you call a "private company" that gets 50%, 75%, or even 99% of "its business" from just one "customer", the Government? Is that "private company" really "private" in the same sense that McDonald's is a private company whose customers are in the billions? Answer, NO! Its not the same as a private sector company whose customers are the millions found in John Q Public. This hybrid "company" with one "customer" is really a "Gov-Company", and these hybrids are growing in leaps and bounds.

Same is true in the Voluntary Sector, hybrids are growing there to thanks to GW Bush letting tax monies go to charities. Public-Private Charities are growing like vines, squeezing out and smothering 100% private charities. Before long, your local Little League donation will one day "match your donation" with one from the government, ie if you give us money, we get more money from the government sector.

These 3 sectors in society, the stagnate Trading Sector, the shrinking Voluntary Sector, and the out of control growth of the Government Sector, is what concerns libertarians the most. And its the Hybridization of these sectors and the nightmares to come that won't let us sleep at night.

Yes, please BUY this wonderful libertarian BOOK! We all must know the History of Freedom! Buy it today!

"The System of Liberty: Themes in the History of Classical Liberalism" ...by author George Smith --
Buy it Here: http://www.amazon.com/dp/05211820

Treg,

Thank you for that comment / analysis.
Hopefully Daily Paulers will take note of it.

Article seems pretty fluffy and divisive

The article seems to want to contrast progressives vs libertarians. Bad move. The progressives are more libertarian minded than most people understand. The progressives could be our allies to do to the democrats what the Ron Paul revolution did to the republicans and do it for the same ends. The author totally fails to realize this fact. The article seems to intentionally pit libertarians vs progressives.

This kind of talk will reinforce the libertarians as 'right' and progressives as 'wrong'. This is beyond stupid and seems to be an intentional psyop. If you so called libertarians attack me here this will prove my point. If progressives were to believe I am supporting them this would prove my point.

Our enemy is criminals! Why is this so hard to understand?

Oh, would that be because most still believe that politics will solve a crime problem? Politics will never solve a crime problem because it was not designed to solve a crime problem. Bringing remedy to crime is the job for juries competent in law but that just seems way to complicated for those who think in red or blue or Libertarian or progressive. If you fall for this division and circumvention of the fact that crime being committed by men claiming to be government is our REAL problem then you are just taking another turn on the hamster wheel and will see the rise of Libertarian vs progressive replace liberals vs conservatives as the new right vs left.

Sorry but that story is divisive crap written to make those of you who have fallen for applying a divisive label to yourself feel good about yourself so you will go back to the hamster wheel instead of being resolved to bring real justice to the war criminals and criminal thugs calling themselves "law enforcement" and "courts".

The progressives are totally with us on ending foreign interventionist policies, bringing justice to war criminals, ending the drug war, having real investigations of 9-11, eliminating the income tax, ending the police state. Somehow the writer turns Obama into the progressives man which is total bs.

If you fall for this then you will induce a bias in your mind that will pit someone calling themselves a progressive as someone against you and you will never move past that point while everything is destroyed around your hamster cage.

The most powerful Law of Nature is Time. It is finite and we all will run out of it. Use this Law to your advantage, for it offers you infinite possibilities...

I used to think that about Progressives... Don't anymore.

I think Justin summed them up well when he wrote: "that knife you see sticking out of the back of the ACLU and the wide array of liberal-left institutions and organizations that have joined the coalition to restore the Fourth Amendment and get the NSA out of our computers was put there by progressives like Beauchamp-Hillhiser, Wilentz, Watson, and the rest of the James Clapper Fan Club........

"These, however, are not liberals in the sense that my generation understood the term: there is nothing remotely liberal about their almost religious worship of the federal government and the principle of super-centralism that dominates progressive thought today. Forced to choose between a bloated overweening federal hegemony and eliminating the NSA’s invasion of our private lives, the Beauchamp-Hillhiser progressives unhesitatingly choose the former.......

"Yes, ideology certainly does matter, which is why a great many progressives responded to the Snowden revelations by simply shrugging their shoulders and holding out hopes for some vague "reform" of NSA practices. That’s because progressive ideology is a veritable church, these days, the god of which is State power as an unmitigated good. Even after a decade of war accompanied by a wholesale assault on the most basic civil liberties, they don’t fear the power of government: they worship it as the only agency that can right what’s wrong with American society......

Read "THE PROGRESSIVE CRACK-UP" here: http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2014/01/26/the-progressiv...

Yes, please BUY this wonderful libertarian BOOK! We all must know the History of Freedom! Buy it today!

"The System of Liberty: Themes in the History of Classical Liberalism" ...by author George Smith --
Buy it Here: http://www.amazon.com/dp/05211820

The labels are what caused the 'crackup'

That's why identifying with political labels is bad. Those labels are a wrapped gift for TPTB to divide and conquer. If we continue to use any political label such 'libertarian' then you will read the same story of crackup about libertarians down the road.

The most powerful Law of Nature is Time. It is finite and we all will run out of it. Use this Law to your advantage, for it offers you infinite possibilities...

TPTB ? What label is that?

What is a TPTB?

Yes, please BUY this wonderful libertarian BOOK! We all must know the History of Freedom! Buy it today!

"The System of Liberty: Themes in the History of Classical Liberalism" ...by author George Smith --
Buy it Here: http://www.amazon.com/dp/05211820

The Powers That Be

the ruling class......

"Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern." ~~C.S. Lewis
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

??? bottom line what we have today,

re·pub·li·can [ri púbblikən]
n (plural re·pub·li·cans)
supporter of republic as government: somebody who believes that the best government is one in which supreme power is vested in an electorate

pro·gres·sive [prə gréssiv]
adj
1. favoring reform: advocating social, economic, or political reform
2. progressing gradually: developing gradually over a period of time
a progressive decline in popularity

3. becoming more severe: describes a disease that becomes more widespread or severe over time
4. informal and less structured educationally: relating to or using a more informal, less structured approach to the education of children
5. with higher rates for higher incomes: describes a form of taxation in which the tax rate increases in proportion to the taxable income

NOSHEEPLE

These two

work together on a lot of levels.

NOSHEEPLE

If thats what you believe

"somebody who believes that the best government is one in which supreme power is vested in an electorate"

If you believe these definition are true and correct you are one of the SHEEPLE. Common Law has more specific limits on power within agency. If you believe there is anything other than law abiding people vs criminals then you have fallen into their trap.

We can operate on opinion and destroy everything around us OR what can operate with the protections of law and NONE of the political process matters at all.

The most powerful Law of Nature is Time. It is finite and we all will run out of it. Use this Law to your advantage, for it offers you infinite possibilities...

Both these groups

are corrupt. I don't identify with any fenced in political group.

Assumption is a failure mode to wisdom possessed.

NOSHEEPLE

Thank you

That's why I said "If".

+1 for your discernment.

I still would not use the labels. The labels destroy us and empower the psychos.

The most powerful Law of Nature is Time. It is finite and we all will run out of it. Use this Law to your advantage, for it offers you infinite possibilities...

I disagree.

If it is pitting libertarians vs. progressives, it is libertarians vs. fake progressives. That's it.

Falling for either one is the trap

Whether you fall for being 'libertarian' or 'progressive' it is a psyop trap whether you or the author of the article realize it or not.

TPTB want the labels and want you to want the label. If you want the label then you have chosen a 'side'. That's all they need you to do. Your neurological processing will do the rest of the functional processing they install into your mind and the minds of others.

You can test yourself for its effects if you can observe your own thoughts objectively. Do you identify libertarians as good? Do you observe progressives as bad? Do you have any emotional state over either word? Are you more likely to be adversarial toward 'progressives'? Are you likely to be more open minded towards 'libertarians'? Do you identify yourself as 'libertarian' and see that as good? If so then their labels are already working.

If libertarians become successful then you will see the psychos become 'libertarians' and then trash the label as corrupt or not based in reality or where ever they want to steer that label and then you will find others who consider you an adversary. Just think TEA party. They smashed those words and turned them into a shit sandwich.

There are certain things that you could identify yourself as that there is no way they can attack, 'a law abiding man/woman' for instance. That label will not be able to be corrupted because of the already established neurological weighted bias of those words. Libertarian is an easy target for corruption of the word.

Remember, it's not just about your perception but also about the perception of others who will fall for their psyop trap. Don't forget that. This is how they play the infowar with an end of divide of conquer. Label yourself a political label and you are doing them a favor by helping them divide and conquer.

The most powerful Law of Nature is Time. It is finite and we all will run out of it. Use this Law to your advantage, for it offers you infinite possibilities...

Interesting

Thanks for sharing this POV.

Yes, please BUY this wonderful libertarian BOOK! We all must know the History of Freedom! Buy it today!

"The System of Liberty: Themes in the History of Classical Liberalism" ...by author George Smith --
Buy it Here: http://www.amazon.com/dp/05211820

But as I said

It is clear that the "divisiveness" is really only simply the attacking of fake progressives; saying that those fake progressives support things that are completely opposite what real progressives would. That is different than saying all progressives, whether real or fake, are the same and attacking them all. Because the writer clearly wasn't attacking all progressives, he was simply pointing out the idiocy of those who claim to be real progressives while supporting and defending things that are completely opposite what real progressives would.

Do you identify libertarians as good?

Depends who they are, what they say, how they act or behave, etc.

Do you observe progressives as bad?

If they're fake progressives, particularly the variety that defend Presidentrash Obama for the same things they smashed Presidentrash Bush for.

Do you have any emotional state over either word?

Not necessarily.

Are you more likely to be adversarial toward 'progressives'?

If they're fake progressives.

Are you likely to be more open minded towards 'libertarians'?

I am open minded to most people regardless of being libertarian or not. It depends who they are, what they say, how they act or behave, etc.

Do you identify yourself as 'libertarian' and see that as good?

I identify with both libertarians and to certain degrees real progressives as well for a variety of reasons and causes, both personal, political, social, etc.

If so then their labels are already working.

Labels are sometimes important.

Sounds like your pretty balanced there

I have just seen too many people fall into the trap of labels.

Labels are generally bad and an effective tool for TPTB. But you seem to have contained the emotional aspects of the labels for now.

I like to just stick to the law. Pointing out violations of law and criminal acts has proven (to myself) to be the most effective position. I do not come from a political position because I only seek to uphold the law. I don't participate in politics I only seek to bring down the criminals through our juries. I don't believe politics is legit or effective at all as far as getting people 'elected'. I think they pretty much allow people they can contain (like Ron Paul in Congress) to enable some diversity just for the purpose of collecting intelligence through those elements they contain. That's why I just seek justice for criminals through detailed criminal investigations targeted for our juries.

I want the criminals in prison not just thrown out of office. Talking to others only in terms of what is lawful and what is not doesn't put me on any 'side' and it enables me to talk to anyone without the labels inducing negative bias.

So keep your head on straight but I recommend being very careful with the labels they are very dangerous.

The most powerful Law of Nature is Time. It is finite and we all will run out of it. Use this Law to your advantage, for it offers you infinite possibilities...

Great read.

Thank you for this.

Great piece

shared it to my facebook

How many times can one

How many times can one article elicit a "hadn't thought of it in that context" from a long tooth like me? Outstanding and optimistic, both.

10-15 million more voters need to believe in non-interventionism (liberty) at home and abroad to change America. Minds changed on Syria. Minds changing on privacy. "Printing money" is part of the dialogue. Win minds through focus, strategy.

Phxarcher87's picture

Solid

piece! bump

THE CLASS OF CITIZENS WHO PROVIDE AT ONCE THEIR OWN FOOD AND THEIR OWN RAIMENT, MAY BE VIEWED AS THE MOST TRULY INDEPENDENT AND HAPPY.
James Madison

This is a great article

He frames the current state of affairs quite nicely, a good roundup.

I particularly enjoyed this:

While partisans sit around and pontificate, young people are exercising their freedom and making the world a better place through massive open-source networks.

This is the essence of opt-out culture. Millennials, having grown up on the Web, are not really into centralization, and thus not into politics.

It’s much easier for them to imagine a world in which you choose from thousands of “apps” (emergent communities) than a world in which every couple of years you wait in line for ages to send your prayers up to get one of two crummy apps—only to have them both suck.

Libertarianism is the antidote to this failed democratic operating system (DOS).

Reason #10

10. Libertarianism is inevitable. In “50 Ways to Leave Leviathan,” Jeffrey Tucker and I showed that the old rules are becoming obsolete. People are connecting and cooperating across national boundaries. They’re practicing what James C. Scott calls “Irish Democracy,” which is another term for people simply turning their backs, on a massive scale, on an imposed order. Together, whatever our moralistic stripes, we are simultaneously creating a new order while rendering the old order obsolete. And now we’re aided by technology. This is not a libertarian ideology, but a libertarian reality carved out by people who simply refuse to be controlled by peers who purport to be superiors.

Read more: http://www.fee.org/the_freeman/detail/rise-of-the-libertaria...

allegory - ˈalɪg(ə)ri/ - noun - 1. a story, poem, or picture which can be interpreted to reveal a hidden meaning, typically a moral or political one.