|
Libertarianism is the Marxism of the Right
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Comrade Stalin |
I have said it before and I will say it again. Libertarianism is no less utopian than Stalinist Communism.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Excerpt taken from the American Conservative.
Libertarianism is basically the Marxism of the Right. If Marxism is the delusion that one can run society purely on altruism and collectivism, then libertarianism is the mirror-image delusion that one can run it purely on selfishness and individualism. Society in fact requires both individualism and collectivism, both selfishness and altruism, to function. Like Marxism, libertarianism offers the fraudulent intellectual security of a complete a priori account of the political good without the effort of empirical investigation. Like Marxism, it aspires, overtly or covertly, to reduce social life to economics. And like Marxism, it has its historical myths and a genius for making its followers feel like an elect unbound by the moral rules of their society.
The most fundamental problem with libertarianism is very simple: freedom, though a good thing, is simply not the only good thing in life. Simple physical security, which even a prisoner can possess, is not freedom, but one cannot live without it. Prosperity is connected to freedom, in that it makes us free to consume, but it is not the same thing, in that one can be rich but as unfree as a Victorian tycoon’s wife. A family is in fact one of the least free things imaginable, as the emotional satisfactions of it derive from relations that we are either born into without choice or, once they are chosen, entail obligations that we cannot walk away from with ease or justice. But security, prosperity, and family are in fact the bulk of happiness for most real people and the principal issues that concern governments.
Libertarians try to get around this fact that freedom is not the only good thing by trying to reduce all other goods to it through the concept of choice, claiming that everything that is good is so because we choose to partake of it. Therefore freedom, by giving us choice, supposedly embraces all other goods. But this violates common sense by denying that anything is good by nature, independently of whether we choose it. Nourishing foods are good for us by nature, not because we choose to eat them. Taken to its logical conclusion, the reduction of the good to the freely chosen means there are no inherently good or bad choices at all, but that a man who chose to spend his life playing tiddlywinks has lived as worthy a life as a Washington or a Churchill.
Furthermore, the reduction of all goods to individual choices presupposes that all goods are individual. But some, like national security, clean air, or a healthy culture, are inherently collective. It may be possible to privatize some, but only some, and the efforts can be comically inefficient. Do you really want to trace every pollutant in the air back to the factory that emitted it and sue?
FULL ARTICLE HERE |
|
|
| Capitalizt |
| holy strawman batman! |
|
|
| Comrade Stalin |
| Is that it? |
|
|
| Capitalizt |
Yes.. It reminded me of you railing against libertarians for wanting to abolish "socialist" traffic lights..lol.
I'm sure there are some so-called "libertarians" (really anarchists) that want to go that far, but it simply aint the case for the majority of us. It's an epic strawman. Less government ≠ no government.
and calling it marxism "of the right" is another huge mistake..since libertarians disagree with right wingers today on nearly everything. They are more in line with the far left on a huge range of social/political issues. |
|
|
|
|
