Libertarian Fools' Paradise

[Kishkumen]

I am not a big fan of libertarianism because, in my view, it ignores inescapable realities about the human species and civilization. Homo sapiens dominates primarily because of its superior ability to act in concert as large coalitions. To effectively do so over long periods of time is the job of civilization, and it does so most effectively through robust and stable institutions. As Sally Paine of the Naval War College has rightly observed:

An encompassing set of enduring institutions is the great innovation of the West and hallmark of Western civilization. Institutions create durability beyond the horizons of human mortality. The political and economic brilliance of the West comes from its institutions, which its citizens take for granted and often assume that others either have or can spontaneously create.

The libertarian is the poster child for this kind of "taking for granted" and "assuming." Indeed, I would say that this has also been the poison pill of the modern GOP and the faddish ideology of creative disruption that came out of Harvard Business School. Adults understand that institutions serve a crucial function in making society and civilization work. Children ignore, neglect, and denigrate institutions at their own peril and the peril of all.

[Gadianton]

I keep wanting to think libertarianism is so yesterday with the new right -- the classical right who is led by the alt-right. The messaging is about making Trump supreme ruler, which is hardly a libertarian ideal. A model of a functional republic for Today's right would be the likes of Tajikistan or Turkmenistan. Republics in name only, where a goofball cult of personality like Trump calls all the shots and makes everything about him personally. Trump has nearly succeeded with the latter, even when he's not president. His efforts as president began with abusing executive orders, constant lying, and desperate power grabs but extended to things like, guidance on rewriting American history and defining "beautiful architecture". "Nice to haves" as president, but essentials when moving to dictator. The more extreme he gets, the more his base cheers him on. So how on earth can they be libertarians?

Yet at the same time, look at a Trump rally. If I'm a republican then on the one hand, I want Trump as dictator, but on the other, I ride around on a 10 foot unicycle and dress like a clown. there is definitely that impulse of individuality. I don't think beliefs are as monolithic as we may think, I think the beliefs tend to be wildly inconsistent and varying, and that Republicans can have somewhat diverse opinions as long as every sentence begins and ends with Donald Trump. As long as each Republican practices crossing their eyes and drooping the right half of their lower lip in front of the mirror as they speak His name, there is reasonable tolerance for all the other words they say that aren't "Trump".

Perhaps the introduction of RFK tests the tension between libertarian and authoritarian. On the one hand, promoting an authoritarian is a natural contrarian move, a way to get noticed, a way to shock and piss off the status quo. "Hey, I'm an individual, I can like Vladimir Putin and Ted Bundy if I want, neener neener." But it isn't the only game in town. All the nut-ball conspiracy theories that Trump plays nice with and has had conveniently molded around him by his base, he doesn't really believe. I think he's confused sometimes, and wonders why his base needs all that stuff when they have him to worship? I think that Trump worship is one of many contrarian plays. What I'm saying specifically is, that liking Donald Trump is exactly like riding a 10-foot unicycle dressed like a clown. It scratches the same libertarian/contrarian itch. The dangers of riding a unicycle are immediate, however, while the dangers of worshiping trump are delayed.

RFK gives people who want to LARP an alternative. Pissing off liberals by liking Trump is fun, but it's also fun to dig deep into a mysterious conspiracy about vaccines, or what have you, and feel part of a cabal that knows the truth. While Trump has been part of that myth-making, he's not essential to it. I saw RFK on Koncrete podcast, and he's really working that culture. We infotainment addicts get bored easy, and it's very possible that other topics compatible with Trump are simply moving on without him for a number of people.

Adults understand that institutions serve a crucial function in making society and civilization work

Yes. And it may be the work of all the elections past that have created strong institutions that may yet save us from what could come later this year.

That was the number one thing I got out of that basic history class we all had to take at the Y. Can't remember what it's called. Factionalism and gridlock -- the backbone of America. You don't want a country of 300 million plus to turn on a dime.

[Kishkumen]

All wonderful insights, Dean Robbers. I was struck by an argument about fascist Germany that I recently encountered on one of the cable “news” shows. The Nazis were able to stitch together enough support from different quarters to take power. It was by appealing to the desires of normally incompatible or widely unrelated groups that they were able to do it. Key to this was making sure businessmen knew they would profit from a Nazi government. A book I recently read about the fall of the Roman Republic made a similar argument about Caesar’s dictatorship. A lot of wealthier Italians were tired of the drama of aristocratic competition in the Republic, but they feared a new Sulla who would seize power and take land and property, so they continued to prop up the system Sulla, ironically, had created, which was all about preventing another Sulla from taking power. Caesar marched on Rome, a Sullan tactic, but he did not steal the property of the wealthy as Sulla had. Once the wealthy realized this, and it also became known that his opposition was salivating over the proposition of property theft, it was all over for the traditional Republic.

Trump is dangerous in part because of his support among the wealthy and privileged. Liberals make fun of the dumb Trump supporter, but if you examine the situation more carefully, there is real cause for alarm here. The super-wealthy no longer seem to believe in the state as anything but an impediment to their further conquests in the world of property and wealth acquisition. The poor are much more useful if they can be talked out of valuing the benefits the state provides. Benefits like a functioning legal system. Forget about the social safety net. The legal system is a big target because it can be used to protect the weak from the powerful. We see how poorly it is standing up against Trump. He may very well waltz into a second term without facing any consequences for the many obvious felonies he committed. All of this further erodes faith in the system, which is exactly what the “libertarian” billionaire elite wants.

[Gadianton]

A book I recently read about the fall of the Roman Republic made a similar argument about Caesar’s dictatorship. A lot of wealthier Italians were tired of the drama of aristocratic competition in the Republic, but they feared a new Sulla who would seize power and take land and property, so they continued to prop up the system Sulla, ironically, had created, which was all about preventing another Sulla from taking power. Caesar marched on Rome, a Sullan tactic, but he did not steal the property of the wealthy as Sulla had. Once the wealthy realized this, and it also became known that his opposition was salivating over the proposition of property theft, it was all over for the traditional Republic.

That's a serious conundrum, and it's certainly relevant. Every now and again some hair-brain tax legislature will get proposed by dems, and I'll have a moment where I think, "don't make not care if Trump wins" and I'm not wealthy.

[Gunnar]

All wonderful insights, Dean Robbers. I was struck by an argument about fascist Germany that I recently encountered on one of the cable “news” shows. The Nazis were able to stitch together enough support from different quarters to take power. It was by appealing to the desires of normally incompatible or widely unrelated groups that they were able to do it. Key to this was making sure businessmen knew they would profit from a Nazi government. A book I recently read about the fall of the Roman Republic made a similar argument about Caesar’s dictatorship. A lot of wealthier Italians were tired of the drama of aristocratic competition in the Republic, but they feared a new Sulla who would seize power and take land and property, so they continued to prop up the system Sulla, ironically, had created, which was all about preventing another Sulla from taking power. Caesar marched on Rome, a Sullan tactic, but he did not steal the property of the wealthy as Sulla had. Once the wealthy realized this, and it also became known that his opposition was salivating over the proposition of property theft, it was all over for the traditional Republic.

Trump is dangerous in part because of his support among the wealthy and privileged. Liberals make fun of the dumb Trump supporter, but if you examine the situation more carefully, there is real cause for alarm here. The super-wealthy no longer seem to believe in the state as anything but an impediment to their further conquests in the world of property and wealth acquisition. The poor are much more useful if they can be talked out of valuing the benefits the state provides. Benefits like a functioning legal system. Forget about the social safety net. The legal system is a big target because it can be used to protect the weak from the powerful. We see how poorly it is standing up against Trump. He may very well waltz into a second term without facing any consequences for the many obvious felonies he committed. All of this further erodes faith in the system, which is exactly what the “libertarian” billionaire elite wants.

Excellent topic and thread! I have pretty much felt this has all been true for a long time but have never seen or heard it stated more clearly or eloquently! Thank you for that! It is so obvious when you state it that way and has only become more obvious since Trump pathologically inflicted himself upon us. It is also glaringly obvious that no one knows this better than the wealthy and privileged who are doing their darndest to enable and excuse Trump's actions and goals. They are certainly even more to blame than the dumb Trump supporters who have been successfully duped by them and Trump. I think that Trump is probably pretty much inconsequential to them except as a useful idiot they would love to get rid of as soon as he has helped them secure their objectives. Surely, they can't help but realize just how stupid he really is.

[Gunnar]

I keep wanting to think libertarianism is so yesterday with the new right -- the classical right who is led by the alt-right. The messaging is about making Trump supreme ruler, which is hardly a libertarian ideal. A model of a functional republic for Today's right would be the likes of Tajikistan or Turkmenistan. Republics in name only, where a goofball cult of personality like Trump calls all the shots and makes everything about him personally. Trump has nearly succeeded with the latter, even when he's not president. His efforts as president began with abusing executive orders, constant lying, and desperate power grabs but extended to things like, guidance on rewriting American history and defining "beautiful architecture". "Nice to haves" as president, but essentials when moving to dictator. The more extreme he gets, the more his base cheers him on. So how on earth can they be libertarians?

Yet at the same time, look at a Trump rally. If I'm a republican then on the one hand, I want Trump as dictator, but on the other, I ride around on a 10 foot unicycle and dress like a clown. there is definitely that impulse of individuality. I don't think beliefs are as monolithic as we may think, I think the beliefs tend to be wildly inconsistent and varying, and that Republicans can have somewhat diverse opinions as long as every sentence begins and ends with Donald Trump. As long as each Republican practices crossing their eyes and drooping the right half of their lower lip in front of the mirror as they speak His name, there is reasonable tolerance for all the other words they say that aren't "Trump".

Perhaps the introduction of RFK tests the tension between libertarian and authoritarian. On the one hand, promoting an authoritarian is a natural contrarian move, a way to get noticed, a way to shock and piss off the status quo. "Hey, I'm an individual, I can like Vladimir Putin and Ted Bundy if I want, neener neener." But it isn't the only game in town. All the nut-ball conspiracy theories that Trump plays nice with and has had conveniently molded around him by his base, he doesn't really believe. I think he's confused sometimes, and wonders why his base needs all that stuff when they have him to worship? I think that Trump worship is one of many contrarian plays. What I'm saying specifically is, that liking Donald Trump is exactly like riding a 10-foot unicycle dressed like a clown. It scratches the same libertarian/contrarian itch. The dangers of riding a unicycle are immediate, however, while the dangers of worshiping trump are delayed.

RFK gives people who want to LARP an alternative. Pissing off liberals by liking Trump is fun, but it's also fun to dig deep into a mysterious conspiracy about vaccines, or what have you, and feel part of a cabal that knows the truth. While Trump has been part of that myth-making, he's not essential to it. I saw RFK on Koncrete podcast, and he's really working that culture. We infotainment addicts get bored easy, and it's very possible that other topics compatible with Trump are simply moving on without him for a number of people.

Adults understand that institutions serve a crucial function in making society and civilization work

Yes. And it may be the work of all the elections past that have created strong institutions that may yet save us from what could come later this year.

That was the number one thing I got out of that basic history class we all had to take at the Y. Can't remember what it's called. Factionalism and gridlock -- the backbone of America. You don't want a country of 300 million plus to turn on a dime.

Thanks so much for your perspective too! Between you and Kish we get a very valuable insight on the dangers of Trump and his MAGAism. The Trump supporters who think they would be better off with a Trump ruled dictatorship have no clue how horrible that could be. I have little doubt that what Trump wants is an absolute dictatorship like Kim Jong Uns' North Korea, in which he has the power to assassinate, execute or imprison with complete impunity anyone who expresses any opposition to him.

[Kishkumen]

That's a serious conundrum, and it's certainly relevant. Every now and again some hair-brain tax legislature will get proposed by dems, and I'll have a moment where I think, "don't make not care if Trump wins" and I'm not wealthy.

The tendency not to take account of the range of views in the electorate is a reality that must constantly be wrestled with. This is the huge blind spot of every extreme movement. The extremists have a conviction about what they perceive the rational and right thing is, but they forget they are stuck in a decision-making coalition (all voting citizens) whom they have to get on board with their views. Failing to persuade, they turn to other means such as manipulating the courts or suppressing the vote.

[Kishkumen]

Excellent topic and thread! I have pretty much felt this has all been true for a long time but have never seen or heard it stated more clearly or eloquently! Thank you for that! It is so obvious when you state it that way and has only become more obvious since Trump pathologically inflicted himself upon us. It is also glaringly obvious that no one knows this better than the wealthy and privileged who are doing their darndest to enable and excuse Trump's actions and goals. They are certainly even more to blame than the dumb Trump supporters who have been successfully duped by them and Trump. I think that Trump is probably pretty much inconsequential to them except as a useful idiot they would love to get rid of as soon as he has helped them secure their objectives. Surely, they can't help but realize just how stupid he really is.

Thank you, Gunnar. Your Trump as useful idiot thesis is surely correct.

[Gadianton]

Disconnecting from the specifics of our present political catastrophe, here is an excellent example of a libertarian fantasy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U9-et4H1jvY&t=1s. It's picture perfect, right down to the first bit of dialog, "It's a joke, but it's not a joke.."

I've said I'm a libertarian. That's mainly because I like to do my own thing, I'm not a participator, I think stuff like Obama's ideals of doing community service is not for me, by a long shot. I don't want a handout and I don't want to give handouts although I do feel guilty and do so grudgingly at times. I can understand repressed peoples fighting for their rights, but it's their fight, not mine. I'm not going to walk down the street with a rainbow flag. (unless it were to troll a right-winger in my neighborhood)

There is definitely some bleed into my economic beliefs. But the real world is quite complicated, and there's no model that reduces to a sound byte that's going to fix our problems. There are markets and there are market failures, and it's not easy to figure out if a situation is one or the other. In general, if there's a chance it's a market, I'm happy to try that first and leave me alone. I guess I hope that the inevitable mixed economy is slightly more libertarian than social welfare.

[Imwashingmypirate]

I am not a big fan of libertarianism because, in my view, it ignores inescapable realities about the human species and civilization. Homo sapiens dominates primarily because of its superior ability to act in concert as large coalitions. To effectively do so over long periods of time is the job of civilization, and it does so most effectively through robust and stable institutions. As Sally Paine of the Naval War College has rightly observed:

An encompassing set of enduring institutions is the great innovation of the West and hallmark of Western civilization. Institutions create durability beyond the horizons of human mortality. The political and economic brilliance of the West comes from its institutions, which its citizens take for granted and often assume that others either have or can spontaneously create.

The libertarian is the poster child for this kind of "taking for granted" and "assuming." Indeed, I would say that this has also been the poison pill of the modern GOP and the faddish ideology of creative disruption that came out of Harvard Business School. Adults understand that institutions serve a crucial function in making society and civilization work. Children ignore, neglect, and denigrate institutions at their own peril and the peril of all.

Never heard it worded this way. I can visualise that as making sense. I wouldn't be quick to assume that the east isn't a successful civilisation in its own right. I also wouldn't assume that is is fair (not sure is it should be fare, bit tired), to accuse people who are ignorant or inexperienced as taking it for granted. We only know what we know or what we have been led to believe. I also think it isn't good to accuse children of ignoring, neglecting and denigrating institutions. I doubt they have that much influence that it would matter. But they don't know. Not all children fight against the institution. But all adults were once children and they grow up and become part of the system.