I promise to “give it a rest” after one last look at the “Marxism of the right”.
Libertarians of all persuasions and Objectivists have the right to urge us to make the world a safe place for free market capitalism. It’s in worse shape than Polar Bears according to the oligarchs.
“No rules, just right”.
I mean, what would the free market do? That is the highest morality. … You have the right to disagree with libertarians and Objectivists but remember, they took a course in economics once.
A pivotal part of libertarianism is EVERYTHING must be owned because all “rights” are defined by ownership. Rothbard declares dependent children to be “owned” by their parents. You can kill them if you like. It’s in his book. He doesn’t advise it, but says you have the “right”.
The concept of “commons”? GONE. It is the only way of making the philosophy consistent and these folks love pounding square pegs through round holes. Muir Woods now has an owner who calls all the shots. If she wants to bulldoze it, what business is it of yours? Passing a law requiring her to preserve ancient redwoods would violate the non aggression principle.
Here is how that works:
“[The Native Americans] didn’t have any rights to the land and there was no reason for anyone to grant them rights which they had not conceived and were not using…. What was it they were fighting for, if they opposed white men on this continent? For their wish to continue a primitive existence, their “right” to keep part of the earth untouched, unused and not even as property, just keep everybody out so that you will live practically like an animal, or maybe a few caves above it. Any white person who brought the element of civilization had the right to take over this continent.”
* Source: “Q and A session following Ayn Rand’s Address To The Graduating Class Of The United States Military Academy at West Point, New York, March 6, 1974”
She was a peach all-righty. At least she cannot be faulted for not wanting to protect children:
“I do not think that the retarded should be allowed to come near children. Children cannot deal, and should not have to deal, with the very tragic spectacle of a handicapped human being. When they grow up, they may give it some attention, if they’re interested, but it should never be presented to them in childhood, and certainly not as an example of something they have to live down to.”
– Ayn Rand, The Age of Mediocrity, Q & A Ford Hall Forum, April, 1981
No wonder she is Paul Ryan’s inspiration.
Under the new morality everything must be owned and anything compulsory is aggression.
Unless of course you don’t want it that way. Objectivists have no problem with “pre-emptive strikes” or either war in Iraq. So taxes are a violation of the non aggression principle but carpet bombing is not… (confirmation is a quick “google” away).
The truth is we have laws mitigating capitalism because they were needed. I won’t argue those laws are perfect. They aren’t. I will argue that if libertarian principles were self evident and a higher morality … there might be one nation in the world who had ever tried them.
And I would miss the hell out of Muir Woods…
We are 7 billion people now and technology has made workers super productive. At a time when more labor is available than ever before and less needed we are told that if the boss says go back down in the Carlsbad Nuclear Waste Site (now leaking but under libertarianism it would be privately owned) you can quit, ask for a raise or just do it. It would be a violation of the non aggression principle to ask for laws forcing that boss to do anything at all. Like full disclosure or safety gear. Oh, he could if it was voluntary and he felt like it…
And what is in that food you eat? If people die from eating, the market will self correct and that business will go under. Forget required food labeling. I have been told eat organic rather than place the burden of regulation. Really? Without regulation I have a cub scout’s word the food is clean.
Rah, Rah Rand and Rothbard!
I have been immersed in Libertarian and Objectivist polemics for 3 weeks now and I feel dirty. I am off to take a shower. I would like to leave you with a question. Is ibertarianism/Objectivism “a few caves above” social Darwinism? The Von Mises Institute doesn’t think so. They have an entire paper out defending Spencer as a misunderstood good guy. Who was Spencer? The “father of Social Darwinism”.
Libertopia is a far off future. It is more instructive to know what policies they support in the here and now and who they are.
Charles and David Koch are the two most powerful plutocrat libertarians in America. They founded the Cato Institute (originally called The Charles Koch Foundation). They have recently reasserted control through a law suit/purge.
In 1980 David Koch ran as the vice presidential nominee on the Libertarian ticket. Please read the platform he supported:
Next week I will invite you on a dog walk with pictures… It will be more fun than an old man’s rant.