Tag(s): ; , Add Tags
Add to My Group(s)

Must Read 7   Well Said 6   Funny 3   View Ratings | Rate It

Promoted to Headline (H3) on 5/22/10:     Permalink
View Article Stats      (60 comments)

Liberated from Libertarianism: Rand Paul Runs and Hides from ... Rand Paul

Add this Page to Facebook!
Submit to Twitter
Submit to Reddit
Submit to Stumble Upon

Tell A Friend
Become a Fan
Get Embed HTML Code
By (about the author)

Become a Fan Become a Fan  (41 fans)   -- Page 3 of 3 page(s)

opednews.com

Suppose you bought a house and had a fat mortgage outstanding on it. Now the guy who owns the plot next door decides to build an abattoir on his land. You can't live in your house anymore because of the nauseating, permeating, stink. You also can't sell it, because no one else wants to live there either. And you're still stuck paying the mortgage, probably plunging you into bankruptcy since you're now also paying rent to live somewhere else. Why did all this happen? Because you voted for that libertarian city council, and they threw out all the zoning laws on the books, preferring maximum freedom for use of private property instead. Aren't you thrilled about how that worked out?

So you pack all your belongings in your car and decide to drive away. But you turn around after going just a couple of miles, because everybody drives on any side of the road they want to, whenever they want to, and it's scary dangerous out there. Why? Because the libertarian state government you elected true to its principles eliminated all such driving laws as the restrictions on personal freedom they truly are.

So maybe you'll fly instead, eh? Oops. Sorry. That's just as frightening. The new libertarian federal government eliminated the FAA and all its restrictions on private carriers as an invasion of their corporate liberties. No red tape here anymore! No onerous regulations! Now each carrier can hire whomever it wants, at whatever salary, to do whatever amount of safety inspection it deems appropriate. Or none at all. No reason to worry, though. I'm sure a corporation would never cut corners in order to maximize profits, right?

Well, actually, never mind the flying off to a better place idea is moot anyhow. You see, there's no airport in your town. No private actors had either the resources or the motivation to build one. And since government is evil, they never did the job either. Which is also why you're about to lose you job, as well. With no ports, trains, highways, internet or other mass infrastructure, the US is about to become an economic actor more or less on the scale of Togo. Congratulations on that bright move, my libertarian friend! How does the freedom of chronic unemployment taste? Yummy, eh?

But, really, what do you care, anyhow? Your water is polluted because anyone can dump anything into it they want. Ditto with your filthy air. And global warming is about to take out all the living things on the planet, anyhow. We will be quite free to die, thanks to libertarianism.

Well, all is not lost. At least you can walk down to your local dining establishment and have a nice meal without having to fear the presence of darkies or queers in the same room with you. That pretty much makes it all worth it, no?


We could go on and on from here, but why bother? The point is made. The problem with libertarianism is that it is a child's candy store fantasy. Lots of sugar, no nutritional value. It's the Mel Gibson ("Freeeee-dom!!") of political ideologies. The ugly truth is that we hominids are social animals, not atomistic asteroids, each flying through space in our own little orbit. At the end of the day, the simultaneous great delight and awful curse of our humanness is, ultimately, each other.

That is not to say that individual liberty is not important. It is, and I no more favor libertarianism's opposite number, totalitarianism, than I do the lunacy of Ayn Rand, who spent her life (vastly over-)reacting to the Stalinism of her youth. I don't want to live in either of those worlds. It's just that it's naive and juvenile to believe that what is required here is anything other than some sort of difficult balance between the needs of the individual and those of society. That's the only solution that works.

One would think we might have learned this lesson of late. We've just come through an era of wholesale foolish deregulation in the name of setting free Americans and their productive capacities. The whole of our ethos of political economy these last three decades could easily be boiled down to a single bumper-sticker: "Government Bad, Industry Good". So now we might wanna ask ourselves, as Sarah Palin would put it (assuming she had a brain larger than a centipede's), "How's that whole deregulatey depressiony thing working out for you?"

Sorry, Mr. Paul. Just when we've seen precisely what happens when greedy individuals with all the morality of mafia hit men are allowed to do whatever they want by a government that is completely coopted by them on a good day, and utterly AWOL the rest of the time, you come talking to me about more "freedom' from government intrusion?!?! Are you joking?

Government, as imperfect and downright lethal as it can be when in the hands of those who use it for the wrong purposes, is the instrument and expression of the public will. It is the tool through which society conveys its values and seeks to achieve our mutual goals. And it is meant to be triumphant over private actors because societal needs (which, by the way, can, should and often do include government protecting individual liberties see, for example, "Rights, Bill of") are broadly more important than those of the individual.

It would be a mark of our (return to) political maturity if we could acknowledge that.

If that's too much to ask, though, I wonder if my libertarian friends would at least be willing to take ownership of the real implications of their own ideology.

I mean, if you guys are just going to practice deceit and hypocrisy, why bother taking over the Republican Party?

Those guys are already experts.

Next Page  1  |  2  |  3

 

www.regressiveantidote.net

David Michael Green is a professor of political science at Hofstra University in New York.  He is delighted to receive readers' reactions to his articles (dmg@regressiveantidote.net), (more...)
 

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles

 

Share this page: (what's this?)                   Tell a Friend: Tell A Friend

Add this Page to Facebook!      Submit to Stumble Upon      Submit to Reddit      Add This Page to Mr Wong!           NEWSVINE      DEl.ICIO.US      Looksmart Furl      My Web      Blink List     (More...)

Comments

The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
60 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
(Or you can set your preferences to show all comments, always)

MotherJones depicts Rand Paul as 911Truther by Richmond Gardner on Saturday, May 22, 2010 at 8:54:12 PM
Sweet! by BaronVonRothschild on Sunday, May 23, 2010 at 10:52:09 AM
Libertarians are not anarchists by Starbuck on Saturday, May 22, 2010 at 9:46:15 PM
Not quite by Kathy Stuart on Sunday, May 23, 2010 at 10:43:15 AM
Who said there'd be no laws? by BaronVonRothschild on Sunday, May 23, 2010 at 10:51:16 AM
If he were for deregulation, by marko polo on Sunday, May 23, 2010 at 6:21:18 AM
Corporations by BaronVonRothschild on Sunday, May 23, 2010 at 10:44:29 AM
Commerce clause of Constitution by MichaelOhio on Sunday, May 23, 2010 at 12:26:04 PM
Libertarianism is Anarchy for rich people. by Phil DeGrave on Sunday, May 23, 2010 at 10:13:27 AM
Wow. You teach political science? by BaronVonRothschild on Sunday, May 23, 2010 at 10:40:12 AM
Let's be big boys and girls here by truthseeker7 on Sunday, May 23, 2010 at 10:43:37 AM
Also by BaronVonRothschild on Sunday, May 23, 2010 at 10:56:45 AM
Perhaps Rand is a Better Chess-Player than Anyone Thought by Conspiracy Girl on Monday, May 24, 2010 at 9:38:01 AM
let's hope so by truthseeker7 on Monday, May 24, 2010 at 10:48:24 AM
What would have Martin Luther King Jr Said? by Randy Rinaldo on Sunday, May 23, 2010 at 11:02:29 AM
This joker by Daniel Geery on Sunday, May 23, 2010 at 11:04:43 AM
Rand Paul Interview by Bernard on Sunday, May 23, 2010 at 11:24:22 AM
The Problem With The Interview by Conspiracy Girl on Tuesday, May 25, 2010 at 2:43:53 AM
Tweet: Rand Paul exposed by MichaelOhio on Sunday, May 23, 2010 at 11:50:57 AM
Rands position is simple. by marko polo on Sunday, May 23, 2010 at 12:10:31 PM
The lunch counter, the gas station restroom by Jim Arnold on Sunday, May 23, 2010 at 12:37:24 PM
Perhaps you misunderstand the word "public" by BaronVonRothschild on Sunday, May 23, 2010 at 2:22:52 PM
Perhaps not. by MichaelOhio on Sunday, May 23, 2010 at 2:38:37 PM
commerce by Jim Arnold on Sunday, May 23, 2010 at 2:42:44 PM
History: Revised by BaronVonRothschild on Sunday, May 23, 2010 at 5:22:29 PM
Histor despised by Jim Arnold on Sunday, May 23, 2010 at 8:24:30 PM
The "virtue" of autonomy and soveriegnty by Randy Rinaldo on Sunday, May 23, 2010 at 11:35:10 PM
The Forgotten Man by Conspiracy Girl on Monday, May 24, 2010 at 2:52:28 PM
Home? by Randy Rinaldo on Sunday, May 23, 2010 at 11:46:07 PM
The problem is by Kathy Stuart on Sunday, May 23, 2010 at 5:00:49 PM
Yes or No! by Craig Thomas on Sunday, May 23, 2010 at 12:43:20 PM
Bravo, Mr. Green by Carol Crown on Sunday, May 23, 2010 at 1:11:25 PM
Disagree, Agree, Dystopia by Ankhorite on Sunday, May 23, 2010 at 1:18:49 PM
equally empty rhetoric by MITYOJAB on Sunday, May 23, 2010 at 4:57:25 PM
Libertarianism by Nancy S on Sunday, May 23, 2010 at 5:43:40 PM
ITS ONE BIG PARTY by MARGARET BASET on Monday, May 24, 2010 at 4:01:01 AM
Very good article by Dick Thomson on Monday, May 24, 2010 at 6:59:29 AM
Von Mises is Prevailing by Conspiracy Girl on Monday, May 24, 2010 at 8:43:42 AM
Keynesian vs. American by Dick Thomson on Monday, May 24, 2010 at 9:16:23 AM
Minority Rights by Conspiracy Girl on Monday, May 24, 2010 at 8:29:13 AM
real liberals should support Paul by Matt Kjeldsen on Monday, May 24, 2010 at 10:01:29 AM
talk about "not getting it"! by Jim Arnold on Monday, May 24, 2010 at 12:05:08 PM
race pimping by Matt Kjeldsen on Monday, May 24, 2010 at 12:42:38 PM
A "free republic" by Jim Arnold on Monday, May 24, 2010 at 2:05:27 PM
Not engaging in commerce by Conspiracy Girl on Monday, May 24, 2010 at 6:23:31 PM
Facts and principles by Jim Arnold on Monday, May 24, 2010 at 8:14:00 PM
Wickard vs Filburn by Conspiracy Girl on Monday, May 24, 2010 at 9:42:39 PM
Wickard vs Filburn by Conspiracy Girl on Monday, May 24, 2010 at 10:31:25 PM
excessive regulation by Jim Arnold on Tuesday, May 25, 2010 at 7:22:08 AM
Not engaging in commerce by Conspiracy Girl on Monday, May 24, 2010 at 10:32:31 PM
I HAVE POSTED THIS BEFORE by MARGARET BASET on Tuesday, May 25, 2010 at 7:27:45 AM
Libs are people, too by BaronVonRothschild on Wednesday, May 26, 2010 at 4:02:00 AM
focus by Jim Arnold on Wednesday, May 26, 2010 at 6:06:46 PM
Wow by BaronVonRothschild on Thursday, May 27, 2010 at 11:20:52 AM
personal exchange, commercial exchange by Jim Arnold on Thursday, May 27, 2010 at 6:07:50 PM
Individual rights vs. community by Carol Crown on Wednesday, May 26, 2010 at 9:08:20 AM
Fear by BaronVonRothschild on Wednesday, May 26, 2010 at 11:17:56 AM
foxes in the henhouse by Jim Arnold on Wednesday, May 26, 2010 at 6:19:37 PM
You get tunnel vision with your fears by Carol Crown on Thursday, May 27, 2010 at 8:58:27 AM
Well by BaronVonRothschild on Thursday, May 27, 2010 at 11:58:27 AM