What it feels like to be a Libertarian

[Timshel]

http://faculty.msb.edu/hasnasj/GTWebSite/FeelsLike.htm

Political analysts frequently consider what it means to be a libertarian. In fact, in 1997, Charles Murray published a short book entitled "What It Means to Be a Libertarian" that does an excellent job of presenting the core principles of libertarian political philosophy. But almost no one ever discusses what it feels like to be a libertarian. How does it actually feel to be someone who holds the principles described in Murray’s book?

I’ll tell you. It feels bad. Being a libertarian means living with an almost unendurable level of frustration. It means being subject to unending scorn and derision despite being inevitably proven correct by events. How does it feel to be a libertarian? Imagine what the internal life of Cassandra must have been and you will have a pretty good idea.

Imagine spending two decades warning that government policy is leading to a major economic collapse, and then, when the collapse comes, watching the world conclude that markets do not work.

Imagine continually explaining that markets function because they have a built in corrective mechanism; that periodic contractions are necessary to weed out unproductive ventures; that continually loosening credit to avoid such corrections just puts off the day of reckoning and inevitably leads to a larger recession; that this is precisely what the government did during the 1920's that led to the great depression; and then, when the recession hits, seeing it offered as proof of the failure of laissez-faire capitalism.

Imagine spending years decrying federal intervention in the home mortgage market; pointing out the dangers associated with legislation such as the Community Reinvestment Act that forces lenders to make more risky loans than they otherwise would; testifying before Congress on the lack of oversight and inevitable insolvency of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to legislators who angrily respond either that one is "exaggerat[ing] a threat of safety and soundness . . . which I do not see" (Barney Frank) or "[I[f it ain’t broke, why do you want to fix it? Have the GSEs [government-sponsored enterprises] ever missed their housing goals" (Maxine Waters) or "[T[he problem that we have and that we are faced with is maybe some individuals who wanted to do away with GSEs in the first place" (Gregory Meeks) or that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are "one of the great success stories of all time" (Christopher Dodd); and arguing that the moral hazard created by the implicit federal backing of such privately-owned government-sponsored enterprises is likely to set off a wave of unjustifiably risky investments, and then, when the housing market implodes under the weight of bad loans, watching the collapse get blamed on the greed and rapaciousness of "Wall Street."

[Mott the Hoople]

How do you spell "Impotent"? L-I-B-E-R-T-A-R-I-A-N

Libertarian is a failure as a politcial philosophy because it is a self full filling prophecy for poor, inept and bad governance. That's why many consider it anarchy in drag.

One of the major problems that the Republican Party has that is dragging it down is the influence of Libertarians within the party.

How can one in good conscience vote for a political party when you have no confidence in their ability to govern affectively or competently.

[SmarterthanYou]

How do you spell "Impotent"? L-I-B-E-R-T-A-R-I-A-N

Libertarian is a failure as a politcial philosophy because it is a self full filling prophecy for poor, inept and bad governance. That's why many consider it anarchy in drag.

One of the major problems that the Republican Party has that is dragging it down is the influence of Libertarians within the party.

How can one in good conscience vote for a political party when you have no confidence in their ability to govern affectively or competently.

classic evasion of any intent for personal responsibility.
ZOMG, Libertarians are anarchists because they don't want people governed!!!!!!

what's it like to distrust people and freedom so much that you demand people be controlled by government?

[Cypress]

How does it actually feel to be someone who holds the principles described in Murray’s book?

I’ll tell you. It feels bad. Being a libertarian means living with an almost unendurable level of frustration. It means being subject to unending scorn and derision despite being inevitably proven correct by events. How does it feel to be a libertarian? Imagine what the internal life of Cassandra must have been and you will have a pretty good idea.

HaHa, man that was great. Gracias, that totally gave me a laugh.

Is this why libertarian message board posters have such a chip on their shoulder? Emotional drama and being distraught at being dismissed as irrelevant?


Here's a tip, and don't take this personally. Nobody hates libertarians, or spends more than a few nanoseconds of time thinking about them or making fun of them.

It's not worth it. Most of the entire planet knows that the markets unleashed to self-police themselves won't, and never will work. Every adult knows that shit doesn't get done at the scale of a nation-state by relying on the theory of rational self-interest.

It's really just a theoretical ideology promoted by a handful of theorists and cranks who don't want to pay taxes, and was fueled by rage at the New Deal and the modern social democratic states of the US and other developed nations.

[Topspin]

Libertarians are teenage virgins who've grown up used to rejection.

Markets don't work, what a masingil

[cawacko]

How do you spell "Impotent"? L-I-B-E-R-T-A-R-I-A-N

Libertarian is a failure as a politcial philosophy because it is a self full filling prophecy for poor, inept and bad governance. That's why many consider it anarchy in drag.

One of the major problems that the Republican Party has that is dragging it down is the influence of Libertarians within the party.

How can one in good conscience vote for a political party when you have no confidence in their ability to govern affectively or competently.

Damn man, first you say the Republican Party needs to drop its social conservatives and then you say it needs to drop its libertarian elements. You might as well say you think the party should cease to exist.

[Damocles]

Damn man, first you say the Republican Party needs to drop its social conservatives and then you say it needs to drop its libertarian elements. You might as well say you think the party should cease to exist.

Well, it would be better for the party and stuff. Clearly he cares deeply about the survival of the republican party and all his suggestions should be followed.

[Socrtease]

What is so funny is that people still view libertarians as complete free market capitalists who want zero regulation. Most understand that a minimal amount of regulation is required, but too many people, especially lefties, have never seen a regulation they could not live with. Requirements that businesses extend credit to people not credit worthy is just plain stupid. Anyone that knows anything about economy KNOWS that there are periods of growth and correction. Providing looser and looser credit to keep people afloat GUARENTEES that periods of contraction are going to be greater than they otherwise would have been. There is a mindset, primarily among liberals that ownership is a right and not a privilege earned through success. No one is owed a home or a successful business. We ought not prop up bad businesses or people who should not own a home at a period in their life where their finances do not warrant business or home ownership. And that includes not just low income but middle income individuals. There is nothing wrong with renting. Shit, when you rent you have less expenses associated with home ownership. Your landlord has to replace the roof, put in a new heater, pay for extermination services etc. Americans are not entitled to shit. They are entitled to the ability to be free to work their ass off, go to school, get an education and earn the ownership of business, homes, new cars, home theaters etc. When I was a kid in the 70's not everyone had a credit card. It was a hard thing to get. You had to be credit worthy, which meant having a job that provided you with the disposable income to make monthly payments. When my grandparents had a credit card, my grandfather paid them off monthly unless there was an unexpected expense that required 60 days to pay off. When he died he had 11 credit cards and NOT ONE OF THEM had a ballance due. Now credit card companies give college students cards with 1000 dollar limits. LIbertarians don't want a wild west anything goes economy, at least not many of them. What they want is the ability to do business, make money and pay the people that work for them. I know that they are evil and make more money than do their employees, but they take the risks and stand to lose much more if the business fails. That failure should not be prolonged by the easing of lending so that when they ultimately fail, they fall farther than they otherwise would have.

[cawacko]

That's a pretty good response Soc. I think many of us like to paint something we don't agree with in more radical terms as a way to put it down thus saying 'Libertarians want no government, want to pay no taxes and want zero regulations'. I'm sure someone can find an example of that but it is obviously an extreme fringe example.

[Cancel 2016.2]

That's a pretty good response Soc. I think many of us like to paint something we don't agree with in more radical terms as a way to put it down thus saying 'Libertarians want no government, want to pay no taxes and want zero regulations'. I'm sure someone can find an example of that but it is obviously an extreme fringe example.

Those aren't libertarian's... those are anarchists... it is how the morons of the world try to paint libertarians... (yes... that means you Cypress).

[Cancel 2016.2]

What is so funny is that people still view libertarians as complete free market capitalists who want zero regulation. Most understand that a minimal amount of regulation is required, but too many people, especially lefties, have never seen a regulation they could not live with. Requirements that businesses extend credit to people not credit worthy is just plain stupid. Anyone that knows anything about economy KNOWS that there are periods of growth and correction. Providing looser and looser credit to keep people afloat GUARENTEES that periods of contraction are going to be greater than they otherwise would have been. There is a mindset, primarily among liberals that ownership is a right and not a privilege earned through success. No one is owed a home or a successful business. We ought not prop up bad businesses or people who should not own a home at a period in their life where their finances do not warrant business or home ownership. And that includes not just low income but middle income individuals. There is nothing wrong with renting. Shit, when you rent you have less expenses associated with home ownership. Your landlord has to replace the roof, put in a new heater, pay for extermination services etc. Americans are not entitled to shit. They are entitled to the ability to be free to work their ass off, go to school, get an education and earn the ownership of business, homes, new cars, home theaters etc. When I was a kid in the 70's not everyone had a credit card. It was a hard thing to get. You had to be credit worthy, which meant having a job that provided you with the disposable income to make monthly payments. When my grandparents had a credit card, my grandfather paid them off monthly unless there was an unexpected expense that required 60 days to pay off. When he died he had 11 credit cards and NOT ONE OF THEM had a ballance due. Now credit card companies give college students cards with 1000 dollar limits. LIbertarians don't want a wild west anything goes economy, at least not many of them. What they want is the ability to do business, make money and pay the people that work for them. I know that they are evil and make more money than do their employees, but they take the risks and stand to lose much more if the business fails. That failure should not be prolonged by the easing of lending so that when they ultimately fail, they fall farther than they otherwise would have.

but but... everyone should have the RIGHT to that new flat screen TV every other year. Everyone should have the RIGHT to drive a BMW... have the best and newest treatments in health care... have the RIGHT to every little thing they can think of subsidized by the government if they aren't working hard enough to earn it on their own.

How dare you suggest they have to work hard to attain the higher quality of life. It should be given to them. That is what the government is for.

[cawacko]

This isn't very Libertarian but I don't disagree with the idea of the government promoting home ownership as a good thing with tax write-offs for instance. I think there are definant advantages to individuals and to communities for people to own their homes. Now this of course does not mean everyone must own a home. And as Soc pointed out the government trying to lower standards to get people to purchase a home that aren't really in a financial position to do so ends up having a negative consequence.

But on the whole I am a big proponent of home ownership.

[Cancel 2016.2]

This isn't very Libertarian but I don't disagree with the idea of the government promoting home ownership as a good thing with tax write-offs for instance. I think there are definant advantages to individuals and to communities for people to own their homes. Now this of course does not mean everyone must own a home. And as Soc pointed out the government trying to lower standards to get people to purchase a home that aren't really in a financial position to do so ends up having a negative consequence.

But on the whole I am a big proponent of home ownership.

I agree certain incentives are fine... such as the mortgage interest deduction, but like Soc said, the initiatives forced down the throats of the industry to lower credit standards was nothing short of absurd.

Promotion of home ownership is great... if we make sure it is done in a responsible manner. The problem is that politicians fail to grasp the concept of 'responsible'

[tinfoil]

classic evasion of any intent for personal responsibility.
ZOMG, Libertarians are anarchists because they don't want people governed!!!!!!

what's it like to distrust people and freedom so much that you demand people be controlled by government?

exactly
That hopple dude is a moron

[Timshel]

HaHa, man that was great. Gracias, that totally gave me a laugh.

Is this why libertarian message board posters have such a chip on their shoulder? Emotional drama and being distraught at being dismissed as irrelevant?


Here's a tip, and don't take this personally. Nobody hates libertarians, or spends more than a few nanoseconds of time thinking about them or making fun of them.

It's not worth it. Most of the entire planet knows that the markets unleashed to self-police themselves won't, and never will work. Every adult knows that shit doesn't get done at the scale of a nation-state by relying on the theory of rational self-interest.

It's really just a theoretical ideology promoted by a handful of theorists and cranks who don't want to pay taxes, and was fueled by rage at the New Deal and the modern social democratic states of the US and other developed nations.

You're missing the point. The point we are always right and you piss us off.