Published the day after Christmas, a young journalist named Christopher Beam explains it all in an article in New York magazine (fitting, that) called The Trouble With Liberty. You see, "Libertarians, of both left and right, haven’t been this close to power since 1776. But do we want to live in their world?"
The answer unfolds below….
"The American Revolution was a libertarian movement," Beam correctly observes, "rejecting overweening government power." But….
- Libertarianism sucks, because "It’s also an excuse to indulge your most selfish instincts."
- Libertarians suck, because "There’s something about libertarians where working as a team is inconsistent with the whole concept of being a libertarian" (quoting Warren Redlich, a 2010 Libertarian party candidate for governor of New Yorik who got sued by one of the losing candidates for the nomination).
- The Free State Project sucks because one guy in New Hampshire, "inspired by the movie Gandhi, got arrested for performing a manicure without a license." (Yuk! Yuk!)
- Libertarian Silicon Valley zillionaires suck because they "no longer believe that freedom and democracy are compaatible" (quoting Peter Thiel, a co-founder of PayPal and early investor in Facebook). And "he’s not alone"!
- A gold-backed currency sucks because it’s "a policy that most economists agree would lead to economic meltdown."
- States’ Rights suck because they "had become a cover for unconstitutional practices," making The 1964 Civil Rights Act necessary.
- Charity sucks because it didn’t work, causing "the welfare system" to evolve in response.
- Those who want to abolish the Federal Reserve suck because it "was created after the panic of 1907 to help the government reduce economic uncertainty." (Right! That worked!)
- Minarchy sucks becaue "we’ll never get thiere," and it can’t work anyway.
- The private marketplace sucks because it "isn’t good at managing…asymmetrical information (I know my doctor is qualified to treat me because he has a government license," (RIGHT!) and "it makes sense for the government to cover vaccines, which benefit everyone, not just the consumer." (DOUBLE RIGHT!)
- Opposing the Mega-Bank bailouts sucks because "not intervening would have unfairly punished a much great number" of people." (Here comes the all-purpose smack-down: "Fairness.")
- Freedom sucks, because "there’s always tension between freedom and fairness" And "Libertarianism, in promoting freedom above all else, pretends the tension doesn’t exist."
- Self-interest sucks, because if everyone pursued their own self-interest, "there would be no cooperation. There would be no collective responsibility. The result wouldn’t be a city on a hill. It woudl be a port town in Somalia….In a world of scarce resources everyone pursing their own self-interst would yield not Atlas Shrugged but Lord of the Flies."
- "Libertopia" sucks baecause, "even if you did somehow achieve [it], you’d be surrounded by assholes."
Well (brushing hands-off), that pretty much takes care of that! In the end, says Mr. Beam, a 2006 Columbia University journalism grad, "Libertarianism and power are like matter and anti-matter. They cancel each other out," and he certainly woulnd’t want to live in such a place!
Except…there are so many things wrong with Beam’s very youthful, very limited vision and understanding, that it would take a doctoral thesis…or maybe an Atlas Shrugged-like novel to sort them out. But who’s got the time? Or the energy? Not me, unfortunately. I leave the job to one of our younger freedom-fighters…perhaps a Free State Project participant as yet unidentified.
But there’s good news too! Chris Beam and those who think as he does are in luck! They won’t have to live in the terrible circumstances he describes in is article. That’s why the Founding Fathers set up "competing sovereign states" (something Beam may or may not be aware of). Today there are 50 of them (not 57, as thought by the President that he doubtless voted for). The most libertarian state will eventually be New Hampshire (that’s rational libertarianism, not the nutcase version, which we also have plenty of). Sooo…. Don’t like small government, low taxes, reduced state spending, free enterprise economics, an absence of government barriers to job-creation, and an insistence on personal responsibility? Great! You don’t have to live in New Hampshire.
Instead, those who worry about the problems of freedom like Mr. Beam does can live in places where it’s restricted in favor of "fairness," where "self-interest" is pared back to require "collective responsibility." Everyone wins! Chris and his friends can live in places that already uphold "balanced values," places like Massachusetts, New York, and California with its wonderful climate. Go for it, Chris!
In the end, of course, it will be clear, whether an Ivy League grad coming into his the Ruling Class accepts it or not: The only things that "really" suck—because they impoverish and harm real, individual people in so very many ways—are all forms of statism and collectivism, including today’s teetering but "balanced" welfare state. Watch what happens over the upcoming years in New Hampshire. And watch what happens in our competing "anti-matter" states, where freedom and individual rights are "wisely restricted" in favor of "balance."
The rest of you? You’d better vote with your feet now. We’re waiting for you in New Hampshire. You’re welcome here, with all your selfishness and self-interested energy, your outlandish ideas about liberty, and youur creativity. Come join us. Let’s see which places turn out to be better, happier, wealthier places to live—for rich and poor alike!—the Free State of New Hampshire, or thse states like New York, California, and Mass. that "balance" rights and freedom in favor of "collective responsibility."