Who Are You Calling Crazy?
Over at Newsweek I argue that libertarians ought to be treated more equitably by the media, especially given some of the disastrous policies the centrist Washington establishment has voted for and defended:
Forced to name the “craziest” policy favored by American politicians, I’d say the multibillion-dollar war on drugs, which no one thinks is winnable. Asked about the most “extreme,” I’d cite the invasion of Iraq, a war of choice that has cost many billions of dollars and countless innocent lives. The “kookiest” policy is arguably farm subsidies for corn, sugar, and tobacco—products that people ought to consume less, not more.
These are contentious judgments. I hardly expect the news media to denigrate the policies I’ve named, nor do I expect their Republican and Democratic supporters to be labeled crazy, kooky, or extreme. These disparaging descriptors are never applied to America’s policy establishment, even when it is proved ruinously wrong, whereas politicians who don’t fit the mainstream Democratic or Republican mode, such as libertarians, are mocked almost reflexively in these terms, if they are covered at all.
You can read the rest here.
That would make sense if actual libertarians existed.
All I have ever seen are boutique libertarians that pick and chose their principles in solidarity with social conservatives, WECs, nativists, racists, birthers, homophobes, teabaggers, life warriors and neocon revanchist imperialists….IPOF….the only libertarians I have experience of are Tea Bag Libertarians.
— matoko_chan · May 27, 01:26 AM · #
Srsly Conor…..what’s not mock-worthy? The self-declared libertarians are hilarious.
Glenn Beck says he’s a libertarian….its meaningless….Glenn Beck is a weepy mormon rodeoclown that doesn’t have a nanoparticle of honesty or truth in his carny barker soul.
And 99% of the newsworthy, public domain, soi disant libertarians are just like Beck and Rand Paul…..crazier than shithouse rats.
That teatard Sarah Palin says shes a libertarian.
OF COURSE THE MEDIA MAKES FUN OF THEM!
surrender now dorothy.
you got nuthin’
— matoko_chan · May 27, 01:37 AM · #
Conor, I respect you and appreciate many of your views and I agree with you on, seemingly, lots of ideals. However, I am consistently struck by the evenhandedness with respect to Dems and Repubs. Struck in a bad way. In all three of the examples you cite, Republicans are far more to blame than Democrats. I know that the war on drugs has a really complicated history and I don’t want to get into it. I am talking about the here and now. Republicans support the war on drugs more than Democrats. Not enough Democrats were suspicious enough of the unjust war in Iraq, but it was Republicans drumming up total bullsh*t evidence to go to the war and it was Republicans fear-mongering and pushing for the invasion. And as for the farm subsidies in place, Liberals and Libertarians are the ones most interested in seeing a major change on that front. And there are a hell of a lot more Liberals with power than Libertarians. I’m sympathetic to many Libertarian perspectives on issues, but they have almost zero political power; whereas there is a serious Liberal population that can get some of the issues worked into legislation. I just don’t see any hope for good conservative action in the near future. It’s curious to me that there are a bunch of people (lots of them on this site) who have generally sensible ideas, but side with a totally powerless political party. The Republican party seems to me to be insanely pernicious right now and the Democratic party seems to me to be pursuing more-or-less sensible policy (I really don’t like the executive power BS and several other issues, but they’re serious about addressing serious problems like health care). Shouldn’t we try to be somewhat pragmatic about issues with real practical import? As a side-final note, I thought your defense of Goldwater, mainly on the premise that he was “principled,” was quite unconvincing. There are tons of principled people that do and believe terrible and/or ridiculous things. I understand that one shouldn’t quite be opportunistic, but why is it a fault to side with what will work for the situation and is better than the extremes? Why is it bad to compromise when the compromise is better than the outcome of what is available on the other ends of the spectrum?
— Gary · May 27, 01:57 AM · #
Well, we’ve had the War on Drugs, War on Poverty. When is the last time America has won any war? You are right about the war in Iraq. My 2 sons served and so did I. All based on false foundation and the ‘sugar’ battle could be equal to the Tea Act for modern times. The govt. doesn’t need to mess with our sugar with a tax
— MorningStar · May 27, 03:51 PM · #
I so totally love this cartoon
h/t Barry Ritholtz
— Keid A · May 28, 12:34 PM · #
Breaking news: a politico thinks libertarianism is the wave of the future.
— Freddie · May 29, 01:06 PM · #