Reason.com posted an article today that really made me think. The mass media have targeted libertarians and their beliefs as an enemy to the status quo. Salon writer Gabriel Winant had this to say about the “Juvenile” libertarians.
It’s not just that he screwed up and said something stupid because he’s so committed to a purist fancy. No, it’s worse than that. Libertarianism itself is what’s stupid here, not just Paul. We should stop tip-toeing around this belief system like its adherents are the noble last remnants of a dying breed, still clinging to their ancient, proud ways.
Now, to be clear, before continuing: there are legions of brilliant individual libertarians. [Dave] Weigel himself, for example, is a great writer and reporter, and a true master of Twitter. We’ve never met, but by all accounts, he’s also very much a stand-up fellow. But brilliant, decent people can think silly things. And that’s what’s going on here. It’s time to stop taking libertarianism seriously. [...]
Think about the New Deal. Although libertarian ingrates will never admit it, without the reforms of the 1930s, there might not be private property left for them to complain about the government infringing on. Not many capitalist democracies could survive 25 percent unemployment, and it doesn’t just happen by good luck. [...]
The government didn’t just help make the “free market” in the first place — although it did do that. It’s also constantly busy trimming around the edges, maintaining the thing, keeping it healthy. The state can think ahead and balance competing interests in a way that no single company can. [...]
The libertarian who insists that the state has no place beyond basic night-watchman duties is like a teenager who, having been given a car, promptly starts demanding the right to stay out all night. Sometimes, someone else really is looking out for your best interests by saying no.
And that’s why the best rap on libertarians isn’t that they’re racist, or selfish. (Though some of them are those things, and their beliefs encourage both bad behaviors, even if accidentally.) It’s that they’re thoroughly out of touch with reality. It’s a worldview that prospers only so long as nobody tries it, and is too unreflective and self-absorbed to realize this. In other words, it’s bratty. And that’s bad enough.
Of course this is after Rand Paul made his comments on the Civil Liberties legislation, which is a different discussion for a different day. What surprises me is that Mr. Winant’s take on the “Free Market.” He states that without the government there would be no free market. How this makes sense eludes me. The fact that the government passes regulation on the private sector eliminates the term “free market.” The fact that the government prints currency at super speeds and adjusts value of this paper and adjusts the intrest that these papers can collect completely destroys the principles behind the “free market.” Its a disgrace that people think that we have ever had a “free market” especially since the establishment of the Federal Reserve. If anything that line should read that “The government didn’t just hurt the “free market” in the first place, it destroyed it — It is constantly busy regulating, getting in the way of innovation, messing up the thing, making is sick with disease. The “FREE MARKET” can adjust to the current times and balance competing interests in a way no government can.”
The metaphor he gives to compare the governments duties and to that of a teenager acquiring a license to operate a motor vehicle doesn’t even fit. While the Government would love more than ever to have a parent child relationship with the citizens of the nation, it does not. All the gov’t is supposed to be is the night watchman, who defends in country. It is none of the states business how enterprise and industry provide money and wealth to society. There is not one line written in the constitution about gov’t and business. Any person who advocates that gov’t be in control of enterprise and industry are those who are already holding office or those who do not trust themselves to make decisions for their own lives. These people also love to tell people what to live like and how to live this way.
How about the fact that in the 1920′s credit was so easily available, it created a false boom just like today, and then it collapsed because of gov’t intervention and thus we had the great depression. There was a major crash in the economy in the 1921, and since the gov’t just left it alone and allowed the market to handle it, this depression lasted all of a year. A vast contrast to the great depression, where gov’t intervened and let to mass unemployment and a serious cut in living standard. The gov’t cannot do anything successful because the people who sit in their offices have no one clue about the issues they pass regulation and laws on. They like to think they do. But they don’t. Look at whats happening today with unemployment rates.
True unemployment rates are approaching that same 25% that is was in the 1930′s and how is the great government handling it today? By forcing regulations on the private sector to “stimulate” job creation. It sure is working! Ask people how easy it is to get a job today, in todays market. These regulations shut the door on job creation, no business is hiring because they simply cannot afford to hire or do not have the tools to make sure they match these requirements and regulations. So the government creates some public works project to build some useless bridge out in the middle of nowhere to create 500 jobs that last 6 months-1 year, and lauds it as some success, while the factory that produces a small part to an aircraft has to close up shop because the 20 people he was going to hire were given the bridge job, that in the end provides nothing to economic growth. This factory now needs to shut down because it does not have the man power, now the aircraft manufacturer needs to go to China, Japan, India, Mexico to get the part to produce the crafts. He runs the risk of paying more per part due to regulations on foreign importing and trading of goods set up by the government, and he also risks that the quality of the part that he has used for the past 20 years might not be the same quality as the part made from foreign plants and businesses.
You cannot go attacking the “free market” because you feel its attackable due to what one Rand Paul stated. You need to do research and think things through before you post your verbal assault on how bad the “free market” is and how it would not exist without the governments watchful eyes and constant pruning. Until we have a true FREE MARKET in this country, one cannot assert that it will not correct government created problems and those that fall under corporatism.
