-Caveat Lector-
MJ-
My earlier response to your post did not get through, I'm afraid. First
off, let me say that I do enjoy your input on CTRL...even though I don't
share your political philosophy, and I do think you are making a valuable
contribution to the list by giving us your thoughts on a variety of
topics. And, I do admire you for your passionate dedication to the
Constitution..and your interest in economics/politics and history, but I
find libertarianism to be not only a flawed approach to political and
social issues...but also a dangerous one.
Libertarianism reminds me of Ayn Rand's Objectivism, which sounds
good and possesses a certain amount of appeal, until you begin to examine
its axioms and unstated assumptions more closely. I've noticed that the
people who are drawn to libertarianism and objectivism tend to be the same
kind of individuals who are drawn to Marxism. They are looking for a
single, totalizing theory which will make sense of the world....an
intellectual authority upon which they structure their lives. In that
respect, the psychological dynamic behind this search for authority is
similar to what one finds with true believers everywhere. You might want
to read Eric Hoffer. Both Marxists and Libertarians speak in terms of
absolutes..both have their holy books (the word according to Marx, the
word according to Lysander Spooner and Bastiat, or Ayn Rand says such and
such). But there is a narrowness in the thinking of true believers... a
tendency to reduce very complex issues into absolute terms. And I
think the problem with this kind of totalitarian mindset is that the
reality IS very complex and multifaceted.
And what happens when the theory doesn't fit the facts? The theorists
carry on with their wrongheaded policies without paying the price, nor
admitting that they were in error. An example of this was the war in Viet
Nam. One of the chief architects of that disastrous policy, Robert
McNamara, was convinced during the sixties that the war was winnable. All
of his techno/realpolitik expertise had convinced him that the US could
use force to bring about a favorable outcome in Nam. And we were winning
battles and killing more of the enemy than they killed us...but we still
lost. Years later, to his credit, he admitted that the combined wisdom of
the experts in the think tanks waas wrong. Moral of the story? You can
have a beautifully structured intellectual theory that sounds great on
paper...but when it's put into practice, the results can be completely
disastrous. Why? Because human beings, social systems, civilizations and
life itself contain powerful irrational forces that constantly undermine
the best-laid intellectual schemes and theories. So, I think you must be
leery of Rand, Spooner, Sowell, Bastiat, and "the founding fathers." If
you were to research their lives, you would find that they were not
necessarily possessors of all truth and wisdom. In fact, they were often
driven by irrational and less noble impulses than their published writings
would reveal. I'm not suggesting that you should devalue them; On the
contrary, I'm only suggesting that you see them as whole, complete human
beings who were fallible, flawed and imperfect.
If you doubt that, I think you need to read some of the recent biographies
on Ayn Rand. Even Rand defenders admit that her relationship with
Nathaniel Branden, her protege, was a troubled and problematic one.
As for Jefferson, an individual that you love to quote, although he freed
his slaves, AFTER his death, the same writer who could write so eloquently
of the rights of man could also walk out the door of his plantation at
Monticello and see the squalid quarters of his slaves. Jefferson's
relationship with Sally Hemmings is well-documented.
In the case of Adam
Smith, certainly a great economist, it's often overlooked that the great
Adam was an agent of Lord Shelburne, and his Wealth of Nations was more a
product of Britain's desire to cripple American manufacturing than it was
an exercise in disinterested economic theory.
I have no quarrel with many of the insights of Smith, Jefferson, and Rand.
But I think it's ludicrous and absurd to idolize these individuals to such
an extent that you lose sight of their flaws, inconsistencies and
contradictions. That's why I find the libertarian love for one-liners to
be interesting, but not particularly enlightening. So many of these
quotes you are fond of, were produced in the eighteenth century or
nineteenth century.. They sound great, but they have little relevance to
1999.
Changing topic: In regard to your belief that social welfare programs can
be equated to theft, I find that amusing. Our government has been using
taxes to fund any number of different, welfare programs for corporations
for years. Look at Mr. Weissman's post today. Clearly, the biggest
welfare queens are not found in housing projects, but in corporate
boardrooms.
But your real target, of course, is "altruism," perhaps more specifically,
Christianity, which Ayn Rand found abhorrent. Have you ever heard of the
Ik culture? I think you might find it an interesting topic to research...
the Ik culture have abandoned the notion of altruism. Every individual is
turned against everyone else...even within the family units.... I think
libertarians should consider the implications of the kind of world that
would be the result if their extreme theories would be embraced by
everyone. Rather than being a utopia, it would be a nightmare scenario..
Well, enough for now,
Regards,
Wm
On Fri, 4 Jun 1999, M.A. Johnson wrote:
> -Caveat Lector-
>
> William Hugh Tunstall wrote:
> There's always a certain percentage of the population that
> is unable to work for a variety of physical/psychological
> reasons...disabilities, mental health problems, etc.
>
> MJ:
> Does this provide them with a 'special right' to steal from others
> or have their agent do so for them? As to 'healthcare' ... getting
> the government OUT of all facets will reduce the costs to 5-10%
> of current ... restrict Government to its Constitutional limitations
> and one effectively doubles their income ... this provides MORE
> resources which go farther to those who would prefer to spend other
> people's money on their pet causes -- in other words, this allows
> people to put THEIR money where their mouth is.
>
>
>
> William Hugh Tunstall wrote:
> First off, the government subsidizes businesses, bails out
> foreign despots around the world, while it simultaneously
> also does a splendid job of ensuring that those who have
> will get more.... This more spectacular "free ride" at
> taxpayer's expense tends to be ignored.
> MJ:
> This phenomenon is not limited to 'businesses', but *any* voting
> block which can ensure their [party/representaive] reign.
> Most of the quid pro quo is nowhere mandated, but the dumb masses
> fail to grasp those items necessary to make up the fourth branch
> of the government (educated electorate).
>
> William Hugh Tunstall wrote:
> The majority of welfare recipients are children.
>
> This is false. 33% of ALL government expenditures go to the elderly.
>
>
> William Hugh Tunstall wrote:
> They had the misfortune of being born to the wrong parents.
> MJ:
> Are you willing to advocate the correction of this 'misfortune'
> or do you prefer to grow it be 'rewarding' the undesired behavior?
>
>
>
>
> William Hugh Tunstall wrote:
> So, what's the answer? Well, it's definitely NOT more
> deregulation, MORE handouts for big business, and a "free
> ride" for the privileged classes in America. MORE "free
> trade" and MORE "open borders" will only continue to destroy
> us.
> MJ:
> In a word, bullshit.
> The solution ... in five words, 'get out of the way'.
>
>
> William Hugh Tunstall wrote:
> We need to change the political agenda and place American
> issues first on the list.
> MJ:
> Can you cite some examples/suggestions?
>
>
>
> Regard$,
> --MJ
>
> Good intentions will always be pleaded for every assumption
> of authority. It is hardly too strong to say that the
> Constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers
> of good intentions. There are men in all ages who mean to
> govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good
> masters, but they mean to be masters. -- Noah Webster
>
> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
> ==========
> CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
> screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing! These are sordid matters
> and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
> frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
> spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
> gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
> be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
> nazi's need not apply.
>
> Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
> ========================================================================
> Archives Available at:
> http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
>
> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
> ========================================================================
> To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
> SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
> SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Om
>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing! These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
