The current political clime is slowly being pushed in the vague direction of lefitst statism-lite, but only because of a philosophical vaccum and because the US has successfully portrayed itself as the embodiment of free-market, Lassaiz Faire capitalism.
However, I don't see the strong support for Soviet or Maoist-style state control these days...these are vaguely romantic notions once in a while, but they don't have any deep ideological support like they might have in the 60s.
-TD
From: Tim May <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Decline of the Cypherpunks list...Part 19 Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 11:07:06 -0800
On Dec 8, 2003, at 12:11 AM, Bill Stewart wrote:
At 07:55 PM 12/7/2003 -0800, Tim May wrote:The Libertarian Party started at about this time, in 1972, and nearly all of the volunteers, spear carriers, etc. were in their 20s. This is very well known.
(And today most of the LP volunteers and spear carriers are in their 40s and 50s. A correlation here.)
Yes, and one of the LP's problems is that we've largely turned into old farts there also....
Indeed.
I can imagine a bunch of possible reasons for this development. In no particular order:
* In the 1950s and 60s, the effects of Rand and Heinlein were pervasive. Many college kids in the 60s were reading "Atlas Shrugged." (I won't get into how badly it's written, except to say I devoured it in 2 days in 1968, when I was 16, and quoted from it to all who would listen in the next couple of years. But I haven't been able to read it _since_. I can't get past about page 10 before throwing it down. It's strong propaganda, but badly written.)
* The mood of the 50s and 60s was actually one of nearly boundless possibilities for the future, at least in America. Not because of socialists in Congress and JFK, but because of a booming economy, technology, and all the usual things of the time. The generation which entered the work economy in the 1960s through the early 1980s is the wealthiest generation in history...especially those who did so in Silicon Valley or similar areas.
(My implication being that things were different for the generation which came of age much later, with more of a sense of limited horizons, dead-end jobs at Starbucks making lattes for Yuppies, etc. Maybe if I were 25, working for $9 an hour at Starbucks, I'd shave my head and look like a refugee from the Apple "1984" commercial too.)
* A lot of these folks, the ones who came of age in the 60s and 70s, were enthusiastic libertarians. Some of them joined the Libertarian Party, most of them dislike government drug laws and redistribution of their income, and so on.
* A lot of the younger folks I see interviewed describe "income inequality" and "discrimination" and "globalization" as the serious problems the world and America face. They may favor drug legalization, as libertarians do, but they certainly aren't sympathetic to most laissez-faire, "survival of the fittest" libertarianism.
A couple of folks here have followed-up in this latest thread with claims that the old farts, especially me, quash discussion of new theories, new outlooks.
Hey, this is an anarchy. I have absolutely no power whatsoever to quash _anything_ related to this list!
When we were a young list, but when I was still an old fart by most standards (I was 40 in 1992), we didn't need any permission or approval to post what we wished. And some of the folks then were even older than me (Sandy Sandfort, Arthur Abraham, maybe Jude Milhon...).
And new subscribers and young people who join the list today are perfectly free to make good contributions. I recall few such newcomers, however. (One of them was Dave Molnar, now a grad student in CS/something at Berkeley, interested in many of the issues we are interested in. He was not "censored" by the old farts when he had something interesting to say.)
Bottom line is that this crap about how the old farts are suppressing the young guns is bullshit. If someone has something to say, they should say it. They may not get a positive response to calls for passing new laws to raise taxes "on the wealthy," or to break up Microsoft, or to tell people what kind of software they can write, but that's because the underlying philosophy of the list is what it is: call it libertarian, call it anarcho-capitalist, call it whatever, but don't call it "there ought to be a law" sentiment.
--Tim May
"He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." -- Nietzsche
_________________________________________________________________
Our best dial-up offer is back. Get MSN Dial-up Internet Service for 6 months @ $9.95/month now! http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/dialup
