|
Because it is something with which I've been flirting a lot, lately -- going back to read Rothbund, Rand, Mises, Friedman -- some others. The problem with libertarianism is three fold;
1. The utiopian libertarian vision cannot be made piecemeal -- in other words, your friend's pronouncement that if you simply stop feeding the poor, all our problems will be solved, is stupid and short-sighted. Libertarianism's solution to getting rid of government is decentralization -- but it's really too late for that. A huge breakdown of society would have to happen, before this could be accomplished. The libertarian asks "what if..." but the answer is already there. You can't un-do McDonald's, you can't un-do the fact that consumers are stupid. In other words, if people had stuck to libertarianism from the beginning, the guy might have an argument. At this point, I would guess that NO, people would not suddenly give to charity, because we're all trained to be terminator-like consumers, who will spend every last dollar of disposable income on matching towels or something.
2. You can't trust libertarians -- because they don't trust each other. The party is mainly a mish-mash of misunderstood separatists, Christian Right advocates who don't want to pay their taxes, and kids who want to see marijuana legalized. Each of these groups have taken "libertarian" concepts and applied them to their particular worldview. There is libertarian philosophy, which mainly revolves around three things: property, freedom and peace -- but they still have the same arguments as to what extent the governemnt should be involved in disputes, and what level this "decentralized" government should exist on -- city or town? County? State? The GOP takes as much from libertarian philosophy as the Libertarians, the only difference is that the GOP is more forthcoming about its attempts to morally legislate. I personally think that the necessity of a libertarian party was because people wanted an "alternative GOP," one either without big government or without religion. That's why the official Libertarian party so closely parallels the GOP -- it's kind of an idealistic GOP.
3. Libertarianism doesn't provide an answer to the question: What happens, when, because wealth isn't distributed more evenly, that the wealthy BECOME the government -- like a ruling class, etc? It is at this point that you have to let altruism or communalism into society -- and introduce some principles that we live by, as a whole. Of course, in the libertarian dream, the rich don't become the governemnt, because the "perfect consumer" has "perfect knowledge" and would neither buy, nor support anything that would harm his or her environment or community. In other words -- there are no nine-year-old girls puking their guts out to look like Britney Spears, and people wouldn't buy products that outsource their own jobs.
Like all philosophies, libertarianism is just as idealistic and absurd as the "workers' paradise," and just as insane as the Christian Theocracy. Libertarians do serve to remind us, too, however, that society should be a lot more free than it is. But what to do about it now?
|