Does this idiocy merit a response? /Answering Michael Lind’s Question: Why Is No Country Libertarian?

http://www.openmarket.org/2013/06/13/answering-michael-linds-question-why-is-no-country-libertarian/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Openmarketorg+%28OpenMarket.org%29

…..”Why are there no libertarian countries? If libertarians are correct in claiming that they understand how best to organize a modern society, how is it that not a single country in the world in the early twenty-first century is organized along libertarian lines?

“…….

RRD: “If this women’s suffrage stuff is so great how is that no nation on earth has ever given women the right to vote before now” ;that or words to that effect were no doubt spoken by an anti-suffrage Swede in 1718,similar “arguments” were made about freedom from the monarchy,religious freedom,emancipation from slavery a reduction of anti-Semitism & hatred of gays,& virtually every other right or positive development  that “civilized” countries now take for granted. It is hardly rational to say “this is not,& is without precedent ,therefore this should not be”. And is this same argument to be made against gay marriage by Mr.Lind? Or does he simply apply this ludicrous standard to economic freedom? No doubt Lind would oppose the promethean who first seized control of fire on the grounds that it was unprecedented. And what is this “21st century” drivel? Or are we back to the:”that which comes later is automatically progress & therefore good” absurdity? Was Nazi Germany an “improvement” on the Weimar Republic? Was the end of reconstruction and the return of lynchings an “improvement” on reconstruction? What of the dark ages? Was the rise of Islamic fundamentalism an improvement on the Shah’s Iran?
Note that this argument is never made by liberals against their own proposals,quite the contrary,if their proposals fail disastrously ( like the  housing projects) it is simply evidence that we need more “bold persistent experimentation” not that there is anything fundamentally wrong with their  proposals.
Nor is it true that the repeated failure of socialist states proves that socialism can never work. It proves that socialist regimes have failed repeatedly & therefore implies that such proposals should be looked at with skepticism at the least ,but in and of itself alone it does not prove that no valid argument now or in the future can ever be made for socialism.

But if Lind’s nonsense is the best argument that can be made ,then the intellectual battle against capitalism is dead & the enemies of freedom can only prevail through ignorance & inertia.

Advertisements

Leave a comment

Filed under Activism, Current events, Objectivism, Politics

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s