Korean Job Discussion Forums

[Senior]

http://www.tnr.com/book/review/the-joyless-mind

This is a review of Thomas Sowell's new book. The reviewer doesn't actually review the book, but I do agree with some of what he says. You pretty much know what Sowell is going to say on any given topic, and that is one of the things I find comforting about Libertarianism.

With modern "Liberalism", (I will from now on always quote the word "Liberalism" in quote marks because Libertarians are the true Liberals), you never really know where they stand on any given issue. They tend to be wishy washy, preferring to take the "middle ground". Personally I just see this as hedging your bets, moreover it is decidedly unmanly(for lack of a better word). I personally believe a man needs to possess an over-riding ethos that guides him. In my opinion, "Liberals" lack this.

I am not a theist, but in some ways, I sympathize with religious folk. They have a guiding ethos that, though I may find some parts of it a little weird or contradictory, is at least consistent.

Having not read the book myself, perhaps it is boring and flat, as the reviewer explains. However, I can pretty much guess what Sowell has written in this book, and I think the reviewer may have been put off by that (he has read more of the author than me), but for me that is what I like about Sowell, and Libertarianism in general.

[Ya-ta Boy]

"Yet this liberal-libertarian lovefest was doomed. As Jonathan Chait argued in this 2006 essay, true "liberaltarianism" would require progressives to give up their core goals of smoothing capitalism's rough edges and delivering economic security. Amid the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, that ain�t happening.

"Moreover, with the arrival of the Tea Party movement, libertarians have acquired a kind of mass political cachet that they've never before enjoyed. As Nate Silver estimated last year, the early tea parties were �two parts Ron Paul/libertarian conservative--with its strength out West and in New Hampshire--and one part Sarah Palin/red-meat conservative--with its strength in rural areas, particularly in the South.� This phenomenon has pulled libertarianism rightward: Despite some expressed concerns about the crudeness and cultural conservatism of many Tea Party activists, it has become clear that most self-conscious libertarians are willing to participate in, and cheerlead for, the Tea Party movement as though their political futures depend on it.

"That, in turn, has torn open cultural rifts between libertarians and liberals. Progressives who previously fawned over the libertarians' Jeffersonian modesty are now exposed to the unattractive aspect of libertarianism that is familiar to readers of Ayn Rand: a Nietzschean disdain for the poor and minorities that tends to dovetail with the atavistic and semi-racist habits of reactionary cultural traditionalists."

It's You, Not Me
Liberals and libertarians finally break up.
http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/the-liberaltarian-moment

[visitorq]

[Manner of Speaking]

If I understand some of the stuff written by Libertarians and members of the Cato Institute correctly, any "alliance" between Libertarians and Progressives - or even any potential alliance between Libertarians and Conservatives is/was bound to be temporary in any case. Some Libertarian ideas seem congruent with the bundle of principles and beliefs labelled Conservatism, some with the bundle of principles and beliefs labelled Progressive. But it's hard to see Libertarianism ever binding seamlessly with ANY "ism". It's kind of coming from a third dimension, other than the strictly left or right.

[RufusW]

[dragon777]

Ha ha.....oh .....LOL.....whoooooh....jeeeeez.....

[dragon777]

I am just trying to come to terms with the people who deny climate

change and now I have this. Lord Monckton crying out loud....GW Bush...

what other comedy acts do we have????

[gay in korea]

I describe myself as a realist, rather than a liberal, a progressive or as a libertarian.

I favor the legalization of many/most controlled substances. I do so not so much on the idea of freedom or liberty, but based on the fact that all evidence points to prohibition doing far more harm than good, and that there are actually enormous benefits to be gained from legalization.

And the above is why I am not a liberal, conservative or a libertarian. If you govern solely on ideology you might as well put a blind fold on, not read anything, never commission any research etc. So the guy who claims that liberals are too stupid too understand free market economics, give me a break.

I think the evidence that humans need laws and rules etc is overwhelming. Drunk driving, speeding... Licenses are a good thing. The push by many in the libertarian movement toward deregulation ignores most psych and sociological data sets that indicate that given the opportunity, enough people will do enough bad things that some form of restriction is needed.

[Senior]

[bacasper]

[RufusW]

[visitorq]

[Ya-ta Boy]

[bacasper]

[visitorq]