The move to ban gender-inclusive language in all official documents and public administration comes as the far-right libertarian continues to implement his socially conservative agenda.
Most “libertarians” in the world are just conservatives who don’t like the label. The fraction of them who actually embrace libertarianism in its truest form, especially when given any amount of power, is vanishingly small.
I’ve always said “Libertarians” (ignoring the fact that the word originally referred to libertarian socialists) are just conservatives who like weed and pedophilia.
Thats cause libertaianism isn’t a viable form of government, it technically can only lead to anarchy, but I feel like it’s used more by conservatives as a cover.
Thats cause libertaianism isn’t a viable form of government
Its viable in so far as it is a marketing slogan used to distract and disguise the policy these assholes genuinely want to impose.
The libertarian mantras are seductive and libertarian populism - the theory of perfect economic independence via personal strength - is appealing to upwardly mobile / financially secure portions of the electorate. Using “the government” as a rhetorical punching bag when you’re out of power means you’re never on the wrong side of an issue. Whatever anyone’s complaint, you can sympathize by complaining that the government is doing things wrong.
If you haven’t this is a great book about a town that tried to see what libertarian policies actually lead
Its worth noting how and why these folks took power originally. Lots of money spent on advertising combined with a personal beef with the existing city council that had them undermining the basic functions of government even before they took office. Lots of empty promises and outright slanders of sitting officials. And a city that was already in financial decline, without a state or federal government willing to spend counter-cyclically and get them back on their feet.
This isn’t just a failure of libertarianism. The libertarianism is a symptom of a broader failure of a laisse-faire national economy.
Most “libertarians” in the world are just conservatives who don’t like the label. The fraction of them who actually embrace libertarianism in its truest form, especially when given any amount of power, is vanishingly small.
I’ve always said “Libertarians” (ignoring the fact that the word originally referred to libertarian socialists) are just conservatives who like weed and pedophilia.
Thats cause libertaianism isn’t a viable form of government, it technically can only lead to anarchy, but I feel like it’s used more by conservatives as a cover.
If you haven’t this is a great book about a town that tried to see what libertarian policies actually lead - https://www.amazon.com/Libertarian-Walks-Into-Bear-Liberate/dp/1541788516
Right libertarianism doesn’t lead to anarchy, it leads to corporatism.
Its viable in so far as it is a marketing slogan used to distract and disguise the policy these assholes genuinely want to impose.
The libertarian mantras are seductive and libertarian populism - the theory of perfect economic independence via personal strength - is appealing to upwardly mobile / financially secure portions of the electorate. Using “the government” as a rhetorical punching bag when you’re out of power means you’re never on the wrong side of an issue. Whatever anyone’s complaint, you can sympathize by complaining that the government is doing things wrong.
Its worth noting how and why these folks took power originally. Lots of money spent on advertising combined with a personal beef with the existing city council that had them undermining the basic functions of government even before they took office. Lots of empty promises and outright slanders of sitting officials. And a city that was already in financial decline, without a state or federal government willing to spend counter-cyclically and get them back on their feet.
This isn’t just a failure of libertarianism. The libertarianism is a symptom of a broader failure of a laisse-faire national economy.