So I’ve been thinking a lot about libertarianism. It’s constantly paraded as “more freedom”. But the more I think about it the more it seems that it appeals to those who’ve become disenchanted with Democracy. It reminds me of the Russians constantly trying to revive the communist party because they felt it worked better. Ultimately if private companies provided all the functions of government, if they built our roads, provided our electricity, and removed our sewage we would have less control. Our democracy would disappear and we would have one or two choices. Perhaps this disillusionment with government and popularity of libertarianism goes hand in hand with our indoor TV culture. It’s too hard to get out and make a difference.

It’s much easier to just have a choice of two horrible Internet providers and pick one. Rather than have the government be the Internet provider and have to make decisions about infrastructure spending democratically, you can pick from one of two equally bad private entities.

The choice becomes easy, but you no longer have any Democratic control. We should strive to make our government more effecient, not to privatize it. Because privatizing it just the first step to corporate totalitarianism.

---

Comments

Robert

2011-06-16T17:55:40.000Z

You keep going on about democracy. You DO realize that’s not the system our government uses right? And I don’t see libertarianism promoted as “more freedom” (at least not by the people who aren’t trying to write a hit-piece). I tend to see it as less interferance. From what you write above, you don’t want the choice of two horrible internet providers. You’d rather have the government be the sole provider. You realize having the government being the sole provider of services has nothing to do with either libertarianism or democracy?

Tim

2011-06-16T19:24:42.000Z

Unfortunately, the ultimate conclusion of libertarianism results in corporate feudalism. This so called “interference” (i.e. oversight) is there for your benefit… Since the corporation cannot and will not act in your best interest.

Tim

2011-06-16T19:26:33.000Z

Instead… perhaps we should strip the corporations of their legal personhood? I’m quite confident that we would all be better off if we did.

Tamara

2011-06-16T20:10:46.000Z

congrats on winning stanley cup and MVP. LOL

Robert

2011-06-16T20:41:09.000Z

corporate personhood should go away. Interstate commerce should be specifically defined as applying to acts of commerce between two or more parties in different states. And the government should get out of the business of telling anyone who can get married to anyone else.

Tim

2011-06-16T21:20:36.000Z

Robert, you and I are in violent agreement!!

Tim

2011-06-16T21:21:58.000Z

States are an antiquated idea. Cities and economic regions are all that will matter in the future. Think how much stronger an economic engine Austin would be if it wasn’t constantly being interfered with by the state government.

Kathryn

2011-11-02T22:09:11.000Z

I agree- states are an antiquated idea; at the very least the notion that they hold a monopoly on power is incongruent with reality. Looking through history, the state has not had a very long or popular life, and those polities that resemble city-states always crumble… usually because of succession struggles, wars with the periphery or, ahem, economic woes. If it’s a period of neo-medievalism we’re entering, cities better become self-sustaining quick!