Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (26801)	8/18/2006 3:04:50 PM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 543319

I do agree with that small bit, in general. But I think it supports my point, not yours. If Bush is tossing in some libertarian stuff just for extra heft, if Libertarianism is just a little stream in the watershed, and the real underlying principles are economic and moral ones, then Lunt/Lind was incorrect in labeling his bugaboo "libertarianism." This, then, rapidly gets down to the proverbial "angels on the head of a pin" argument. Here's where I am on this point. And I do appreciate this last attempt to focus. The Bushites took a core principle of libertarianism, its opposition to the welfare state, from which one may well deduce opposition to social security, they took that core principle and "wove it" into their push to privatize social security. Ok, so the principle is at play. Now, one other level. There is little doubt that the Bushites thought that by doing so they would win a public opinion battle. Instead they learned that the public is not ready to privatize social security and, by inference, Lind argues that much of the drive to "privatize everything" is going down the drain. On that latter point, I think he's too hopeful. So two places the libertarian argument is at play: "woven in" to the Bush argument and a hypothesized presence in the public mind. It may not be libertarianism as you know it, but it's certainly opposition to the welfare state and opposition to social security on individualistic grounds. A libertarian label works for me.