I’ve only read the first article on political correctness so far (nicely written), I’ll have to look at the others later. Mostly just wanted to thank you for doing some surfing for me 😉
Thinking about Political Correctness a little more, and especially in tandem with Goldman’s essay, I think that the phenomenon we call PC can best be described as limiting discourse by seeking to exclude certain factions from the marketplace of ideas. Of course, both the Left and the Right are guilty of this (as Goldman’s essay shows) but it might help the marketplace of ideas if we could identify the various ways in which factions seek to limit the voice of other factions.
Clearly-defined property rights stand out to me as an obvious tool necessary for a healthy marketplace of ideas.
Gosh, you’re so intelligent, I probably shouldn’t comment. But something you say confirms my general sense about capitalism:
“The mixed economy does create poverty, but not from private entrepreneurship. The poverty comes from government’s taxing the poor and subsidizing the rich.”
It seems to me that if the free market were NOT rigged, it would manage to balance in a way that could offer more equal opportunity. That would mean all businesses are free to fail, as well as succeed. Unruly banks would be allowed to fail. Fossil fuel companies that don’t prepare a transition in the face of the obsolescence of their product would lose revenue. Etc.
That quote is actually from Fred’s post on the Dalai Lama’s hypocrisy, and yes the US economy is carefully managed and heavily regulated by the federal government. Nice, huh?
Notes On Liberty 
Reblogged this on bertpowers and commented:
Some good shares
Thanks John.
I’ve only read the first article on political correctness so far (nicely written), I’ll have to look at the others later. Mostly just wanted to thank you for doing some surfing for me 😉
Glad to be of service Professor T, and thank you.
Thinking about Political Correctness a little more, and especially in tandem with Goldman’s essay, I think that the phenomenon we call PC can best be described as limiting discourse by seeking to exclude certain factions from the marketplace of ideas. Of course, both the Left and the Right are guilty of this (as Goldman’s essay shows) but it might help the marketplace of ideas if we could identify the various ways in which factions seek to limit the voice of other factions.
Clearly-defined property rights stand out to me as an obvious tool necessary for a healthy marketplace of ideas.
Gosh, you’re so intelligent, I probably shouldn’t comment. But something you say confirms my general sense about capitalism:
“The mixed economy does create poverty, but not from private entrepreneurship. The poverty comes from government’s taxing the poor and subsidizing the rich.”
It seems to me that if the free market were NOT rigged, it would manage to balance in a way that could offer more equal opportunity. That would mean all businesses are free to fail, as well as succeed. Unruly banks would be allowed to fail. Fossil fuel companies that don’t prepare a transition in the face of the obsolescence of their product would lose revenue. Etc.
Thanks JoAnn,
That quote is actually from Fred’s post on the Dalai Lama’s hypocrisy, and yes the US economy is carefully managed and heavily regulated by the federal government. Nice, huh?