A short note from the editor

I don’t even know what to write about anymore.

The Kavanaugh-SCOTUS debacle was so bad, and so predictable, that I thought it was worth avoiding altogether, even though it’s important. I thought about writing on why it’s important to understand “the other side” of a debate. In the US, as in democracies everywhere right now, political polarization has occurred. Nobody is listening, but nobody is paying attention to the important stuff, either. There’s no mention of checks and balances or rule of law, but plenty of ink has been spilled on “legitimacy,” as if the beliefs of the mob are somehow superior to minority rights and due process in a free and open society.

Don’t people realize that the Supreme Court, in fact the whole judicial branch of government, is supposed to be somewhat anti-democratic? Wasn’t that high school civics?

The election of Donald Trump has overwhelmed libertarians, I think. He’s too vulgar for us to properly counter. He’s a demagogue and he’s immoral. NOL‘s traffic has gone up over the past two years since Trump’s election victory, but the number of posts has gone down. Even I have switched from writing about political issues to simply sharing stuff that’s mostly non-political. Again, how do you counter something so vulgar and crass using the written word and your own humble logic? I understand why Leftists have taken to the streets. I understand why they use violence and intimidation to get their points across.

The root cause of the populist surge across the democratic world is hard to pinpoint. Perhaps it never will be properly pinpointed. Yet, I see two causes: the first is a simple lack of knowledge about what liberty means. Just mention the word “liberty” in your next conversation and you’ll see what I mean. It has become archaic or even eccentric. “Liberty.” Its meaning has become lost. And in the meantime, populist demagogues throughout the West have taken a dump all over the meaning of freedom. Demagogues now assault the liberties of minorities, of refugees, and of foreigners in the name of freedom.

How did we let this happen? How did libertarians let this come to pass? Complacency is the wrong answer here. Libertarians fell under the spell of economizing. Libertarians and libertarian organizations sought to become more rational, more efficient, and more eye-catching as the medium of mass communication has moved from television and print to digital and print. Something called “data” or “metrics” convinced libertarians worldwide to bend the knee. But the hallmark of liberty has always been informality and spontaneity. Institutional and professional organizations are a great complement to libertarian activism (whatever that might be), but once rationalization overpowered the informal nature of libertarian networks, populism prospered as libertarians, too worried about their careers in Washington, took the cowardly route. I am part of the cowardly crowd. I should have spoken up more often. I should have been more a fighter.

The second cause of the populist surge is globalization and the lack of formal institutions to accompany its spread across the globe. The spread of formal markets has decreased income inequality worldwide, but has increased that same inequality within countries that have been economically developed for centuries. If a poor country is trading with a rich country, and the poor country is obviously cheating, there is nothing citizens in the rich country can do to stop the cheating other than stop trading with the poor country. If the world had better formal institutions to confront stuff like this, the populists would have remained forever on the margins of their respective societies. The World Trade Organization was seen as “good enough” by those inside Washington and by those who should have known better.

A fuller, more robust vision of the free and open society has not yet been produced. There are those in libertarian circles who argue that charter cities or “seasteading” ventures are the proper future of humankind, the proper future of liberty. Yet running away from the world does not seem like a smart thing to do. It’s certainly cowardly, and we’ve had enough of that over the past three or four decades to last us a lifetime. A better, more up-to-date, argument for the free and open society needs to be built off of the works of liberty’s past defenders. Globalization has been good for the world’s poor, but it has sidelined the voices of the world’s middle classes (who work in the world’s rich countries). To fight populism, I am going to continue to figure out how to make globalization a little bit better for everybody, instead of just ignoring the complaints of the middle classes. I think expanding the Madisonian republic territorially is the best way to go about this. I may be wrong, but I’ll never know if I don’t at least take a crack at it.

6 thoughts on “A short note from the editor

  1. I’m not a libertarian so I will leave it to you to talk about how Libertarians have screwed the pooch with Trump and Trumpkins. Instead, I want to complain about my fellow travelers – progressives.

    “Don’t people realize that the Supreme Court, in fact the whole judicial branch of government, is supposed to be somewhat anti-democratic? Wasn’t that high school civics?”

    Yes, it was in high school civics. Apparently most progressives slept through that part. The parts of the internet I frequent have been bitching about the electoral college for 2 years now….endless whines about how it’s undemocratic. Yes, it is…by design. I might not be happy about some of the reasons [eg protecting slave holding states] but I’ve known about it since junior high school. Similarly, progressives bitch about how senators representing a relatively small % of the population are in control. The hows and whys of that were also in civics class. The Founding Fathers [and yes Professor Pinocchio they were all men, none of those uppity women you so detest] had a distinct aversion to direct democracy and sought ways to protect minorities from the tyranny of the majority.

    I understand why….look at any political map. Right now raw numbers favor the Democratic Party so they chaff at the power being wielded by a small number of mostly rural states. Personally I’m still in favor of mechanisms to protect minorities even though those being protected right now are, imo, despicable people.

  2. Indeed, I’m not a libertarian either, I’m a conservative, although as Brandon has noted over the years, as far as economics go, I’m pretty close to being a libertarian. I’m also a Trump supporter, originally because I was Never Hillary, but while he not conventionally presidential, he is effective and working well within the constitution.

    But I also agree 90+% with what Terry says above. Why is that? Simple, it is what has worked in America for almost 250 years, and I see little point in fixing things that are not broken.

    Actually, from his comment here, I read Terry as more of an old-style liberal. I suspect we could have a pretty good discussion if he’d stick to the subject and quit the name calling, and stick to the subject.

    • Thanks NEO. It would definitely be nice if Terry would stick to the subject!

  3. I’m not sure about the entire cause of the rise of populism. But can say I understand what caused the creation of the alt-right/neo-reaction which is a part (maybe the main part) of current populism in the West. The rediscovery of genetic determinism, aka human biodiversity, aka scientific racism as the left calls it. You can’t remain a supporter of libertarianism in it’s current form if you believe human biodiversity is convincing. Nor can you remain a supporter of progressivism or neo-conservatism.

    These ideologies are predicated on the assumption that everyone is born largely equal and largely desires the same thing. There’s an assumption that humans are interchangeable cogs and the reason the West is so prosperous is simply because of it’s institutions. The West can just replace their population with Africans, Arabs and Latin Americans and everything will continue on as it has for the last 300 years towards more and more prosperity. Well Muslim Arabs don’t desire the same thing as Westerners and humans aren’t interchangeable cogs.

    Look at South Africa, look at Zimbabwe, look at Venezuela, look at Detroit, look at what a utopia Iraq has been turned into, look at crime statistics and the persistent racial gap in the US despite best intentions and efforts. The equalist ideologies are not compatible with reality and will lead to the destruction of the prosperity the West has worked so hard to attain. Mainstream thought needs to reconcile these contradictions to make a cohesive ideology that people can work towards if they hope to resolve this current bout of populism and the issues ailing the West.

Please keep it civil

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s