Freepublican Finale

It started as a poorly-focused libertarian project built around promoting the work of a single individual, but became something much worse. Naming any of the players involved would be unprofessional, but for the sake of simplicity, I call the entire fiasco "The Freepublican Job."

We live in a society. By definition, we have to balance our needs and desires with those of the people among us. If we were all identical, it would be far easier, but people have a diversity of lives that most of us cannot fully grasp. We have to be conscientious of the consequences of our actions on people whose lives we can never anticipate.

It can be exhausting to try to be considerate of others and to anticipate how our actions affect others. It can be an almost stifling weight for people who are comfortable seeing the world from their singular perspective.

The siren song of libertarianism is that it promises to let us shake off those concerns. Perhaps that, and not institutional failings, are the reason it's been so much more successful taking root amongst wealthier individuals.

In a world where no one is required to think about anyone else, those who have temporal power feel that they could come out ahead, either because of the skills which make them powerful in the first place, or because of the temporal power they've already gained.

That's the ultimate failing of libertarianism. It's easy for the powerful to let everyone fend for themselves. It relieves them of the societal expectation to give any of their accumulated wealth to anyone else. It helps them sleep easily at night.

It's a philosophy which demands sensible fiscal policy from government and stipulates that it should never be used to impose societal expectations on others. No matter how strong those ideas are though, it will never gain a significant foothold until it's more than an excuse for the wealthy to shake off the responsibility that comes with their power.

Guns, and the Rights to Thereof

It started as a poorly-focused Libertarian project built around promoting the work of a single individual, but became something much worse. Naming any of the players involved would be unprofessional, but for the sake of simplicity, Saio Kaas calls the entire fiasco "The Freepublican Job." After much professional and mature debate, Saio Kaas is doing more freelance work while I handle this week's Freepublican post.

Guns have been a big issue lately, huh? As someone who's generally in the center, but leans liberal, it's almost frightening to see the veneer of detached rationality melt away from those further on the left when they discuss guns. Like nuclear power, guns are something frightening and other to them. The bone-deep fear gives them an absolutist attitude that empowers them to eschew rational discussion in favor of repeating just how right their attitudes are.

Obviously, I don't think taking everyone's guns away is the answer. I'd say that if the left calmed down and explained that they feel the same way, the right might finally get that point, but I'm not stupid. I might be the only one in this conversation who's not. The resistance to gun legislation isn't to preserve a completely unregulated weapons market; there are plenty of laws that restrict weapon (and gun) ownership, as well as every other amendment in The Bill of Rights. If you don't believe me, try suing the government over a loved one killed in Iraq. Try protesting in the middle of the road of Time Square. Try keeping your property once eminent domain comes up. Try getting a trial for US citizens killed in drone strikes. Try being a governor who doesn't want your National Guard sent overseas.  Whether you like it or not, the 0th Admendment is "People should be free, but let's be reasonable here."

Looking Backwards, then down. Deep down.

It started as a poorly-focused libertarian project built around promoting the work of a single individual, but became something much worse. Naming any of the players involved would be unprofessional, but for the sake of simplicity, I call the entire fiasco "The Freepublican Job."

Part of the reading materials for the job was Looking Backward: 2012-2162. It was based on another book, Looking Backward: 2000-1887, apparently a seminal liberal work I wasn't familiar with. Both books are centered around characters who find themselves thrown forward in time to see a world improved by the writer's ideology, with the latter being a libertarian ideology.

It would be easy to call it a bad book; the story is sparse, there's no conflict, the ending is inevitable, and it's not very original. There's a conversation to be had about writing stories that aren't supposed to be good stories, but now isn't the time.

Looking Backward: 2012-2162 is the story of a textbook liberal college professor who's locked in a time capsule and wakes up in a libertarian wonderland occupies thirteen of the fractured states of america. He tours his new world, learns about the foibles of the old one, and raises faint arguments that the ultimate, liberated people of the future bat aside with condescension.

They're Not Called Freepubliberals

It started as a poorly-focused Libertarian project built around promoting the work of a single individual, but became something much worse. Naming any of the players involved would be unprofessional, but for the sake of simplicity, I call the entire fiasco "The Freepublican Job."

My initial perspective of Libertarians was based on a simple concept of the political spectrum. If Republicans favored government intervention on social issues and eschewed it for economic issues and Democrats wanted government out of the social sphere and in the economic sphere, then Libertarians wanted the government out of both. On the surface, it seems like a party with a platform of responsible government spending, except without the ultra-Christian minority adding tourettes-like bylines.

As someone who watches the political landscape, I was aware of Ron Paul's repeated run for the presidency as a Libertarian in Republican's clothing. I'd known that Republican support for Libertarians was strong, but had always assumed that those on the left had as much to gain from it as the right. After all, Ron Paul opposed foreign wars, wanted to draw down the military, favored a less authoritarian approach to our relationships with other countries, and loudly decried the post-9/11 erosion of civil liberties.

Working with the Freepublicans

You might have noticed that I've been absent lately. Regretfully, it left an inconsistent drunkard with aspirations of counteracting centuries of female objectification by objectifying as many men as possible in charge of things around here. The upside is that I got a few extra dollars on the side working on a project of some importance. It started as a poorly-focused Libertarian project built around promoting the work of a single individual, but became something much worse. Naming any of the players involved would be unprofessional, but for the sake of simplicity, I call the entire fiasco "The Freepublican Job."

The story behind that name is funny; there's this nice country club and I'm having lunch with our benefactor, his right-hand lady, two middle management types, and another applicant. Despite the other applicant and myself not knowing much about economics or China (two subjects Libertarians like talking about), when the time came for our benefactor to point out our short comings, I--a uselessly handsome aryanish-looking man--watched as this smaller, Hispanic woman bore up under a lot of criticism we both should have shared (or been equally spared).