The 538 post makes the debatable assumption of summing the "social liberal" and "economic conservative" lines. I've always thought of "libertarian" as being "social liberal AND economic conservative" thing, not "social liberal OR economic conservative." Without knowing if the two dimensions of politics are increasingly correlated it's impossible to say if the graph really represents increased "libertarian identification" as compared to increased libertarian sentiment on two sets of issues but with most people still loading pretty heavily on right-right or left-left.
I guess it partly depends on whether issues come bundled (as with voting for a politician) or can be taken serially (as with plebiscites).
From the second article, Sajwert: "Exactly HOW much LESS government do [libertarians] specifically want?"
It's a false question. Ask a store owner, "how much less shop-lifting do you want?". Ask the average person, "how much less mugging incidents do you want?" There isn't a floor to the "want". There might a point where striving for less is too expensive, but there isn't a specifically wanted minimum, above zero.
I assert that in government, shop-lifting, and mugging, we are a long ways from the point where striving for less is uneconomic. Let us work for more liberty and pick up this "floor" question again in fifty years (if we're lucky).
In a possibly related theme, I noticed the following search results for my county library audiobooks / ebooks :
Search for "Hayek": 2 books, 1. Hayek - His Contribution to the Political and Economic Thought of Our Time, by Eamonn Butler. Waiting list of 11 patrons. 2. The Road to Serfdom, by Friedrich A. Hayek. Waiting list of 6 patrons.
Search for "Keynes": no results.
Do you think there is a trend emerging? (I deleted my earlier post due to a typo)
I've never been a fan of the social question. The idea that government should do this but not that is itself a particular value. Indeed, my political beliefs are a particular set of values: natural rights, negative liberty, Constitutional federalism, etc. That doesn't mean that I think the government should use force to stop people doing everything I personally think is wrong, but it's still a set of values.
5 comments:
The 538 post makes the debatable assumption of summing the "social liberal" and "economic conservative" lines. I've always thought of "libertarian" as being "social liberal AND economic conservative" thing, not "social liberal OR economic conservative." Without knowing if the two dimensions of politics are increasingly correlated it's impossible to say if the graph really represents increased "libertarian identification" as compared to increased libertarian sentiment on two sets of issues but with most people still loading pretty heavily on right-right or left-left.
I guess it partly depends on whether issues come bundled (as with voting for a politician) or can be taken serially (as with plebiscites).
From the second article, Sajwert: "Exactly HOW much LESS government do [libertarians] specifically want?"
It's a false question. Ask a store owner, "how much less shop-lifting do you want?". Ask the average person, "how much less mugging incidents do you want?" There isn't a floor to the "want". There might a point where striving for less is too expensive, but there isn't a specifically wanted minimum, above zero.
I assert that in government, shop-lifting, and mugging, we are a long ways from the point where striving for less is uneconomic. Let us work for more liberty and pick up this "floor" question again in fifty years (if we're lucky).
In a possibly related theme, I noticed the following search results for my county library audiobooks / ebooks :
Search for "Hayek": 2 books,
1. Hayek - His Contribution to the Political and Economic Thought of Our Time, by Eamonn Butler. Waiting list of 11 patrons.
2. The Road to Serfdom, by Friedrich A. Hayek. Waiting list of 6 patrons.
Search for "Keynes": no results.
Do you think there is a trend emerging?
(I deleted my earlier post due to a typo)
I've never been a fan of the social question. The idea that government should do this but not that is itself a particular value. Indeed, my political beliefs are a particular set of values: natural rights, negative liberty, Constitutional federalism, etc. That doesn't mean that I think the government should use force to stop people doing everything I personally think is wrong, but it's still a set of values.
Post a Comment