Comments on: People are Not Good: Another Reason I’m a Libertarian

By: Black Angus

Black Angus — Mon, 04 May 2009 00:14:59 +0000

Here in Australia from time to time comes a call to abolish state governments and/or local governments, reducing our system to a one- or two-tier government (our system is an interesting combination of US/Britain but is essentially Federal). This is championed as producing ‘less government.’
I have always opposed it because it does not make less government but concentrates the power into fewer hands. And that can only lead to trouble. And it is championed by the party that is more interventionist/interfering. Even more dubious.
And that, combined with a society that does what it’s told, scares me.
I’m with you Travis.

By: lonelypilgrim

lonelypilgrim — Sat, 02 May 2009 20:20:26 +0000

OK, tough question for you: in 1963 who do you side with, JFK or George Wallace?

I know you don’t support segregation, but if your logic follows you may not say that George Wallace was right, but you’d have to say JFK was wrong.

By: Travis Prinzi

Travis Prinzi — Sat, 02 May 2009 01:28:33 +0000

Precisely. I share Tolkien’s view. There are occasional times I get mildly optimistic, but mostly I have dystopian views that agrees with Tolkien’s assessment of history as “the long defeat.”

By: korg20000bc

korg20000bc — Sat, 02 May 2009 01:07:58 +0000

Tolkien- “My political opinions lean more and more to Anarchy (philosophically understood, meaning abolition of control not whiskered men with bombs) — or to ‘unconstitutional’ Monarchy. I would arrest anybody who uses the word State (in any sense other than the inanimate realm of England and its inhabitants, a thing that has neither power, rights nor mind); and after a chance of recantation, execute them if they remain obstinate!… Government is an abstract noun meaning the art and process of governing and it should be an offence to write it with a capital G or so as to refer to people… The most improper job of any man, even saints, is bossing other men. Not one in a million is fit for it, and least of all those who seek the opportunity.” (Letter #52)

By: korg20000bc

korg20000bc — Sat, 02 May 2009 01:01:08 +0000

I agree with the principle but cannot imagine how you could avoid these issues in practicality because, as you say, people are basically evil- on any scale. But bad small government is the lesser evil. YOu have more of an opportunity to avoid the resources of small government than big.

Tolkien said something like that as he became older he tended towards becomming an anarchist because he realised not one man in a million is equipped to govern others.

By: Travis Prinzi

Travis Prinzi — Sat, 02 May 2009 00:49:33 +0000

There’s a long answer to this and a short answer. I’ll give the short for now, the long later.

The short answer is that yes, of course small governments can be just as oppressive, but you start by not letting there be a big, impersonal force invading the lives of all the citizens in the country, and then you have limited government at local levels as well. No big or powerful government at any level.

But you can’t even get to the limited-power local community if there’s a big-brother federal government in charge.

By: korg20000bc

korg20000bc — Sat, 02 May 2009 00:46:05 +0000

Travis,
If each small community is self-governing doesn’t that just change the scale of the same issues? Small communities government can be just as oppressive as large governments, sometimes worse as it can be personal oppression rather than just general policy.

Can you expalin this aspect a little more to me please.

By: lonelypilgrim

lonelypilgrim — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 18:41:48 +0000

I think the gulags and concentration camps are exhibits A and B in your argument.

“A government powerful enough to give you everything you want, is also powerful enough to take everything you have.”