Skip to main content

the resurgence of liberty

Political awareness and activism at the grassroots level is rising in the United States. The political spectrum in the United States is changing. Long seen as one-dimensional (left vs. right), there has been a strengthening and orthogonalization of at least one more axis -- that of liberty, and the lack thereof. Libertarianism is most certainly on the rise -- with a rising concern, across all demographics, for broader economic (laissez-faire capitalism and Austrian economics) and personal freedoms (civil libertarianism). While a majority of the new libertarians come from the right, there is also growing number of left-libertarians as well as a significant exodus of liberals and progressives toward classical libertarianism.

Fiscal conservatism is a defining characteristic of the traditional right-wing. This ideology is generally hawkish on spending, budget deficits and taxes and moderate on business regulation and social safety-net programs, advocating for fiscal and monetary restraint and balanced budgets. Fiscal libertarianism takes these attitudes a step further -- advocating for laissez-faire capitalism, free(er) markets and the reduction of taxes, entitlement programs and regulatory burdens, and, in general, the reduction of the size and scope of governments. 

The new libertarians share with most conservatives a disdain for the bloated, elitist nanny-state and bureaucratic welfare-state engendered by statist progressive (and, occasionally, "compassionate conservative") policies. They are also characterized by a disdain for political-industrial complexes of various shades (e.g. military, prison, etc.), and, recently, are increasingly concerned with civil liberties and with emphasizing a non-interventionist foreign policy. In these latter two regards, they have much in common with many liberals (except only, perhaps, the Democratic Jewish lobby) and most progressives. The new libertarians diverge from the traditional right-wing on matters of foreign policy: they reject the neo-conservative interventionism of national security hawks and the political-industrial complexes that result and arise from maintaining a perpetual warfare state.

Civil libertarianism emphasizes the protection and increase of personal liberties, a.k.a. civil liberties -- such as free speech (e.g. First Amendment of the US Constitution) and general freedom from government intervention in matters of conscience, expression and association. More recently, civil libertarians have expressed grave concerns over the potential and actual violations of individual liberties by the government, in the name of domestic and national security (see indefinite detention and the NDAA, mass surveillance, the surveillance state and PRISM). Also, recently, there has been an increasing concern for the protection of individual digital rights & privacy (see the protests against SOPA and PIPA).

Right-wing libertarians are finding common cause with the libertarian socialists (for e.g. as found in the Occupy movement) in their equal disdain for crony capitalism and with civil libertarians in their suspicion and distrust of an oppressive police & surveillance state.

Libertarians in the US, esp. right-wing libertarians, oftentimes find support for their viewpoints in the American Constitution -- and esp. in the idea of Constitutionally-limited government. This has led to a strong confluence of thought and activism between libertarians and the Patriot movement, esp. among right-leaning libertarians. The Tea Party is essentially the love-child of these two strains of thought in recent American civil and political life.

The idea of liberty rises steadily and naturally in many hearts and minds throughout the world. Robert G. Ingersoll, extols it best:
What light is to the eyes
what air is to the lungs
what love is to the heart,
liberty is to the soul of man.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

the World Cup draw -- an alternative proposal

The FIFA World Cup seeding and draw system has consistently produced groups of death and groups comprised mainly of teams that fail to invoke passion or imagination from fans around the world, except perhaps for such teams' own fans. The latest edition is no exception -- and may even be the worst ever on this measure. An outline of the draw system can be seen here . We have one group which contains Switzerland, Ecuador and Honduras and another consisting of Russia, Algeria and South Korea!! And, on top of this, we have at least three, if not four or more, groups of death. Depending on one's perspective, esp. given the recent rise of African powerhouses, all of the rest of the groups may even be considered Groups of Death!! This is a disservice to football fans around the world, not to mention the skilled and enterprising teams that worked hard to get here. To address this, I propose a simplified draw system : Randomize Pot 1 and assign to Groups Assign remaining Pots t...

Migrating from MS SQL Server to MongoDB

The following contains notes from various attempts at migrating 2.5GB of MS SQL Server data to MongoDB, on an 8 GB, quad-core, 64-bit Windows 7 Enterprise machine. [TERMINATED]  http://mssql2mongo.codeplex.com/ : Simple to use. Exponential slowdown observed in migration. For a total of the 50 million records spanning two tables, the following migration times were observed: 1 second for the first 100,000 records,  30 minutes for 1,000,000, 20 hours for 16 million (after which I terminated the process). [DID NOT WORK] http://rubydoc.info/gems/mongify/ : A ruby-based approach. Use Ruby 1.9.3 (tiny_tds dependency causes problems with Ruby 2.0). Install DevKit before installing the mongify gem. Also, use ' sqlserver ' as the adapter in the .config file. Then, before running ' mongify check <config-file> ', install the gems  activerecord-sqlserver-adapter  and tiny_tds . At this stage, it fails. ' mongify translation <config-file> ' fails as well. ...

Excerpts (with some annotations) from "Competition Is For Losers" by Peter Thiel

Source :  http://online.wsj.com/articles/peter-thiel-competition-is-for-losers-1410535536 The above article by Peter Thiel is the best business + economics education I have ever received or can ever conceive of receiving. Something about "anti-trust" always rubbed me the wrong way -- now I know what!! In the following, I organize excerpts from his article into named sections and summarize, emphasize and/or annotate (minimally) along the way. ________________________ CAPTURING VS. CREATING VALUE Creating value isn't enough—you also need to capture some of the value you create . Airlines create value but run razor-thin margins and are unable to capture the value they create vs. Google creates far less value but is able to capture most of it. MONOPOLY VS. PERFECT COMPETITION Competition is idealized and monopoly is abhorred -- in academia and among the general public.  "Americans mythologize competition and credit it with saving us from...