The World Needs a Philosophy of Liberty Communicator

Posted by CircuitGuy 6 years, 4 months ago to Philosophy
47 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

Someone from the Venezuelan diaspora (can we call it that?) told me flatly he’s not into economic philosophy but he knows communism means “no jobs”. He said he’ll go back to Venezuela when Maduro’s gone.

This got me thinking about claims that US is closer to dysfunction of that nature than it seems. I thought there would be a backlash against President Trump’s antics, deficit spending, nastiness, lying, and many appearances of impropriety. But there really hasn’t been as much as I thought. Democrats are lining up with large gov’t programs like the so-called Green New Deal that attempts to sell socialism by tying it to one of the biggest problems of our time, global warming. Using the problem to sell socialism is worse than pretending it’s not there.

It sounds like a cliché, but I’m worried there’s no philosophy of people solving problems without government force. That idea won’t die, but I see the US as carrying it forward. I have a borderline-nationalistic feeling no one else will do it right. Americans have that expansive and sometimes annoying attitude: “Don’t look to others. What are your dreams? Anything is possible!”

I hope I’m wrong and we soon see that attitude that I see in my American colleagues in US politics. Or if we don’t see it, then maybe President Trump’s antics and this Green New Deal and Medicare for All crap are all just rhetoric. Maybe when crisis strikes, people suddenly get serious. I don’t like that because seriousness in a sudden crisis usually means more government intrusion.

It seems like the world needs a great Ayn Rand communicator, not a politician, but an intellectual that reaches that average non-philosopher person. It doesn’t even need to be a person. It could be a hit TV show. I have no idea what form it would take.

I have been concerned about all the people who want government to solve their problems uniting together since I read an article by Bernie Sanders in 2015 praising Trump. It’s easy for me to imagine selling protectionism to socialists; and its easy to imagine selling socialism to deplorables. The key is “someone else is to blame for your life’s problems.”

The good news is my predictions are wrong at least half the time. People respond telling me, no, no, they’ll stay fired up blaming different groups for their problems and that will keep them apart. I hope so. It doesn’t seem sustainable long-term. As ewv said, tricks won’t cut it. The world needs a solid foundation of a philosophy of liberty.


All Comments


Previous comments...   You are currently on page 2.
  • Posted by 6 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I agree with the problem definition completely (except for belittling the industry of journalism), but I completely disagree that there's any modern political force pushing for less gov't borrowing and intrusion. Except for a few kooks, modern politicians sell more borrowing and more disregarding the law. It's not that they're evil. It's hard to win. You need every advantage. Borrowing, creating facile scapegoats, and gov't solutions give them that advantage.

    I believe the stuff they say to get that edge, the stuff you're repeating about presidents being responsible for the small ups-and-downs of the economy is a huge part of the problem. The economy always has ups and downs. It's been on an expansion for 10 years, not because of politicians. It's at long-term risk because of the borrowing, intrusion, and taxation. They're not doing it out of malice, but they have people arguing over the tiniest minutia while the structural problems persist. I think the real "bad guy" is interpreting the Constitution broadly, which makes the sophistry about which president steers the economy better slightly more plausible. It allows people in Congress and running for president to promise to solve people problems.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 6 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I have only watched one. It was good, but it seemed to get partially into partisan politics. I remember it (if I'm thinking of the right video) because a conservative was debating a liberal, and the conservative said they had to disagree on principles because the conservative saw people as inherently flawed by made more virtuous by police and other gov't institutions and the liberal saw people as more inherently good. It stuck with me because i'm more liberal and, as the video says, see people as more inherently good. I find that truly interesting and worth discussing, but my thought in this post is how to get everyone, regardless of their view of partisan issues, to come together for liberty.

    Thanks for the suggestion. I'll watch some more Prager U videos.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 6 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    "What is needed is a way to understand the human need to be slaves (taken care of) and how to communicate the fault of this desire."
    Yes, the fault of this desire and/or the benefits and virtues of taking care of things yourself.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 6 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    "I suggest we undertake a modern "translation" of both the Federalist and Antifederalist papers into modern context. "
    This is a very powerful idea. I hope someone surprises us it does in some unexpected way: a hit book, a TV show, a video game... anything that at least makes it an issue.

    My one fear is what if it becomes a topic for debate and people decide to amend or re-write the Constitution granting vast government powers. That would be horrible, but in some ways I'd rather admit aloud it than just pretend. I also have hope that if it were presented in a way completely divorced from modern politicos and from "wedge issues", most people still are for liberty.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by mccannon01 6 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Agreed, LibertyBelle. I need to take Dr Z's advice and get more familiar with the Founder's original debates on the Constitution. With that said, I'm willing to bet good money the Founder's idea of "promote" as used in the Constitution isn't even close to the common definition of "provide" in the same era.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by mccannon01 6 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I've told my children when they were growing up: "Freedom without responsibility is freedom corrupted and soon lost." There seems to be a lot of corruption of freedom going on now days and when it's lost I'm sure those corrupting it will be clueless as to where it went.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Stormi 6 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    We can only continue if our kids are properly allowed to experience and reason with the help of philosophers who have lived through hard times. People who examined what was going on, encouraged others to do so. Encouagae people to educate themselves, not rely on talking points of some chick who never supported herself ever.
    As to global warming, they need to research and find the sun is actually in control, not some hucksters in DC. They cannot change, what the sun dictates. We are not in global warming, we are in the third year of a mini ice age, which will continue, Cortez or not. Make them examine and admit their past tinker ing with HAARP, to change jet streams. That is government, not citizens causing it.
    People need to read somethingas simple as "Anthem, and see what is being done to them. If my daughter understood it at age 10, adults should be able to muddle through it. Freedom requires responsible behavior, and ignoring your own part in the chain, means you deserve the consequences of your own stupidity. Having stuidied philosophy since high school, I grow wary of the people who only seek a an oxymorong: benevolent dictator" to take care of them.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by LibertyBelle 6 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Too bad "promote the general welfare" was even in there in the first place. I don't believe the Founders intended that to mean a welfare state, but it's too easy to manipulate. True, "the general welfare" is best promoted by protecting the people from crime and tyranny, but it looks vague enough to be twisted into just about anything a statist wants.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ blarman 6 years, 4 months ago
    The US grows closer to meltdown and dysfunction every day, and it is largely as a result of big government (which BTW has been mostly Democrat-controlled for nearly 100 years now). Backlash against Trump's "antics"? I don't know what you mean, but I can only conclude that you are thinking that way because you listen far too much to the lamestream media. The economy is booming back now that Obama-era oppression is being rolled back by both a rescission of the government bureaucratic control state and lower taxes. There is still much that could be done, but Trump is moving us back toward the right track - not away from it as you imply.

    "Democrats are lining up with large gov’t programs like the so-called Green New Deal that attempts to sell socialism"

    You are only now beginning to notice this? There hasn't been one Democratic program in the last 60 years which HASN'T been a socialist program! Rent controls? Yes. Social Security? Yes. Medicare/Medicaid? Yes. Minimum wage? Yes. And the list goes on and on...

    "Maybe when crisis strikes, people suddenly get serious."

    That's because they won't be able to kick the can down the road anymore. Like SS, which is already defunct and will start becoming a major burden on the deficit in only a decade - if not reformed ASAP. Medicare and Medicaid only exacerbate the problem. Please note that I hold a portion of the Republican party complicit in this.

    The key is “someone else is to blame for your life’s problems.”

    Bingo. It used to be in this nation that people were individuals and the ideal of the individual held sway. We've grown much more communistic over the past 100 years and lost that sense of "rugged individualism" which made this people - and as a result this nation - great. It also completely defeats the mindset of the progressives of forcing everyone into a "group" box from which they can play politics and pit one against another, which we see to greater extent now than at any prior time in history.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by mccannon01 6 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Nicely expressed, Doc, but I always thought the phrase "promote the general welfare" somehow got wrongfully interpreted to mean "provide the general welfare", which are two different meanings, IMHO. Too late to fix at this point, I guess.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by ArtIficiarius 6 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    What suggestions would you make to a Convention of States Project presenter readying a table and a speech for the Constitution Center and/or Independence Hall (both in Philadelphia, PA)?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by DrZarkov99 6 years, 4 months ago
    Picking just one of your concerns, climate change, the general attitude has been to let the government pick the winners and losers. A better solution is to keep the government's hands off of the issue, and let market forces drive solutions. Propping up electric vehicles with subsidies, or reusable energy sources with tax breaks, or instituting punitive carbon taxes cripple the economy for all but the wealthy, and are most likely ineffective solutions to start with.

    Propping up existing technology stagnates progress. It took breaking up the AT&T stranglehold on phone communications to enable the rapid rise of wireless communications. Making renewable energy sources compete instead of being coddled will drive innovation. Making electric vehicles compete head to head with conventional vehicles will drive innovation there as well. Reliable, affordable clean power and quiet, clean, efficient electric vehicles will be eagerly accepted, no carbon tax (which is a worthless scam) needed.

    Nuclear power has been vilified as a possible solution to reducing carbon emissions. There are modern nuclear technologies that prevent disasters like Chernobyl or Fukushima, and restrictive, expensive licensing processes need to be trimmed to allow their construction.

    As for liberty and the pros and cons of the American vision, I suggest we undertake a modern "translation" of both the Federalist and Antifederalist papers into modern context. The insights and arguments the Constitution was based on are emphatically laid out in these papers, with warnings of the potential for failure due to some content. The probability that the ill-defined phrase "promote the general welfare" would lead to out of control government expansion is clearly spelled out in these papers, and that the abbreviated language of the 2nd amendment would create confusion of purpose is also illustrated. More people should have access to these arguments to better understand how the United States was originally envisioned.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by mccannon01 6 years, 4 months ago
    Gee whiz, CircuitGuy, this looks like a carefully worded smoke screen of "Philosophy of Liberty Communicator" to express your desires to take a slap at President Trump and promote the global warming religion to the rest of us Gulchers. Not buying it.

    I've heard it said that sometimes in the White House it's nice to have a Mother Theresa and other times we need Dirty Harry. Now, IMHO, we need a Dirty Harry and Trump is filling the bill very nicely even if some folks would rather have a Mother Theresa.

    I guess I'll just have to exercise what's left of my personal liberty to throw another log in the wood stove to keep the workshop warm in the snow while Nancy flies off to Hawaii. Oh wait! Some of the communist (Democrat) nuts in the state I live in are contemplating outlawing fireplaces and wood stoves to combat global warming. I wonder if Nancy has room on the plane for me and my family to get us out of the ice and snow we're covered in. Edit: Then again, maybe if I can help bring on a bit of global warming I won't have all that ice and snow to contend with and have a longer growing season to boot, LOL!
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by coaldigger 6 years, 4 months ago
    Yaron Brook is the best spokesman for a morality based purely on reason. He has many outlets on the webb for his ideas, one being his youtube channel.
    https://www.youtube.com/user/ybrook

    There are others but Yaron will lead you to them as well.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Kittyhawk 6 years, 4 months ago
    "... I’m worried there’s no philosophy of people solving problems without government force." Me too. Both liberals and conservatives are statists, believing that government is and should be the solution to society's problems. The alternative viewpoint, which holds that individuals have both the moral right, and the moral obligation, to find non-coercive solutions to our problems, is called voluntaryism or anarchy. I'd encourage you to watch this video by Larken Rose comparing authoritarianism (statism) to anarchism.
    https://youtu.be/xMoPBDz5ycA
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by chad 6 years, 4 months ago
    I am not certain a good communicator will accomplish turning the tide of socialism. When I first embarked on this journey of understanding 55 years ago by living as a libertarian it made so much sense to me and seemed so obvious that I thought all that was necessary was to explain it to someone eloquently and the news would be self actualizing. For some reason humans seem to prefer slavery and not just because they might be in charge, although that is the attraction for those who desire to lead. It isn't just half the population that follows the call of collectivism those who consider themselves 'conservative' want government control of a different sort.
    What is needed is a way to understand the human need to be slaves (taken care of) and how to communicate the fault of this desire. Failing to do this merely agitates the slaves when you tell them being free is better.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Olduglycarl 6 years, 4 months ago
    That philosophy of liberty is in our Declaration of Independence and ratified in our Constitution...get back on That road...and we'll be fine...but unfortunately, half the country has lost it's mind.

    Deport them to Venezuelan along with alexandria ocasio cortez and her snot green no deal.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jbrenner 6 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Those with a sound philosophy of liberty (i.e. colonists and eventually Founding Fathers) made the act of isolating themselves in a colony with like-minded individuals first. This is a major reason why Atlas Shrugged remains credible.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by ZenRoy 6 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Those that seek power rather than liberty will eventually (based on the fact it repeats through history) turn on one and other or on themselves.

    If are to correct the course of society we will need to wait for that event, but we will need to be ready and everyone with sound philosophy of liberty must be ready to act.

    Initially only 10% of colonists supported a drive for liberty (At the point of the declaration of independence). That grew to 30% by the revolutionary war.

    Even then the Jack Flag, or Grand Union Flag, which was symbolic of a desire to return as part of England after the war was flown for the first 2 years of the Revolutionary war.

    After all that the majority of people were seeking a philosophy of liberty. I think events will happen that will lead down this road again, however if there are not good men and women who will stand up and fight it will never blossom beyond the 10% base that always seems to be around with a good internal philosophy of liberty.

    I think right now is a time for opportunity. Not at all sure if it will work out or not but I think it depends on us. Are we apathetic believing that nothing can be done? If so we will be right. Or are we trying?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by ZenRoy 6 years, 4 months ago
    Watch Prager U videos. https://www.prageru.com/ they are the closest thing I have seen yet to what your suggesting we need. I agree. I also think it must be many different groups of people. One person will not have the reach that is needed to combat this cancer that has all ready spread far and wide. One person can slow it, only many will turn it.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jbrenner 6 years, 4 months ago
    CG: "The world needs a solid foundation of a philosophy of liberty."
    Such a foundation has already been laid ... and ignored ... because it is not in the best interest of those who seek power rather than liberty.
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo