MaggieMae
Reality bits
- Apr 3, 2009
- 24,043
- 1,635
- 48
Lack of infrastructure in such a Libertarian idealized system would weaken the country dramatically.
Well, like you said, there's different degrees of libertarianism. The (big l) Libertarian party is unlike the (little l) libertarianism you'd see on the Mises website, or taught in the Austrian school
I think there are some libertarians who won't get worked up over a government monopoly on infrastructure, while there are some others who think all roads and highways should be privatized to a toll system. There can be competent arguments for the latter, but i won't make them because I don't believe in that aspect of it.
Like modern liberalism and conservatism, there are different degrees of adherence to classical liberalism.
Lack of regulation would allow the greedy to eventually destroy the system to their own benefit.
Regulation can sometimes but not always be a code word for corporate favoritism.
Some libertarians will frame certain environmental regulations as justified since it is the governments responsibility to ensure each individual is not poisoned by the air and water. And if those environmental laws are applied to the courts, breaking them would be a criminal offense (manslaughter?) against individuals in the offending company. For good or bad, the board would be held criminally responsible for breaking environmental regulation laws.
I think most libertarians would be against the Articles of Incorporation. There really is more than one road to serfdom, and most libertarians are aware of this and will disapprove of corporate America and the mutual backsratching that happens on K Street with the politicians.
Excellent post. In my opinion, the nation would be in far better shape regardless which party is in power if lobbyists could be banned. There's such a huge difference in permitting the Constitutional free speech rights of advocates (special interest groups) and the "free speech" of K Street professionals.