Why Libertarians Shouldn't Like the 19th century or the "Robber Barrons"

[Rothbardian Girl]

This is nothing new. Gabriel Kolko's work goes further in depth on these issues, particularly his book The Triumph of Conservatism. Although it specifically focuses on the early 20th century, a lot of the arguments apply to the Gilded Age as well. It's pretty great and a must-read for any libertarian interested in challenging status-quo interpretations of history.

[bolil]

I am reading a bio on Carnegie now, and except for selling anything to JP Morgan he seems like quite the paragon
Besides, 1900 Robber Barons used violence to force workers to work, which no self respecting libertarian would even try to defend.

[Gumba of Liberty]

This is simply not True the banking families were always fighting against alternative currencies. The silver currencies which would have made currency available to people were regularly lobbied against by banking families. As well as the greenback and Tally Sticks.

+1

Sadly the free silver movement was swept away by the statist Democrat William Jennings Bryan

[juliusaugustus]

I will acknowledge that the United States used to be more of a free country however the US has always been a statist country the anti-statism is simply an outgrowth of that. I will also acknowledge that the US often had more freedom then other countries
Economic policies
Economic policies have always been hugely interventionist whether it be through tariffs or subsidies the government has always played a large role in the economy of course the US has had many central banks and periods of government enforced gold standards. Central banking and protectionism are as American as Apple pie. OF course there is that whole slavery thing which the United States was the last country to abolish. Many founding fathers wanted to limit the powers of corporations. Central banking was ruled constitutional with Muccolloh v. Maryland. Even before the railroad land grants the federal government built the Cumberland road as well as other early roads. Though there was much dispute of the constitutionality of these improvements.
Welfare
The constitution includes some non libertarian things such as the ability to establish post offices and post roads. Of course the whole general welfare thing has been abused to no end.
Religion
While the federal government never had any religious policies however localities did the intention of having congress not recognizing religion was so that states could have their own religions.
Warfare
The US since the middle of 19th century was participating in expansion and empire building completely contradictory to libertarianism.
I say because one can't point to a real historical example of libertarianism one can't really criticize it. IF somebody tries to say the US is failed libertarianism they are wrong. The us is a long history of a failed leviathan government. People are wrong to think we had to much freedom so the magical government saved us from ourselves. I also think it is pointless to try to work with the existing system because it can only grow. Constitutions are also a pointless way ensure freedom because constitutions are enforced by the government they are supposed to limit. A truly libertarian system is what is needed to demonstrate the usefulness of it. my .02 fiat currency

[acptulsa]

I will acknowledge that the United States used to be more of a free country however the US has always been a statist country the anti-statism is simply an outgrowth of that. I will also acknowledge that the US often had more freedom...

You're almost as cute when chasing your tail as a kitten.

...then other countries

Then other countries did what? Oh, you mean than other countries. Or do you?

Economic policies have always been hugely interventionist whether it be through tariffs or subsidies the government has always played a large role in the economy of course the US has had many central banks and periods of government enforced gold standards. Central banking and protectionism are as American as Apple pie.

Andrew Jackson would disagree.

OF course there is that whole slavery thing which the United States was the last country to abolish.

That's hard to swallow, given that some countries still haven't abolished slavery.

Many founding fathers wanted to limit the powers of corporations. Central banking was ruled constitutional with Muccolloh v. Maryland. Even before the railroad land grants the federal government built the Cumberland road as well as other early roads. Though there was much dispute of the constitutionality of these improvements.

As I have pointed out to you, the railroad land grants weren't the government building anything, but rather giving some land to railroads to build so the value of the lands the government retained would gain in value.

IF somebody tries to say the US is failed libertarianism they are wrong. The us is a long history of a failed leviathan government. People are wrong to think we had to much freedom so the magical government saved us from ourselves. I also think it is pointless to try to work with the existing system because it can only grow. Constitutions are also a pointless way ensure freedom because constitutions are enforced by the government they are supposed to limit. A truly libertarian system is what is needed to demonstrate the usefulness of it. my .02 fiat currency

The Roaring Twenties was a direct result of scaling back an overreaching federal government and its micromismanagement. This is a demonstrable example of why our philosophies and principles are proven to be beneficial. And I am old enough to have seen a time when more of the population understood the Constitution and was more vociferous about defending it. It's also demonstrable that our economy worked better then than it does now. No one can take the validity of those arguments away from us.

[juliusaugustus]

You're almost as cute when chasing your tail as a kitten.

Why do you feel the need to respond everything I post?

Then other countries did what? Oh, you mean than other countries. Or do you?

I meant that the US has more freedom than many other countries, though there are definitely countries with more economic freedom than us. Yes I meant "than".




Andrew Jackson would disagree.

Andrew Jackson replaced the central bank with a decentralized state banking it is still government banking. Lincoln himself created a central bank as well as other presidents. Jackson was still a proponent of protectionism. In fact South Carolina threatened to secede until tariffs were adjusted.

That's hard to swallow, given that some countries still haven't abolished slavery.

Well most developed countries did end it before us and didn't have to fight a war for it.

As I have pointed out to you, the railroad land grants weren't the government building anything, but rather giving some land to railroads to build so the value of the lands the government retained would gain in value.

I don't care much for railroads as you have pointed out they have long paid for themselves. You gloss over the government created Cumberland road as well as other government roads.

The Roaring Twenties was a direct result of scaling back an overreaching federal government and its micromismanagement. This is a demonstrable example of why our philosophies and principles are proven to be beneficial. And I am old enough to have seen a time when more of the population understood the Constitution and was more vociferous about defending it. It's also demonstrable that our economy worked better then than it does now. No one can take the validity of those arguments away from us.

The roaring twenties was the result of many factors. Some people would argue that it was an asset bubble similar to the one that lead up our current recession. The Federal Reserve was feeding huge amounts of cheap credit during the time. Economists such as FA. Hayek and Mises predicted that prosperity that such prosperity couldn't go on for long.

[MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2]

Andrew Jackson would disagree.

And THAT is why he is on the 20 dollar FRN. That is one big giant philosophical, tyrannical "fuck you."

[roho76]

With Gold you would simply loan out more money than you have in reserves. OR you manipulate by making it highly available or contracting it.

Well then that's not really a "Gold Standard" now is it?