Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 50

Thread: New York Times Magazine: Has the ‘Libertarian Moment’ Finally Arrived?

  1. #1

    New York Times Magazine: Has the ‘Libertarian Moment’ Finally Arrived?

    It's a long one, and they interviewed Rand and Amash, so click through!

    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/10/ma...ived.html?_r=0

    “Let’s say Ron Paul is Nirvana,” said Kennedy, the television personality and former MTV host, by way of explaining the sort of politician who excites libertarians like herself. “Like, the coolest, most amazing thing to come along in years, and the songs are nebulous but somehow meaningful, and the lead singer kills himself to preserve the band’s legacy.

    “Then Rand Paul — he’s Pearl Jam. Comes from the same place, the songs are really catchy, can really pack the stadiums, though it’s not quite Nirvana.

    “Ted Cruz? He’s Stone Temple Pilots. Tries really hard to sound like Pearl Jam, never gonna sound like Nirvana. Really good voice, great staying power — but the whole is not greater than the sum of its parts.”
    [...]
    But today, for perhaps the first time, the libertarian movement appears to have genuine political momentum on its side. An estimated 54 percent of Americans now favor extending marriage rights to gay couples. Decriminalizing marijuana has become a mainstream position, while the drive to reduce sentences for minor drug offenders has led to the wondrous spectacle of Rick Perry — the governor of Texas, where more inmates are executed than in any other state — telling a Washington audience: “You want to talk about real conservative governance? Shut prisons down. Save that money.” The appetite for foreign intervention is at low ebb, with calls by Republicans to rein in federal profligacy now increasingly extending to the once-sacrosanct military budget. And deep concern over government surveillance looms as one of the few bipartisan sentiments in Washington, which is somewhat unanticipated given that the surveiller in chief, the former constitutional-law professor Barack Obama, had been described in a 2008 Times Op-Ed by the legal commentator Jeffrey Rosen as potentially “our first president who is a civil libertarian.”

    Meanwhile, the age group most responsible for delivering Obama his two terms may well become a political wild card over time, in large part because of its libertarian leanings. Raised on the ad hoc communalism of the Internet, disenchanted by the Iraq War, reflexively tolerant of other lifestyles, appalled by government intrusion into their private affairs and increasingly convinced that the Obama economy is rigged against them, the millennials can no longer be regarded as faithful Democrats — and a recent poll confirmed that fully half of voters between ages 18 and 29 are unwedded to either party. Obama has profoundly disappointed many of these voters by shying away from marijuana decriminalization, by leading from behind on same-sex marriage, by trumping the Bush administration on illegal-immigrant deportations and by expanding Bush’s N.S.A. surveillance program. As one 30-year-old libertarian senior staff member on the Hill told me: “I think we expected this sort of thing from Bush. But Obama seemed to be hip and in touch with my generation, and then he goes and reads our emails.”
    [...]
    After eight years out of the White House, Republicans would seem well positioned to cast themselves as the fresh alternative, though perhaps only if the party first reappraises stances that young voters, in particular, regard as outdated. Emily Ekins, a pollster for the Reason Foundation, says: “Unlike with previous generations, we’re seeing a newer dimension emerge where they agree with Democrats on social issues, and on economic issues lean more to the right. It’s possible that Democrats will have to shift to the right on economic issues. But the Republicans will definitely have to move to the left on social issues. They just don’t have the numbers otherwise.” A G.O.P. more flexible on social issues might also appeal to another traditionally Democratic group with a libertarian tilt: the high-tech communities in Silicon Valley and elsewhere, whose mounting disdain for taxes, regulations and unions has become increasingly dissonant with their voting habits.

    Hence the excitement about Rand Paul. It’s hardly surprising that Paul, in Ekins’s recent survey of millennial voters, came out ahead of all other potential Republican presidential candidates; on issues including same-sex marriage, surveillance and military intervention, his positions more closely mirror those of young voters than those of the G.O.P. establishment. Paul’s famous 13-hour filibuster last year, while ultimately failing to thwart the confirmation of the C.I.A. director John Brennan, lit afire the Twittersphere and compelled Republican leaders, who previously dismissed Paul as a fringe character, to add their own #StandWithRand endorsements. Paul has also gone to considerable lengths to court non-Republican audiences, like Berkeley students and the National Urban League.
    [...]
    During the father’s two runs for president as a Republican, in 2008 and 2012, libertarian activists gave him momentum far beyond his popular appeal, packing caucus halls and organizing rallies. But it’s an open question whether these same activists will get off the sidelines and support his son, whose libertarian bona fides are less sure but whose chance of victory is far greater. And if they do, it’s unclear whether G.O.P. establishment figures can put aside their longtime distrust of libertarianism and welcome Paul’s bid to expand the party’s base. If this is indeed the libertarian moment, do either libertarians or Republicans intend to seize it?
    h/t http://reason.com/blog/2014/08/07/ne...s-the-libertar
    Based on the idea of natural rights, government secures those rights to the individual by strictly negative intervention, making justice costless and easy of access; and beyond that it does not go. The State, on the other hand, both in its genesis and by its primary intention, is purely anti-social. It is not based on the idea of natural rights, but on the idea that the individual has no rights except those that the State may provisionally grant him. It has always made justice costly and difficult of access, and has invariably held itself above justice and common morality whenever it could advantage itself by so doing.
    --Albert J. Nock



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    Libertarian? More like just halfway-sane conservatism. I think I may just have to start calling myself a voluntarist and ditch the "libertarian" label, its getting so watered down these days that it doesn't mean anything. I don't know that Rand even knows what the NAP is, let alone agreeing with it.

  4. #3
    There are still so many people who think "libertarian" means "conservative on fiscal issues but liberal on social issues."

    I'm always careful to define the term these days if I use it at all.

  5. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by FreedomFanatic View Post
    There are still so many people who think "libertarian" means "conservative on fiscal issues but liberal on social issues."

    I'm always careful to define the term these days if I use it at all.
    how do you define it - quickly?
    Seattle Sounders 2016 MLS Cup Champions 2019 MLS Cup Champions 2022 CONCACAF Champions League - and the [un]official football club of RPF

    just a libertarian - no caucus

  6. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by surf View Post
    how do you define it - quickly?
    A combined belief in the non-aggression principle and private property rights.

  7. #6
    The last six paragraphs were about the Free State Project's Porcupine Festival and a speech by one of the three keynote speakers. Here is some of it.

    This June I watched Nick Gillespie deliver the keynote address at PorcFest, the annual libertarian outdoor festival held in Lancaster, N.H., and named for the area’s ubiquitous porcupine. About 500 campers sat attentively, while several others stood off to the side, Hula-Hooping as they listened. Arrayed before Gillespie were several boxes of exotically flavored Pop-Tarts that he had purchased at the Lancaster grocery store. He held them up as evidence that individualism was flourishing and choices were in abundance or, as he put it, “The libertarian moment is now.” Their moment had arrived, Gillespie said, “because the main political drivers have destroyed their credibility. Only the dead think the G.O.P. is the party of small government.” At the same time, he added, “the Democrats had a clean shot to demonstrate that they’d protect our liberties, and they proved themselves to be utter frauds.”

    With deadpan aplomb, Gillespie then said, “If we can have 20 different types of Pop-Tarts, maybe we can have more than two types of political identification.”

    After the speech was over and Gillespie gamely posed for a few pictures with admirers, I cornered him and asked him if he was suggesting that libertarians leave the G.O.P.-flavored Pop-Tarts on the shelf. Gillespie said it all depended on Republicans. “This is the fundamental question for the Republican Party,” he said. “Are they going to embrace the libertarian elements of Rand Paul and Justin Amash? Because that’s their only way out. They’re at 25 percent self-identification, and it’s not going to climb back up if they keep re-electing the old horses. Libertarians don’t need them. We’re already alienated and out of the mainstream. We don’t need the Republican Party in the way that they need the energy and the vision of libertarians.”

    But, I wanted to know, would libertarians be willing to meet the G.O.P. somewhere in the middle? Among the 1,700 or so attendees, I had seen guns and Bitcoins and slogans like “Liberty: Too Big to Fail” and “I Do Not Consent to Searches.”
    The article also featured a photo taken at PorcFest. While I'm not in the photo, it is kinda cool that some of the people at PorcFest got their face featured in a photo that's in the what 2nd largest newspaper in the nation.
    [IMG]http://static01.********/images/2014/08/10/magazine/10libertarians3/mag-10Libertarians-t_CA2-superJumbo.jpg[/IMG]
    Lifetime member of more than 1 national gun organization and the New Hampshire Liberty Alliance. Part of Young Americans for Liberty and Campaign for Liberty. Free State Project participant and multi-year Free Talk Live AMPlifier.

  8. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by Lucille View Post
    It's a long one, and they interviewed Rand and Amash, so click through!

    h/t http://reason.com/blog/2014/08/07/ne...s-the-libertar
    Some of the Reason blog post.

    New York Times Magazine: “Has the ‘Libertarian Moment’ Finally Arrived?”
    Matt Welch|Aug. 7, 2014 9:16 am

    The New York Times Magazine has just published a 6,600-word exploration of, essentially, whether, Nick Gillespie is right when he says "The libertarian moment is now." Writer Robert Draper, author of the terrific 1991 book Rolling Stone Magazine: An Uncensored History, and more recently When the Tea Party Came to Town, takes an entertaining tour through various antechambers of the libertarian movement, from Reason's gin-swilling D.C. headquarters, through the Free State Project's anarchic PorcFest, to the offices of Rep. Justin Amash (R-Michigan) and Sen. Rand Paul (R-Kentucky), in search of ever-elusive answers about what these libertarians want, how/if they plan to use two-party system to get there, and whether 2016 will be the presidential cycle when the burgeoning libertarianism of the millennial generation will produce a political realignment.

    You'll come for the Kennedy Ron Paul/Nirvana quote, stay for the Nick Gillespie/Lou Reed comparison, savor David Frum's delicious contempt, and be left rooting for a clarifying Rand Paul/Hillary Clinton showdown.
    Lifetime member of more than 1 national gun organization and the New Hampshire Liberty Alliance. Part of Young Americans for Liberty and Campaign for Liberty. Free State Project participant and multi-year Free Talk Live AMPlifier.

  9. #8
    From Gawker:



    "There was madness in any direction, at any hour. You could strike sparks anywhere. There was a fantastic universal sense that whatever we were doing was right, that we were winning.

    And that I think, was the handle. That sense of inevitable victory over the forces of Old and Evil. Not in any mean or military sense; we didn't need that. Our energy would simply prevail. We had all the momentum; we were riding the crest of a high and beautiful wave." ~ HST



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    Great article!
    +
    'These things I command you, that you love one another.' - Jesus Christ

  12. #10
    From the article. This is what people here needs to understand:

    But later, with an irritated edge to his voice, Paul added: “Some people are purists, and I get grief all the time — all these libertarian websites hating on me because I’m not as pure as my dad. And I’m putting restrictions on foreign aid instead of eliminating foreign aid altogether. And I’m like: ‘Look, guys, I’m having trouble putting these restrictions on, much less eliminating them! So give me a break!’ ”

  13. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by lib3rtarian View Post
    From the article. This is what people here needs to understand:
    Speaking only for myself, I've got NO PROBLEMS with Rand supporting restrictions on foreign aid with hopes of eventually eliminating them. And I'd have a problem with it if he wouldn't do that. My problem is that he doesn't support (at least vocally) a lot of the things we support.

  14. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by SneakyFrenchSpy View Post
    From Gawker:


    Now that is good stuff right there. I can go with the first two, but Cruz is the lead singer (Scott Stapp if you even give a $#@!. I can't believe I wasted my time looking it up) for Creed if we are doin' this right. Annoying to all but the most zealous.

    I did intend to offend all Cruzombies and Creediathans, or whatever you call yourselves these days, by typing this out. When I hear Creed I wish that all of music was killed off back in the caves before it could ever come to this.

    Oh, and beware of labeling or aligning yourself with any ideological groups. I guess I could consider "libertarian" to kind of mean "I leave you alone, you leave me alone, let's do some business" in a nutshell, but it is not a nutshell. That is why I stay away from any "isms", as it is like asking who is right about spirituality and religion. Ya don't know and you are an idiot in my book if you think you do. It is a trap. Dividing people up into neat little rows and columns is what isms do for you.

    With that said I suppose I could be considered a Constivolibertanarchist. Catchy huh? GO Constivolibertanarchists 2016! You can doo eat!

  15. #13
    The article was definitely good. It was nice to hear something from Rand Paul's mouth that at least seems to indicate that he's pandering.

  16. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by FreedomFanatic View Post
    Speaking only for myself, I've got NO PROBLEMS with Rand supporting restrictions on foreign aid with hopes of eventually eliminating them. And I'd have a problem with it if he wouldn't do that. My problem is that he doesn't support (at least vocally) a lot of the things we support.
    Like what? Something which will alienate 99% of the GOP primary voters instantly I bet?

  17. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by FreedomFanatic View Post
    Speaking only for myself, I've got NO PROBLEMS with Rand supporting restrictions on foreign aid with hopes of eventually eliminating them. And I'd have a problem with it if he wouldn't do that. My problem is that he doesn't support (at least vocally) a lot of the things we support.
    Who is "we"?

  18. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by Slave Mentality View Post
    Constivolibertanarchists
    Either it covers all the bases or alienates everyone, I'm not sure which. I agree about the isms, people use it to classify people they disagree with and then marginalize the identified group.
    Quote Originally Posted by BuddyRey View Post
    Do you think it's a coincidence that the most cherished standard of the Ron Paul campaign was a sign highlighting the word "love" inside the word "revolution"? A revolution not based on love is a revolution doomed to failure. So, at the risk of sounding corny, I just wanted to let you know that, wherever you stand on any of these hot-button issues, and even if we might have exchanged bitter words or harsh sentiments in the past, I love each and every one of you - no exceptions!

    "When goods do not cross borders, soldiers will." Frederic Bastiat

    Peace.



  19. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  20. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by FreedomFanatic View Post
    There are still so many people who think "libertarian" means "conservative on fiscal issues but liberal on social issues."

    I'm always careful to define the term these days if I use it at all.
    You're an anarchist; not a libertarian. Please don't conflate the two.

    Quote Originally Posted by FreedomFanatic View Post
    Speaking only for myself, I've got NO PROBLEMS with Rand supporting restrictions on foreign aid with hopes of eventually eliminating them. And I'd have a problem with it if he wouldn't do that. My problem is that he doesn't support (at least vocally) a lot of the things we support.
    You mean, YOU support. Don't even begin to speak for all of the people here.
    ================
    Open Borders: A Libertarian Reappraisal or why only dumbasses and cultural marxists are for it.

    Cultural Marxism: The Corruption of America

    The Property Basis of Rights

  21. #18
    STP should sue them.

  22. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by LibertyEagle View Post
    You're an anarchist; not a libertarian. Please don't conflate the two.



    You mean, YOU support. Don't even begin to speak for all of the people here.
    Would 'Libertarian' also include sticking up for the Rights of people who have opinions that are not agreed with? IE, this guy is Christian, and that guy is Muslim, but they both stick up for each other when oppressed, although they disagree on this philosophical issue peacefully. Would that be included in the definition? Just cant think of a way to better phrase that...
    1776 > 1984

    The FAILURE of the United States Government to operate and maintain an
    Honest Money System , which frees the ordinary man from the clutches of the money manipulators, is the single largest contributing factor to the World's current Economic Crisis.

    The Elimination of Privacy is the Architecture of Genocide

    Belief, Money, and Violence are the three ways all people are controlled

    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    Our central bank is not privately owned.

  23. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by Carlybee View Post
    STP should sue them.
    I'm sick of reading for 20 years that Stone Temple Pilots were an attempted cover band of Pearl Jam, or that Pearl Jam was an arena-rock version of Nirvana. Nirvana was, essentially, a really dark pop-punk band with postmodern screaming vocals. Pearl Jam has always been about a classic guitar sound with hit or miss indie-rock songwriting. STP in contrast was slow, leaden, more influenced by psychedelic music and stoner rock.

    I minored in musicology and have played or booked artists for a living for 10+ years and I do not see any more similarity between those three acts as between say, Van Halen and Bad Company. Not musically or production-wise. I think the comparison came about because they were all from the West Coast and because there's a couple of ambient sections on the first STP and PJ records that sound somewhat alike.

    It's pathetic how ignorant and lazy people are when they write or talk about music. If today's journalists would have been around in the 60s, Cream would have been considered a lounge jazz band for decades on end because their first single was "Wrapping Paper."

  24. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by FreedomFanatic View Post
    There are still so many people who think "libertarian" means "conservative on fiscal issues but liberal on social issues."

    I'm always careful to define the term these days if I use it at all.
    That's how they define it in this article. All of these articles about how libertarianism is on the rise make it sound like support for gay marriage is the most important and most crucial aspect of libertarianism.

  25. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by Slave Mentality View Post
    Now that is good stuff right there. I can go with the first two, but Cruz is the lead singer (Scott Stapp if you even give a $#@!. I can't believe I wasted my time looking it up) for Creed if we are doin' this right. Annoying to all but the most zealous.

    I did intend to offend all Cruzombies and Creediathans, or whatever you call yourselves these days, by typing this out. When I hear Creed I wish that all of music was killed off back in the caves before it could ever come to this.

    Oh, and beware of labeling or aligning yourself with any ideological groups. I guess I could consider "libertarian" to kind of mean "I leave you alone, you leave me alone, let's do some business" in a nutshell, but it is not a nutshell. That is why I stay away from any "isms", as it is like asking who is right about spirituality and religion. Ya don't know and you are an idiot in my book if you think you do. It is a trap. Dividing people up into neat little rows and columns is what isms do for you.

    With that said I suppose I could be considered a Constivolibertanarchist. Catchy huh? GO Constivolibertanarchists 2016! You can doo eat!
    Hmmm. Creed has always been my favorite band.

  26. #23
    lol thats the best! wow so funny.
    Quote Originally Posted by SneakyFrenchSpy View Post
    From Gawker:




  27. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by FreedomFanatic View Post
    Speaking only for myself, I've got NO PROBLEMS with Rand supporting restrictions on foreign aid with hopes of eventually eliminating them. And I'd have a problem with it if he wouldn't do that. My problem is that he doesn't support (at least vocally) a lot of the things we support.
    You need to learn to speak for yourself and LEAVE the "we" out of it. I don't consider myself part of you..
    War; everything in the world wrong, evil and immoral combined into one and multiplied by millions.



  28. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  29. #25
    "There may be some libertarians who say, ‘By golly, we’re not going anywhere unless they attack us."

    Sounds good to me.

  30. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by LibertyEagle View Post
    You're an anarchist; not a libertarian. Please don't conflate the two.
    Anarchism is the logical end game of libertarianism.

  31. #27
    And if anything, Ron Paul is the Pixies in Kennedy's $#@!ty analogy.

  32. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by NIU Students for Liberty View Post
    And if anything, Ron Paul is the Pixies in Kennedy's $#@!ty analogy.
    Kennedy is a good example of the perils of big-tent libertarianism

  33. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by NIU Students for Liberty View Post
    Anarchism is the logical end game of libertarianism.
    Q: What’s the difference between a libertarian and an anarchist?
    A: About 6 to 7 years, if you’re paying attention!!
    Based on the idea of natural rights, government secures those rights to the individual by strictly negative intervention, making justice costless and easy of access; and beyond that it does not go. The State, on the other hand, both in its genesis and by its primary intention, is purely anti-social. It is not based on the idea of natural rights, but on the idea that the individual has no rights except those that the State may provisionally grant him. It has always made justice costly and difficult of access, and has invariably held itself above justice and common morality whenever it could advantage itself by so doing.
    --Albert J. Nock

  34. #30
    Ugh.

    Listen,
    little "l" libertarians hate big "L" Libertarians.
    An Caps hate Constitutionalists.
    Left Libertarians hate right libertarians
    Objectivists hate minarchists
    Circus clowns hate party clowns
    and call girls hate street whores.


    Give up the labels. Acknowledge and accept our differences, but focus on our commonalities. It creates a much happier existence for you and is more inviting to others.
    "And now that the legislators and do-gooders have so futilely inflicted so many systems upon society, may they finally end where they should have begun: May they reject all systems, and try liberty; for liberty is an acknowledgment of faith in God and His works." - Bastiat

    "It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere." - Voltaire

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-20-2014, 08:09 AM
  2. Replies: 18
    Last Post: 03-08-2013, 01:37 PM
  3. Ron Paul: This Is Your Moment, The New York Times Says
    By tangent4ronpaul in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 12-13-2010, 10:47 AM
  4. Ron Paul in New York Times Sunday Magazine
    By DjLoTi in forum Grassroots Central
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-19-2007, 11:47 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •