Jacob Weisberg, writing in Slate:
[T]he libertarian apologetics fall wildly short of providing any convincing explanation for what went wrong. The argument as a whole is reminiscent of wearying dorm-room debates that took place circa 1989 about whether the fall of the Soviet bloc demonstrated the failure of communism. Academic Marxists were never going to be convinced that anything that happened in the real world could invalidate their belief system. Utopians of the right, libertarians are just as convinced that their ideas have yet to be tried, and that they would work beautifully if we could only just have a do-over of human history. Like all true ideologues, they find a way to interpret mounting evidence of error as proof that they were right all along.
To which the rest of us can only respond, Haven’t you people done enough harm already?
Heh. Here’s the rest.
(And with that, I’m going back to my libertarian comment system ways, and turning off the moderation. The spam seems to have abated. However, I’m heading off for the day, so if there’s an avalanche of it . . .)
unacoder
i think it’s wildly silly to expect anyone to be convinced of the correctness of someone else’s logic. adults merely seek confirmation of their own mental models when reading the news. what evidence would convince?
i think it says a lot about our country (world?) that so many economically-, historically-, and politically-illiterate people can prosper to such an extent.
MB
So human conversation is wildly silly, in your view? :)
Sure, it says alot. But what exactly is it saying? And while we’re figuring that out, can we figure out why it is that so many decent and hardworking folks can end up in the holes they do?
unacoder
i think human conversation is wonderful (except during my stories), provided you don’t expect to convince people your world view is superior to theirs. the best you can hope for is for someone to realize their own inconsistencies in thought. maybe it’s just my election season negativity talking. i get annoyed with everyone around this time: republicans, democrats, and libertarians alike. i am even annoyed with myself for referring to so many people by political party names.
why have decent people been shafted since the beginning of humanity? let’s face it: life’s not fair. does that mean we should leave them to rot and die? no. it’s deplorable that some people in such a rich society would be in such need.
i do think it’s worse for those in such dire straits to minimize their plight by trying to add “the middle class” to their roles. and it’s definitely important *how* we help those in need.