Comments on: On the Left Hand… http://toddseavey.com/2008/03/25/on-the-left-hand/ Conservatism for punks. Wed, 07 Jan 2009 03:35:17 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.9 by: Jacob T. Levy http://toddseavey.com/2008/03/25/on-the-left-hand/#comment-12591 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 12:57:23 +0000 http://toddseavey.com/2008/03/25/on-the-left-hand/#comment-12591 This post is my punishment for my comment on your last post. This post is my punishment for my comment on your last post.

]]> by: Todd Seavey http://toddseavey.com/2008/03/25/on-the-left-hand/#comment-12504 Wed, 26 Mar 2008 21:32:20 +0000 http://toddseavey.com/2008/03/25/on-the-left-hand/#comment-12504 Jeez. It's like he's _trying_ to give Jonah Goldberg nightmares. Jeez. It’s like he’s _trying_ to give Jonah Goldberg nightmares.

]]> by: Ken Silber http://toddseavey.com/2008/03/25/on-the-left-hand/#comment-12503 Wed, 26 Mar 2008 21:20:11 +0000 http://toddseavey.com/2008/03/25/on-the-left-hand/#comment-12503 Todd, Obama is Nietzschean. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ali-eteraz/obama-is-nietzschean_b_93429.html Todd,

Obama is Nietzschean.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ali-eteraz/obama-is-nietzschean_b_93429.html

]]> by: --Brad http://toddseavey.com/2008/03/25/on-the-left-hand/#comment-12502 Wed, 26 Mar 2008 19:10:12 +0000 http://toddseavey.com/2008/03/25/on-the-left-hand/#comment-12502 Todd, in the end such mechanisms would be constructed by those with money rather than those without (such as the corporatocracy that exists in America today) and the strong would still devour the weak. Government interference limits that. This is why I'm convinced that Libertarianism as you describe it is like Communism in the sense that it only looks good on paper and would not work in execution. Please note that this is not a defense of the current system in place. Todd, in the end such mechanisms would be constructed by those with money rather than those without (such as the corporatocracy that exists in America today) and the strong would still devour the weak. Government interference limits that. This is why I’m convinced that Libertarianism as you describe it is like Communism in the sense that it only looks good on paper and would not work in execution.

Please note that this is not a defense of the current system in place.

]]> by: Todd Seavey http://toddseavey.com/2008/03/25/on-the-left-hand/#comment-12501 Wed, 26 Mar 2008 18:56:28 +0000 http://toddseavey.com/2008/03/25/on-the-left-hand/#comment-12501 That question's too vague to answer, though there is no limit to the number of social mechanisms free people can construct -- and, luckily, very strict limits on how much "bullying" you can do in an environment of strict property rights (by contrast with the unlimited bullying potential offered by laws and lawsuits). That question’s too vague to answer, though there is no limit to the number of social mechanisms free people can construct — and, luckily, very strict limits on how much “bullying” you can do in an environment of strict property rights (by contrast with the unlimited bullying potential offered by laws and lawsuits).

]]> by: --Brad http://toddseavey.com/2008/03/25/on-the-left-hand/#comment-12498 Wed, 26 Mar 2008 18:40:36 +0000 http://toddseavey.com/2008/03/25/on-the-left-hand/#comment-12498 I have a question, Todd. If true libertarianism were achieved in our government and society, what societal mechanisms would prevent things such as economic anarchy or the strong devouring the weak (which I translate as property owners bullying those wihout property)? I have a question, Todd.

If true libertarianism were achieved in our government and society, what societal mechanisms would prevent things such as economic anarchy or the strong devouring the weak (which I translate as property owners bullying those wihout property)?

]]> by: Yancey Ward http://toddseavey.com/2008/03/25/on-the-left-hand/#comment-12496 Wed, 26 Mar 2008 18:13:51 +0000 http://toddseavey.com/2008/03/25/on-the-left-hand/#comment-12496 Todd, I wish I could offer points of optimism, but I can't. The fundamental truth is that most people want to be taken care of by others and to be told what to do and when to do it, not to mention how and why. Most people are sheep. As for your broader points about where to find hope (if there is any), I concur. Every liberal I have ever known wants to give me freedom to do things I would not do anyway in return for preventing me doing the things I actually want to do- they are scam artists of the highest order. Conservatives, on the other hand, betray their principles in so many ways that I have lost faith in them to fight the good fights; but is there a realistic third option? Todd,

I wish I could offer points of optimism, but I can’t. The fundamental truth is that most people want to be taken care of by others and to be told what to do and when to do it, not to mention how and why. Most people are sheep.

As for your broader points about where to find hope (if there is any), I concur. Every liberal I have ever known wants to give me freedom to do things I would not do anyway in return for preventing me doing the things I actually want to do- they are scam artists of the highest order. Conservatives, on the other hand, betray their principles in so many ways that I have lost faith in them to fight the good fights; but is there a realistic third option?

]]> by: Todd Seavey http://toddseavey.com/2008/03/25/on-the-left-hand/#comment-12474 Wed, 26 Mar 2008 04:00:29 +0000 http://toddseavey.com/2008/03/25/on-the-left-hand/#comment-12474 Interesting observation. And ironically, a future member of the libertarian John Stossel ABC News unit was the only person on the jury he was part of who wanted to give an award to a man who argued in court that tainted julienne carrots at Howard Johnson's were responsible for his "loss of marital fulfillment" -- but in any case, I agree populism is often the real enemy, the gut instinct of the mindless crowd. Interesting observation. And ironically, a future member of the libertarian John Stossel ABC News unit was the only person on the jury he was part of who wanted to give an award to a man who argued in court that tainted julienne carrots at Howard Johnson’s were responsible for his “loss of marital fulfillment” — but in any case, I agree populism is often the real enemy, the gut instinct of the mindless crowd.

]]> by: Xine http://toddseavey.com/2008/03/25/on-the-left-hand/#comment-12470 Tue, 25 Mar 2008 23:53:22 +0000 http://toddseavey.com/2008/03/25/on-the-left-hand/#comment-12470 Well, Buckley would be (on this occasion, at least) wrong. When I was on a jury, it was I and three fellow professors (random selection, believe it or not) who fought the good fight of restraining gigantic compensation for the "emotional distress" and physical injury of a girl who had suffered a minor fender bender and showed zero evidence of any physical injury. It was the anal-retentive, crazy-lefty professors who were asking questions like "If she was in such pain, why did she neglect to fill her Percoset prescription?" while the salt-of-the-earth, them's-good-people citizens Buckley would favor criticized us for being "too logical" and "hard-hearted" (and for perversely sticking only to the information given in testimony). This was padded with the populist argument that we shouldn't mind awarding her a large payoff even with no evidence of injury, because it was just coming from an insurance company's pockets anyway. A minor point that I couldn't help making. Well, Buckley would be (on this occasion, at least) wrong. When I was on a jury, it was I and three fellow professors (random selection, believe it or not) who fought the good fight of restraining gigantic compensation for the “emotional distress” and physical injury of a girl who had suffered a minor fender bender and showed zero evidence of any physical injury. It was the anal-retentive, crazy-lefty professors who were asking questions like “If she was in such pain, why did she neglect to fill her Percoset prescription?” while the salt-of-the-earth, them’s-good-people citizens Buckley would favor criticized us for being “too logical” and “hard-hearted” (and for perversely sticking only to the information given in testimony). This was padded with the populist argument that we shouldn’t mind awarding her a large payoff even with no evidence of injury, because it was just coming from an insurance company’s pockets anyway.

A minor point that I couldn’t help making.

]]>