Wednesday, November 9, 2011

Pro patria vigilans

Blunt Object discusses the similarities and divergence of liberalism and libertarianism, yadda-yadda.

The reply in the comments from perlhaqr demands reposting:

Blunt Object:
[The problem with this otherwise laudable motivation is,] liberalism sets up government specifically as the biggest kid on the block and assumes away the need for any other institution to hold power over it to keep it in line. The very existence of a sovereign regulatory body suggests that powerful actors (occasionally) need to be bullied into behaving themselves, but the only provision for bullying that sovereign body into behaving itself is a vague wave of the hand at "elections" and "democracy". Sure, that works well in this best of all possible worlds. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

*contemplates a new t-shirt design*

"Ego custodiet, motherfucker."


[I happen to agree with the Object, BTW; the largest individual failing I generally identify when talking to liberals is the belief that voting is sufficient to keep abusive governments in line, no matter how hard it fails in the real world. "Sure, it's an abusable power we're handing government, but if they abuse it, we'll just vote them out in four years!" "Uh-huh. And how'd that work out for killing Bush's Patriot Act?" "..."]


  1. Voting is also the first thing Liberals and "Progressives" interfere with and "adjust," to suit (and push) their own desired outcomes. (See "Weighted Voting" and "Ranked Choice Voting.")
    But Voting also has Magical-Liberal properties, like when the formerly benighted newly enfranchised and Typical Islamical Country goes to Vote, they will also vote for Women's Rights, Gay Rights, Free Internet, and Organic Produce -- all sorts of ridiculous fantasy-stuff that Liberals believe in and are heavily invested-in...

  2. The far left does have a bit of a disconnect on that one, don't they?

    The love of central planning and social control requires an elite to tell the masses what to do, but they also have to believe that such a system is under control, leading to faith in voting by the masses to control it.

    One might almost think they haven't thought it all the way through.

  3. Well, that's where all the gerrymanders come-in, and weighted voting and other nuanced positions that shape the outcomes...