The crucial point about libertarians is that the freedom they want is only for themselves, which essentially means well-off white men. They want to be able to do and say whatever they want, not only without being subject to state coercion but without being "shamed or shunned". NYTimes ran a bizarre editorial demanding precisely this not long ago, and the famous Harpers letter was on much the same lines, showing that this wish extends well beyond the groups that would typically be called libertarians.
But assuring this freedom for the group demanding it requires suppressing freedom for everyone else. Elon Musk can give a Nazi salute, but if I call him a Nazi I'm an enemy of freedom.
And, repeating a point I've made before, the near-uniform capitulation/collaboration of free-market liberals to Trump (despite tariffs and other heresies) shows that we should not expect liberalism to be a good basis for defending democracy against the authoritarian right.
The question is, where is the boundary between private and public life? Which way has it been creeping for more than a century?
“and don’t want to be dependent on anyone else “
Everyone knows that living in society makes everyone dependent on everyone else. But that makes it even more urgent that we respect each other‘s boundaries. The conflict is over where that boundary lies.
“or be told by anyone what to do.[5] “
They share with the classical liberals the idea that social cooperation is more about abstaining from what you shouldn’t do rather than obeying some other person‘s will.
“libertarian-populists see no problem granting political power to leaders as long as they are convinced that this is the best way to achieve their autonomy.”
They know this will not achieve their autonomy. They see this as the lesser of two evils. They see this as a choice between a wrecking ball and a structure of antagonistic lies.
Trump brags about how he will disappoint them. Milei will likely also disappoint them. But they will take what they can get. The alternative is familiar and seems worse.
Milei has been in office for approximately one year. It is odd that you criticize only the tone of his speeches rather than any of his actions. So far at least, he has pursued credible policies that seem likely to improve the situation. If he succeeds at all, he may become the most important politician in Argentina‘s history. Or rather, the most important beneficial politician in Argentina‘s history.
I apologize if you said something more substantial later in the article. This is where I gave up.
The crucial point about libertarians is that the freedom they want is only for themselves, which essentially means well-off white men. They want to be able to do and say whatever they want, not only without being subject to state coercion but without being "shamed or shunned". NYTimes ran a bizarre editorial demanding precisely this not long ago, and the famous Harpers letter was on much the same lines, showing that this wish extends well beyond the groups that would typically be called libertarians.
But assuring this freedom for the group demanding it requires suppressing freedom for everyone else. Elon Musk can give a Nazi salute, but if I call him a Nazi I'm an enemy of freedom.
And, repeating a point I've made before, the near-uniform capitulation/collaboration of free-market liberals to Trump (despite tariffs and other heresies) shows that we should not expect liberalism to be a good basis for defending democracy against the authoritarian right.
“they only care for their private life “
The question is, where is the boundary between private and public life? Which way has it been creeping for more than a century?
“and don’t want to be dependent on anyone else “
Everyone knows that living in society makes everyone dependent on everyone else. But that makes it even more urgent that we respect each other‘s boundaries. The conflict is over where that boundary lies.
“or be told by anyone what to do.[5] “
They share with the classical liberals the idea that social cooperation is more about abstaining from what you shouldn’t do rather than obeying some other person‘s will.
“libertarian-populists see no problem granting political power to leaders as long as they are convinced that this is the best way to achieve their autonomy.”
They know this will not achieve their autonomy. They see this as the lesser of two evils. They see this as a choice between a wrecking ball and a structure of antagonistic lies.
Trump brags about how he will disappoint them. Milei will likely also disappoint them. But they will take what they can get. The alternative is familiar and seems worse.
Milei has been in office for approximately one year. It is odd that you criticize only the tone of his speeches rather than any of his actions. So far at least, he has pursued credible policies that seem likely to improve the situation. If he succeeds at all, he may become the most important politician in Argentina‘s history. Or rather, the most important beneficial politician in Argentina‘s history.
I apologize if you said something more substantial later in the article. This is where I gave up.