Y’all. I’m sorry. I’ve just been snickering to myself all morning about the Libertarian Scale of Things to Panic About and I shouldn’t poke fun because I love the libertarians and do not want to alienate them and Mrs. Coble is not yet feeling well enough to be back making impassioned reasonable defenses of libertarianism which leaves it to Exador and Sarcastro which can only mean that no matter how the discussion starts off, it’s going to end up with guys who uses words like “bourgeois” and “intelligentsia” sticking up for dumb rubes everywhere, which also makes me snicker every time I think about it.
But I do think it would be useful to actually articulate the Libertarian Scale of Things to Panic About. I was thinking that it was a scale of 1 to 100, and everything is ranked that way. So, 100 would obviously be “They’re going to take our guns away!” and down about 75 would be “Communists have infiltrated the anti-War movement” and down at 2 or 3 is “Back in the past, Commies also were mayors of some cities.”
However, I couldn’t come up with just 100 things that libertarians might panic about, so now I think that the Libertarian Scale of Things to Panic About must be like the Fujita Scale of measuring tornados, with the panic increasing exponentially based on factors beyond my understanding.
So, “They’re taking our guns away!” would be an X5 on the Libertarian Scale of Things to Panic About, with libertarians running to their gun cabinets to make sure all of their guns are still accounted for, running out to buy more guns, and posting on the internet about how they will shoot anyone who dares to take their guns away.
X4 is the presence of living “communists” of all sorts doing anything that might be perceived as vaguely communist and other similar threats, such as illegal immigration.
X3 is big government spending under a Democratic administration.
X2 is big government spending under a Republican administration.
X1 is any perceived threat to their dogs.
Now that we have a basic guideline for the Libertarian Scale of Things to Panic About, I’m hoping that it will make discussions between our beloved libertarians and the rest of the world easier.
You just like how we push your comments over 50 on any given post we comment on. Glad to see that poking fun at the elitists allows you the opportunity to snicker. Surrounding yourself with latte liberals, fart-sniffing academics, passive-aggressive publishing world eunuchs and people who describe the NYTimes as "evocative" must not make for a lot of laughs.You totally left out X6. Which, of course, means either a Zombie Apocalypse or a Planet run by those damn, dirty Apes.
You need to work in there somewhere that fundamental relgious extemists (pick any religion) are going to infilitrate the government via the election process and pass laws that limit the limitless libertarian freedoms.Keep your hands off my mind, body and guns.
Damn, I knew I forgot one. Call it X3.5
Please don’t disparage my readers, who are, by and large, also your readers.
Any resemblance to our intelligent and interesting readers is wholly unintended as perjorative or insulting.
Wrong. Our scale only has two levels.
Oh, come now! Don’t leave me hanging. What are the two levels? I’ve already named this scale after you; I’d hate to lose it, but I will if you have something that works better.
Oh, shit. I just got it. You meant "right" or "wrong."Okay, that’s witty.
I thought he meant "Fuck it." and "Forget about it." My bad.
See, I would have figure it to be:"Things That Affect Me"–Taxes, leash laws, DUI statutes, screaming kids in restaurants, etc.and"Things That Don’t Affect Me"–Darfur, gay marriage, prayer in school, etc.
Questions inspired Aunt B’s LSoTtPA: 1) If ‘the government’ really wants to come and take your guns, do you actually believe you could stop them? (see: Randy Weaver, Vernon Wayne Howell)2) In the libertarian context, what is an "elitist"?
CS,I’m guessing here, but I would assume the idea would be for more of an indirect insurgency, rather than a direct "my .38 against the united states military in a field".bridgett, we’re not talking about dating are we?(I just couldn’t help but type that. I’m sorry)
I was thiiiis close to calling myself a true-blue libertarian, Sar. Thanks for reminding me why I can’t make that leap. How could I have forgotten – Libertarians/libertarians always believe in social freedoms, but only under the pretext that those social freedoms first and foremost benefit numero uno.
"Indirect insurgency." Would something like that include hitting ‘soft targets’, like blowing up government buildings?
Huck, well duh.Only the elitist thinks he is qualified to know what is in everyone’s best interest or advocating compulsory government charity.Your money doesn’t cause my poverty.
Don’t get me wrong. I agree with everything you just wrote. That’s why I find it hard not to be a libertarian. However, I think the difference is in the focus. I think to place the entire weight of one’s efforts on protecting only the self is counterproductive to promoting one’s own freedom. You either fight for all rights with the same gusto or forget about your own independence.If you choose to live in a society, and share some of the perks, you better be prepared to fight for everyone’s rights to those perks right along with your own. Social freedom should always be protected and not only when it’s convenient to the individual.
Yes, CS, I deliberately threw that beachball over the plate just for you.Send donations to email@example.com
>Your money doesn’t cause my poverty.Well actually, it does. The relationship between money and poverty is relative. You can make 10 cents per day in Vietnam, and still afford rice, because the entire economy contains less money than ours, and 10 cents is a lot of money. In America, 10 cents per day won’t keep you fed, because that is so much less money than others have. So while his money might not cause your lack of money, it does cause your poverty.
I’m sure it is relative. Your relatives without money want some of yours.Other than that, your attempt at showing some sort of economic zero-sum game falls short.
In the libertarian context, what is an "elitist"?That is a piece of prime humor.