I think my favorite bit is where he asserts that “Libertarianism is where young adults live and breathe“, partially because it sounds like a shampoo commercial and partially because it’s so fucking stupid given that every bit of polling available shows that young adults in the United States can overwhelmingly be described as Keynesian liberals.
NO WAIT it’s the bit where he says “ I would raid Reason Magazine, Liberty Magazine, and the CATO Institute for news editors” – NO WAIT it’s when he says he would pay whatever is necessary to get Charles Krauthammer on his network – NO WAIT it’s this bit. “However, due to CNN then leaning libertarian, I would prohibit consideration of any bid that offered tax money to try lure CNN to a city. Instead, I would encourage city leaders to get their state and local governments to give CNN and its employees tax breaks…” Because tax breaks are nothing at all like government expenditures when it comes to a bottom line!
HE’S A 45-YEAR-OLD MARKETER, YOU GUYS!!!!!!
Related Articles
26 users responded in this post
I couldn’t suffer through the whole thing, so thanks for pointing out some highlights. The last thing I read was, “you could combine the current ratings of CNN, MSNBC, CNBC, and CNN’s Headline News and it would still be less than Fox’s,” which is blatantly untrue, and couldn’t force myself to continue.
But… but… he’s selling libertarianism! You can’t go wrong with libertarianism!
I still think this
http://whatever.scalzi.com/2002/03/22/i-hate-your-politics/
aptly describes all three American political POVs. Especially the libertarian one… “Never got over the fact they weren’t the illegitimate children of Robert Heinlein and Ayn Rand; currently punishing the rest of us for it… Libertarianism the official political system of science fiction authors, which explains why science fiction is in such a rut these days…”
Yes, by all means we should heed the advice of the 45-year-old marketer using html practices from the ’90s to tell us how good he is at predicting the future. (Coloured text for emphasis? Oh, c’mon now.)
— Steve
Any excuse to post this from the Balloon Juice Lexicon is good enough for me:
Glibertarian—a portmanteau of glib and libertarian, a person who affects libertarianism when it’s convenient. Used by those not ready to admit that all libertarian philosophy can be boiled down to “I got mine, fuck you”, or by those attempting to be polite to libertarians.
I’ll admit that 24-hour news with little ads at the bottom is appealing. But then he comes in and says
“As CNN’s new CEO, I would be coming to shake things up and get CNN back into fit shape. Moving CNN out of Atlanta to another city will help with this. As for which city to which it would move, it would only have to be one that isn’t in Georgia.”
…which is kind of like when me and my friends would scream “ANYONE BUT BUSH” when we were thirteen years old.
I actually liked the idea of changing to an ad-free format, while using the ticker at the bottom for ads instead of headlines. It seems like a good way to keep people from tuning away, while still getting ad revenues (and let’s face it, there’s not much substantial info in those headlines anyway.)
Everything else, though, is clearly deranged.
“Libertarianism is where young adults live and breathe“?
Wow. I never thought I’d find better proof of the one definition of Libertarianism : “Self-absorbed adolescence as a political veiwpoint”
Maybe its the fact that Libertarians actually think social negligence and corporate greed are somehow the cornerstones of freedom in the same way that bible-belt bible-humpers think not being able to have banners expressing bible quotes during school football games is a violation of free speech.
Or maybe its that these clowns think that just because a bunch of You-Tubers raved around Ron Paul that they think they have a market for these obscenely stupid social-economic policies. When in fact, Ron Paul has even less support for his “Revolution” than Ross Perot did back in the 90’s.
Buncha anti-tax, anarcho-capitalist retards.
Guy kinda hits the trifecta of Crazy, Stupid, and Evil, doesn’t he?
Hurt my eyeballs.
It’s like guys who say they can “save” DC by bringing Ted Kord back. Or sub in whatever character or creator some nerd is in a tizzy about.
Wait – remind me what the difference is between giving government money vs. giving tax breaks, assuming the recipient falls over a certain minimum tax bracket?
Well, whether you agree with them or not, Libertarians get like 0.1% in elections. How is that an audience for even a cable network? Even if you include the vaguely libertarian people who still vote for one of the two major parties when its crunch time, you’re still talking about a very small percentage of the audience.
Am I the only Libertarian who reads this blog? It’s really depressing commenting along with a bunch of people who all hate my guts.
I do agree that asking for special tax breaks is no different from asking for tax money. If the guy had said that he would pick a city that cut taxes for everybody, then he would have a reasonable position.
Oh my god somebody get that man a website designer. Or, you know, the common sense of a thirteen year old on livejournal.
PS @Mary Warner I like Libertarians! Most of the ones I know are intelligent and therefore fun to argue with. Unfortunately each and every one of them inevitably ends up saying things like “no, I’m not one of THOSE libertarians” which suggests that y’all need some sort of schism or something and to change your name to something people don’t associate with Ayn Rand.
If he were a REAL Libertarian, he’d pull himself up by his bootstraps and start his OWN network. Then he’d show us all! {evil.laugh}
Oh Mary, no one hates your guts. Sure, I think libertarianism is a silly political philosophy whose most visible proponents are professionally crazy (Beck), professionally snide (the creators of South Park, Penn Jillette), or frankly deluded (see above). I don’t blame you personally for any of that.
In fact, I’ll stand to be convinced. If you can convince me that any of the ideas that claim to be uniquely libertarian, or that there is any histroical basis to believe that a political administration based around, committed to, and governing based on the political ideal of libertarianism in a county the size of the United States, hell, I’ll vote libertarian in the next election.
Libertarianism makes much more sense if you think of all its evangelists as value-maximizing in a market for stupidity.
Am I the only one who finds it strange that Libertarian has been dumbed down to mean laissez-faire capitalist concervatives. If you look at the origins of Libertarianism it actually has its roots in radical left wing politics, I belive it was actual coined by an anarcho-communist named Joseph Déjacque. Even up to at least the 1980’s people like Noam Chomsky were using libertarianism in its original meaning, so when did this all change?
No Mary! While I would hesitate to call myself liberal (I really don’t understand a lot about politics) I would say I lean towards libertarianism in my views. I don’t necessarily believe in the elimination of state governments and taxes, but in strong personal freedoms and the reduction of government laws that encroach on them.
But the crazy ones most people tend to think of when they hear about libertarianism, like the ones who want to make their own floating countries etc
@Fandango: +1 for knowing your history, +2 for knowing your Noam Chomsky 🙂
There are at least three different kinds of (self-identified) libertarians working at the Whole Foods I used to work at – the mean-spirited Greed is God types, the states’ rights/anti-federalist types, and the government-is-always-wrong types. My favorite is #2.
Most libertarians you meet are neoliberals – they want to use the power of gov’t to “liberalize” trade. That’s what being a liberal is all about, classically – making room for the merchant class/bourgeoisie at the expense of the monarchy/governing class.
Many Americans, by this definition, are liberals. Many are liberal conservatives, i.e. social conservatives who are pro-business. Neocons, however, are technically anti-liberal, in the sense that liberalism also stands for individual rights, secular government, equal opportunity, etc.
Let me also chime in as someone who would identify as a “libertarian,” if people like Glenn Beck (?!) and Charles Krauthammer (?!?!?) weren’t getting lumped into the same group.
I had this argument with a friend a while back, that the idiots at National Review and the Ayn Rand Institute weren’t really libertarians, not really really. And his response was, “Yeah, but if everyone else calls them libertarians, then you’re stuck with the label.”
If that’s true, I’d rather abandon the label and call myself, I dunno, an anarcho-syndicalist or something.
Bad webpage make Evil Abraham Lincoln head hurt and bleed eye on key broad.
OTOH, Scalzi’s assertion that Libertarians want guns, drugs and brothels is disturbingly appealing to me. To clarify, I’m pro-gun control (I don’t own anything worth defending, on purpose), anti-prostitution (sex without some sort of attraction creates an anti-libido field around my meat and veg) and I didn’t use anything resembling an illegal drug until I had invasive surgery (and I felt like an old school corner-nodder while I was taking my Lorcet.)
Some might call Libertarians idiots. Hell, some Libertarians might BE idiots. Others (like myself) see the validity in a group of people deciding that the two prevailing American political parties are broken, ideologically retarded groups that are systematically working to make the country dumber (as if we need any help).
I more identify with the Libertarian party because I simply cannot stand the system of “Bud Bowl” politics in this country.