[PREV - ROLLING_A_MODEL] [TOP]
April 4, 2003
The guys who created the US constitution
didn't just throw up their hands
and say "who will watch the watchmen?"
They hacked a system that worked
in spite of it's apparent impossibility:
A machine that's staggered toward Though I sometimes
the light for a few centuries... wonder if it's in
its death throes...
DEATH_OF_THE_REPUBLIC
TONE_DOWN
And in that light,
let's consider
another conundrum:
There are clear cases of the
majority of americans making bad STATISTICAL_INDIVIDUAL
personal decisions.
Does it call into question Also in DRAG.
"individual freedom" as a
core political value?
Many, if not most people But then, if history is any guide,
aren't competent at making they're even worse at making
decisions for themselves. decisions for other people.
The libertarian take is that
"let the individuals decide
for themselves" is optimum, WHEN_THE_DEVIL_QUOTES_SCRIPTURES
if perhaps not ideal.
The only check on individual
authority is when it runs
into another individual's And this point alone can
territory. be used to make a strong
libertarian take against
SUVs.
TARIAN_CONTRA_SUV
But I submit that "individualism"
may in fact not be optimum. There
may be another answer, something
in the spirit of the pragmatic
idealism that forged the American
constitution.
There may be something
that works better -- Some sort of analogy to
and if that were so, it the system of checks and
would be favored by an balances?
honest consequentialist.
("Consequentialism" is the
And in fact, we've idea that you should choose
never seen a world an ethical system based on
where a simple the likely consequences, as
principle like opposed to deriving it from
"individualism" has some other central
been played out on principle.)
it's own, in
isolation. THE_WORKS
The only
cases we've
ever really
seen have
been hybrids.
A method: A method: try to
Consciously play write down the way
the game of the world really
hybridization, works, and pick and
look for other choose from the
principles to use menu of what has
to "moderate" been done.
things.
As opposed to
taking the utopian
approach favored
by many But I've got nothing
libertarians. against utopian
scheming myself --
provided you keep in
mind that that's what
you're doing.
So let's call that
another approach:
What would we really like?
Can we get closer?
Just to have a tag to
discuss this, let's (Or perhaps
call this "Moderate "moderated?")
Libertarianism",
ModLib for short.
Everyone likes to be
a "moderate". And
"Libertarian" has
always been grossly
inelegant on the
modern political
Sometimes I play landscape: a long
around with talking clumsy term with no
about 'tarians and elegant shortening
'brals. that doesn't get
confused with "Liberal".
Maybe: "Modtarian"?
Dodge any confusion And "ModLibs"
with librals. sounds like the
popular word game
(brawls Madlibs.
about
'brals?) Positive
associations.
Sort of.
Actually, these
are all pretty
terrible.
Work on the naming
problem more seriously
some time.
ACTIVE_NAMING
Looking for a
third wheeze...
--------
[NEXT - DEATH_OF_THE_REPUBLIC]