Is the end of democracy really this close?

Sent from my iPad

Libertarians (the Republican Freedom Caucus included here) need to more carefully reflect on likely Trump outcomes. Libertarians are being made fools of by Trump, who is more a despot than any previous president, and as such, a true anti-libertarian. But the problem goes deeper, into the very heart of libertarianism.

Libertarianism is one of the giant ideas in political philosophy.

Current proponents believe, for example, that charity (giving welfare) should be entirely voluntary, that indiduals should be encumberered by as few rules, laws (and taxes) as possible, just enough, presumably to prevent chaos, and that the key principle of all government action (the less government action, the better) is to expand “individual” liberty.

Yet in all of history, it is hard, perhaps impossible, to cite an actual precedent, that is a nation,state, group, or collective organized under a pure libertarian regime.

It is one of those pure ideas, of a “perfect” organizational “political” structure, which we can analogize to the platonic notion of an “ideal” (though Plato was far far from a libertarian).

The hard truth is that, while even if we can formulate and think of a perfect circle, we cannot manufacture and realize a perfect wheel. (Just like we cannot man-make a perfect libertarian government structure- in fact, even the term “perfect government structure” is an oxymoron). There will always be defects, small though they may be, threatening the wheels’ ultimate failure in the real, “non-ideological” world. And failure safeguards, and failure remedies have not been adequately addressed by libertarian philosophers/economists, or libertarian leaning politicians, or those voting for them.

And these defects, in the real natural world, are never going to be static. In this world, defects will always expand their presence, like weeds in a garden, and counter-balancing them will always create repercussions, themselves requiring additional counterbalancing. Humans have created their own rule sets to counterbalance (think 10 Commandments, tribal customs and ceremonies, social morays, and yes, even laws).

The current libertarian political argument is thus always going to be about matters of degree. And this is the core problem. Matters of degree often fall into the realm of personal opinion.

Matters of degree also shift with the times, they are in flux, resulting in a perpetual change cycle.

Another intransigent problem is this, wholly embracing a “pure” libertarianism, how do we get from A to B, that is from “here” to “there”?

That is, how move from our current world political structure to a libertarian world structure. Keep in mind that partial structures will forever be unstable.

And this begs the question: how is it possible to get to a libertarian world led by elected leaders, which, in a democracy, requires a majority rules regime? Would not the vote and rule of the many, inevitably repress the freedom of some few?

And finally, is it not possible, even inevitable, that a “partial” libertarian regime (the only kind that is practically attainable) would morph out to either dictatorship or total anarchy? Think of it like a gyroscope encountering pebbles on an actual ground surface. First stumbling to the right, than to the left, between the poles of yin and yang, periodically crashing down entirely (into the Hegelian anti-thesis) before its rebirth yet again.

The truth is that America and earth’s civilization in general, is stuck in a cycle of change, a Hegelian universe, moving see-saw-like between the social-political extreme polls of totalitarianism and anarchy, yang changing into yin, and than back again. Mercifully Americas’ constitutional system has been relatively successful at balancing these extremes. It is only this balancing that can insure America’s longevity.

Libertarian proponents, while they may not actually be Trump lovers, are enablers, and as such have adopted a devastatingly dangerous posture. Trump operates out on that extreme poll which, in the end, will destroy any semblance of libertarianism, not to mention democracy. Trump is the means by which the anti-thesis is now occurring.

(Here is a perfect example of anti-libertarianism, quite frightening really). After Trump’s visit to North Korea, Trump expressed admiration for the way Kim-Jong Un is treated by North Koreans. trump said “Hey, he is the head of a country and I mean he is the strong , head…don’t let anyone think anything different. he speaks, and his people sit up at attention. I want my people to do the same.” Of course Trump later tried to take the statement back saying “I am kidding, you don’t understand sarcasm”. Yes we do. When it comes off the top of Trump’s finisteride infected brain, we need to really worry.

And we are not Trumps’ “people”, we are free people under a fought for constitution. We must not let Trump take back his statements so easily, as they reveal him for what he aspires to be.

Kim publicly murdered (with an anti-aircraft gun) one of his staff for dozing off during a Kim speech. A sane person would not kid about that.

Sent from my iPad