Thursday, 13 September 2007

Freedom fetishism?

Don't look now -- you might be a freedom fetishist too. [Hat tip LP]

UPDATE: Gus Van Horn explains why the article shouldn't be taken seriously, and (once again) why Objectivists and US libertarians do never the twain meet: "anti-intellectual" libertarians allow braindead fools like the article's author to "channel their inner five-year-old" to damn liberty, damn capitalism and damn Ayn Rand. Ouch!


  1. 250,000 members. Why not just all immigrate to New Zealand, and win the election in a landslide. Then we would have at least ONE libertarian country for proof that the system works.

  2. Jeez, PC. Van Horn's diatribe leaves me cold. Not because he's incorrect per se, but because those guys just seem intent upon shooting themselves in their (collective!) feet. They sure as hell don't need Republicans or Democrats to do it!

    I support anybody, anywhere who proposes state reduction, irrespective of who they might be. In NZ that's been individuals from Rodney Hide to Keith Locke (once, on abolishing the crime of Sedition). Goes to show that even Locke isn't always wrong.

    Surely the keyword is 'individual'. As much as I dream of wholesale state roll-back, right now the battle is very much issue by issue. Yet they waste time name-calling and squabbling?

    It seems to me that US freedom-fighters are not behaving unlike the opposing Islamic sects, if you see my point ...

  3. You're not from the People's Front of Judea, are you?

  4. Not me, Comrade. But I do want it recorded that I also think Brian is a nice name.


1. Commenters are welcome and invited.
2. All comments are moderated. Off-topic grandstanding, spam, and gibberish will be ignored. Tu quoque will be moderated.
3. Read the post before you comment. Challenge facts, but don't simply ignore them.
4. Use a name. If it's important enough to say, it's important enough to put a name to.
5. Above all: Act with honour. Say what you mean, and mean what you say.