-
SEQUESTER: The Horror!
March 1, 2013 | 4 comments
-
SOTU Preview: Human Props, Budget Fights, and Wedge Issues
February 12, 2013 | 0 comments
-
Hello, I Must Be Going
August 14, 2012 | 18 comments
-
Weekend Political Wrap-Up, Paul Ryan Edition
August 12, 2012 | 16 comments
-
Esquire Blogger Sees Paul Ryan, Shreds His Safety Net
August 11, 2012 | 13 comments
The Spectacle Blog
Sometimes I feel a little guilty about my chosen profession. Wading through Christopher Beam’s long essay on libertarianism is one of those times. New York magazine gave him many words and who knows how many dollars to write an article that doesn’t say much more than: Libertarianism is a big deal because there is exactly one congressman and one senator who are libertarians, more or less. And because conservatives are talking about shrinking government while liberals are talking about not liking wars or civil liberties violations. And because of the Founding Fathers. And because Will Wilkinson has a blog.
But then what Beam giveth, Beam taketh away: Conservatives won’t really shrink the government. Lots of people tell pollsters they don’t mind being groped by the TSA. Some people at the Cato Institute didn’t like Will Wilkinson’s blog or Brink Lindsey’s book, and they don’t work there anymore. Pat Buchanan wrote a book critical of World War II. And, like, what would happen if all the people who could be on welfare can’t be taken care of by private charities?
To be fair, the piece does contain some discussion of libertarianism and its factions that might be news to readers of mainstream magazines like New York. Libertarians have had a hard time convincing the public they are right when confronted with some of the basic counterarguments Beam offers. Finally, I’m not a libertarian purist myself.
Yet somehow, I doubt New York would give me comparable space to write an essay critical of liberalism that amounted to little more than: Bernie Sanders is in the Senate. We have a national health care plan. Jane Hamsher has a blog. Gee whiz, what would happen if taxes got too high?
View all comments (4) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by W. James Antle, III
http://spectator.org/blog/2010/12/28/taking-liberties
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Downton’s Class System — and Ours
- Of Wizards and Weapons
- Ailes: A Voice for the Silent Majority
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
H/T to National Review Online
ADVERTISEMENT
Clint| 12.28.10 @ 10:12AM
Christopher Beam's (The Ivy League fop son of The Boston Globe's Alex Beam) lightweight " Personal Defining & Criticizing " of Libertarians & Libertarianism is like some Tory Loyalist to King George sitting in New York, defining & criticizing those Unwashed Ragamuffin's under that upstart Washington daring to confront The King's Authority and Army.
Richard Baker| 12.28.10 @ 11:11AM
Christopher Beam. Is he one of the Bourbon family members, as in Jim? Oh, my mistake. Is he a Libertarian or is that Libertine?
Dale Cord| 12.29.10 @ 10:49AM
2011 a year that will live in Infamy. Future school history books will read: The year the Muslims conquered the United States of America. With not so much as a whimper from its cowardly military leaders, and name calling armchair patriots. Disgraceful,Shameful there are no words to adequately describe her defeat. As the 300 Spartans strength and ingenuity conquered all of those who challenged them, so a small band of renegades conquered the greatest country the world has known. When Davids rock slued Goliath. It also foretold a warning. "The bigger they are,the harder they Fall." Our country lost its battle of survival when it became intoxicated with its deceptive mentality, that it did not need its Creator anymore, and wisdom no longer was apart of its citizens physiology to survive
Sasha| 1.6.11 @ 4:08AM
Dale Cord, lay off the fucking crack. Seriously.
The 300 Spartans died to delay the advance of the Persian army by a few days.
I find it dispiriting that anyone lives in the fantasy land that a country like America, vast as the sea, with more private arms than people, could ever be conquered by anybody - especially when we already HAVE been conquered by a bunch of foxes wearing suits and ties.