Manifesto of a gen-x liberal,
There's just something I need to put down and maybe get some feedback on, but who knows.
There is a fundamental disconnect between the liberals who are in power now who grew up with the baby boom generation and the liberals of our generation. I work with under grads in the late teens so I think this is more or less a post baby boom thing rather than a gen-x thing.
I grew up in a post Watergate, concurrent with Iran-contra, was politically aware during the Lewinsky scandal (not a knock on Clinton, but evidence that lust for power is all that motivates politicians instead of any civic spirit or anything like that) and the unbridled disaster that was the Bush presidency. Every presidential administration since I started paying attention to politics there has been one hypocritical scandal after another. I have absolutely no faith in the good intentions of government. The drug war, spying on US citizens, the complicity in persecution of intellectual property "pirates"; the Federal government has never been anything but an antagonist in my view. I grew up on the anarchic values of punk rock (or metal or who knows, your subculture of choice) only to see my small rebellion against the status quo commodified and sold to the white hats thus being made cheap and unsatisfying.
All that means I am not a communist in the way of the old guard. Central control of society on a large scale is an anathema to me. I accept that groups of people will agree to different rules to live by. By and large I accept religious people so long as they don't proselytize. Individual choices are what motivates me. My presentation of myself to the world is what gives me my identity and my humanity. You are gay, I accept you, you are transsexual I accept you, you are poly-amorous I accept you, you believe in waiting till marriage to do it I accept you. Tattoos on the hands and face, unnatural colored hair, no make up, a lot of make up, high heels, fake tits, nose jobs, what ever. I firmly believe adult humans are sentient beings who can make their own decisions for themselves. If I disagree with your choices it is my problem, not yours. There is no need to control the unwashed masses. We are all the unwashed masses, maybe we went to college or have PhD's but we know that that makes us experts in very specific areas but unable to judge outside of those areas.
OK, fine, that makes me a libertarian, no? In absolutely no sense. I distrust concentrated power in any of its forms. Corporations do not have the individual's best interest in mind. The free market may work well, but there is not such thing as a free market. Exigencies exist that absolutely require strict regulation of markets. You say this is intellectually inconsistent from the personal liberty philosophy proposed above. Not at all, There is a synergy among groups of people where 10 people together have more of a voice than 10 people on their own. Since the goal is to maximize the validity of each individual's opinions and positions corporations should be explicitly denied rights that are afforded to persons. Strict regulations are to be applied to them in order to prevent them from impinging on personal liberties.
So where does that leave me. What is my ideal form of government. Here it goes:
1) No regulations on any consensual personal relationships or activities
- That means either all marriage or no marriage is recognized.
- No regulation of recreational drugs
2) Significant regulations on businesses:
- truly free markets do not exist.
- The total information that free markets require is not readily made available by corporations is simply not voluntarily released; it is necessary to stop monopolies and and other anti individual freedom circumstances that arise
- Therefore it is necessary to strictly regulate businesses.
3) There need to be taxes to support government functions
- There are things that government can provide to people who choose to use them such as pre-kindergarten through post high school education, food stamps, roads, energy transmission lines, and so forth
- Income can reasonably be taxed.
- Purchases can also reasonably be taxed... This includes financial transactions such as purchases of stocks and so on.
4) Participation in government programs cannot be based on some sort of behavior.
- So no drug tests, no limitations of what specific products can be purchased with aid (if you want to buy alcohol and twinkies with your food stamps that's none of the government's business
Is the government heading this way? I don't really know. I went to an incredibly liberal small college and now go to grad school at berkeley, which I think is fairly conservative, but compared to the rest of the country I'm not really sure. It seems to me that this is where liberalism is headed, but who knows. But in 20 or 30 years I'm pretty sure that liberalism will not look much like it does today.
There's just something I need to put down and maybe get some feedback on, but who knows.
There is a fundamental disconnect between the liberals who are in power now who grew up with the baby boom generation and the liberals of our generation. I work with under grads in the late teens so I think this is more or less a post baby boom thing rather than a gen-x thing.
I grew up in a post Watergate, concurrent with Iran-contra, was politically aware during the Lewinsky scandal (not a knock on Clinton, but evidence that lust for power is all that motivates politicians instead of any civic spirit or anything like that) and the unbridled disaster that was the Bush presidency. Every presidential administration since I started paying attention to politics there has been one hypocritical scandal after another. I have absolutely no faith in the good intentions of government. The drug war, spying on US citizens, the complicity in persecution of intellectual property "pirates"; the Federal government has never been anything but an antagonist in my view. I grew up on the anarchic values of punk rock (or metal or who knows, your subculture of choice) only to see my small rebellion against the status quo commodified and sold to the white hats thus being made cheap and unsatisfying.
All that means I am not a communist in the way of the old guard. Central control of society on a large scale is an anathema to me. I accept that groups of people will agree to different rules to live by. By and large I accept religious people so long as they don't proselytize. Individual choices are what motivates me. My presentation of myself to the world is what gives me my identity and my humanity. You are gay, I accept you, you are transsexual I accept you, you are poly-amorous I accept you, you believe in waiting till marriage to do it I accept you. Tattoos on the hands and face, unnatural colored hair, no make up, a lot of make up, high heels, fake tits, nose jobs, what ever. I firmly believe adult humans are sentient beings who can make their own decisions for themselves. If I disagree with your choices it is my problem, not yours. There is no need to control the unwashed masses. We are all the unwashed masses, maybe we went to college or have PhD's but we know that that makes us experts in very specific areas but unable to judge outside of those areas.
OK, fine, that makes me a libertarian, no? In absolutely no sense. I distrust concentrated power in any of its forms. Corporations do not have the individual's best interest in mind. The free market may work well, but there is not such thing as a free market. Exigencies exist that absolutely require strict regulation of markets. You say this is intellectually inconsistent from the personal liberty philosophy proposed above. Not at all, There is a synergy among groups of people where 10 people together have more of a voice than 10 people on their own. Since the goal is to maximize the validity of each individual's opinions and positions corporations should be explicitly denied rights that are afforded to persons. Strict regulations are to be applied to them in order to prevent them from impinging on personal liberties.
So where does that leave me. What is my ideal form of government. Here it goes:
1) No regulations on any consensual personal relationships or activities
- That means either all marriage or no marriage is recognized.
- No regulation of recreational drugs
2) Significant regulations on businesses:
- truly free markets do not exist.
- The total information that free markets require is not readily made available by corporations is simply not voluntarily released; it is necessary to stop monopolies and and other anti individual freedom circumstances that arise
- Therefore it is necessary to strictly regulate businesses.
3) There need to be taxes to support government functions
- There are things that government can provide to people who choose to use them such as pre-kindergarten through post high school education, food stamps, roads, energy transmission lines, and so forth
- Income can reasonably be taxed.
- Purchases can also reasonably be taxed... This includes financial transactions such as purchases of stocks and so on.
4) Participation in government programs cannot be based on some sort of behavior.
- So no drug tests, no limitations of what specific products can be purchased with aid (if you want to buy alcohol and twinkies with your food stamps that's none of the government's business
Is the government heading this way? I don't really know. I went to an incredibly liberal small college and now go to grad school at berkeley, which I think is fairly conservative, but compared to the rest of the country I'm not really sure. It seems to me that this is where liberalism is headed, but who knows. But in 20 or 30 years I'm pretty sure that liberalism will not look much like it does today.