The Children are Confused (or Just Being Used)

Today must be conspiracy theory day.  While my earlier post is an example of the awakening in the mainstream (academia) this time toward the reality that elites control the state, this post is an example of the children not keeping up with their elders.

Once again, the culprit is to be found associated with the Students of Liberty.  The post is a few years old, but apparently was posted again recently.  The post is entitled “Conspiracy Theories Hurt the Liberty Movement.”

The author, Ankur Chawla, starts well enough:

Conspiracy Theory: The idea that many important political events or economic and social trends are the products of secret plots that are largely unknown to the general public.

The definition is so well written; using this definition, I am hard-pressed to see how anyone could believe that such conspiracies do not exist.  I am also hard-pressed to understand how conspiracy theories hurt the liberty movement.

Almost immediately, it is obvious that logic and critical thinking are no longer taught to students.  There is too much to unpack in the following few sentences; I will only take a quick run-through:

Both libertarians and conspiracy theorists have a key thing in common: They dislike the government.

It isn’t clear to me that all conspiracy theorists dislike the government.  It also isn’t clear to me that all self-proclaimed libertarians dislike the government (as opposed to just wanting to make it more efficient; a scary enough thought) – for example, many of those associated with Students for Liberty.

The difference is that those interested in liberty dislike the state because it restricts our freedom and limits our prosperity.

Not all of those interested in liberty dislike the state for this reason, although it is a true enough statement.

We do not think the government is intentionally malevolent, just very misguided and unintentionally harmful.

Many individuals who dislike the state come to this view precisely because they believe the government is intentionally malevolent and intentionally harmful.  Just ask the few hundred million who have died at the hands of the state over the last 100 years.

On the other hand, conspiracy theorists fear the government because of its alleged diabolical secret plans it has been cooking up for all these years.

There are many conspiracy theorists that do not “fear the government” – they believe that government actors are justifiable in implementing their conspiracies, and they support such actions. 

The examples of “diabolical secret plans” are so numerous, it is difficult to imagine anyone with an internet connection and a curious mind could miss these.  I guess only one out of two are necessary to write for SFL.

Alexander McCobin at The Daily Bell

I have posted the following at The Daily Bell today.  Quoted (indented) items are all Mr. McCobin’s:

[Debate] teaches critical thinking, writing skills, speaking ability, a broad understanding of current and philosophical issues and a love for ideas….[After attending McCobin’s private debate camps] Students would write to us, "I learned more in one week at this debate camp than in all of my years at school."

Many schools don't have debate programs at all….

Do you think there might be a connection here?  Is it by design, or merely an accident that a) schools don’t teach critical thinking, and b) virtually every school gets a majority if not the entirety of its funding from the state?  More on this later….

Perhaps creating dummies is the objective.

[While at Cato] the leading thinkers developing libertarian public policy…

“…libertarian public policy…” This seems quite the contradiction in terms and objectives. 

This is the most libertarian generation that has ever existed….

For us old guys, that would be nice to believe.  However, it is rather a bold statement when considering the sweep of recorded and unrecorded history.  More on this later….

[Regarding the possibility that the world is headed toward a depression] Given the growing commitment of my generation to fixing the problems given to us by older generations, I remain optimistic that we can correct things before they get to that point.

We face a future of either an inflationary depression or a deflationary depression (arguably, we are in a depression already).  To the extent there is an ounce of truth in Austrian economics, this is unavoidable.  Things will certainly get to that point before they get any better (or worse).

It's contradictory to argue that the government is both generally incompetent and inefficient and then argue it's capable of pulling off the greatest cover-up in history. I also think that if you assume the enemies of liberty are doing evil intentionally your misrepresentation of them will lead you to improper solutions. We have to understand that the enemies of liberty do so with good intentions and require responses with good intentions.

This one statement is enough to dismiss Alexander as a critical thinker.  First, he confuses “government” with those above government pulling the strings (as suggested in DB’s question).  But even looking at those in “government” – I will avoid the non- U.S. enemies of freedom – the pickings are way too easy.  Let’s stick to just the U.S. based enemies of just the last decade – do they really have good intentions: Hillary Clinton, Tim Geithner, Dick Cheney, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, George W. Bush, Barack Obama, Donald Rumsfeld.

The authors of the Patriot Act, NDAA, FATCA.  Lying the people into war.  Authorization of murder by drone.  Killing Americans without trial or jury.  Those building the spy center in Utah.  Initiating several wars throughout the Middle East and Central Asia.  Central banking.  Public funding of education.

His affiliations with Cato and Reason speak volumes of his positions.  See Walter Block here:

His view on war and the military is one big (and un-asked) question.  This comment (when writing elsewhere about some of the differences of opinion amongst libertarians) gives a hint:

While many libertarians opposed the invasion of Iraq, Randy Barnett wrote a strong, libertarian defense of pre-emptive intervention.

That he remains open to a discussion on this issue is…troubling, to say the least.

The other troubling issue is no mention of central banking (nor do I find any via a quick search of outside resources).

No comment on central banking; seems that the war in Iraq (and presumably other overseas adventures) are at least questions properly open to debate (certainly consistent with a Randian view); can’t link public funding of education and the lack of critical thinking in students; and sees no evil intent in those who implement these and other policies.

If this represents the greatest libertarian generation in history, you can have it.