[Editor’s note: this is the first ever guest post at bionic
mosquito; it has been submitted by Alice, of Looking Glass fame.]
Either the well was
very deep, or she fell very slowly, for she had plenty of time as she went down
to look about her, and to wonder what was going to happen next. Down, down, down. Would the fall never come
to an end? “I wonder how many miles I’ve fallen by this time?” she said aloud.
If you’re involved or even
interested in politics and haven’t heard about House of Cards, then it’s likely
that neither you nor your friends own a TV, a tablet, or a smart phone.
The series, one of Netflix’s new
in-house productions, portrays the ruthless, power-hungry politician Frank
Underwood…. Watching as a libertarian, Underwood's nearly every action is
reprehensible. He acts solely to increase his own power, never shying away from
doing immoral things, and he consistently pushes legislation that increases the
scope of government. He is a libertarian nightmare. And yet we can’t help but
be entranced by him.
But what if Frank Underwood was a
libertarian?
“When I use a word,”
Humpty Dumpty said in a rather scornful tone “it means just what I chose it to
mean – neither more nor less.”
At first thought, the idea is a
complete paradox. His blatant acts of aggression and his vision of power as end
rather than a means are contradictory to the underlying principles of
libertarianism. Yet if Underwood viewed power as a means to accomplish
libertarian policies rather than an end to satisfy personal desires, it
wouldn’t be so easy to despise him.
“I know who I WAS when
I got up this morning, but I think I must have been changed several times since
then”
Imagine if instead of education and
entitlement reform, Underwood had pulled strings, twisted arms, and manipulated
politicians in order to pass something like a repeal of the Federal Reserve Act
or a decriminalization of drugs.
“Contrariwise, if it
was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't.
That's logic.”
A mental exercise like this one
doesn’t typically mean much in reality, but the truth is that it offers insight
into the current direction of the liberty movement.
“I don't believe
there's an atom of meaning in it.”
There are two main methodologies
that people subscribe to for creating libertarian change. One relies mainly on
educational efforts, sometimes even abstaining from voting or any political
activity, to create gradual change toward a freer society.
“I give myself very
good advice, but I very seldom follow it.”
The other emphasizes political
activism to sway elections and build alliances with different groups in order
to pass libertarian legislation.
“It's a poor sort of
memory that only works backwards.”
Both are vital for a movement and
some libertarians effectively use a combination of both approaches. But if we
picture the effect a libertarian Frank Underwood could have on the direction of
the country, the superior approach becomes obvious.
…when she thought it
over afterwards it occurred to her that she ought to have wondered at this, but
at the time it all seemed quite natural
As unfortunate as it is, government
bureaucrats and their cronies won’t change their behavior because they get
handed copies of Human Action.
“Where should I
go?"
"That depends
on where you want to end up."
Politicians won’t begin following
the Constitution because they got mailed a pocket-sized version of it.
“No, no! The
adventures first, explanations take such a dreadful time.”
The government will continue to
pass legislation violating everything libertarians stand for until someone has
enough power to stop it. Gaining and keeping this power may very likely entail
manipulative schemes to thwart more statist peers.
“But it's no use now to
pretend to be two people! Why, there's hardly enough of me left to make one
respectable person!”
It may be contrary to what every
libertarian, myself included, wishes the situation could be, but a failure to
“play the game” means a failure to make change.
“If I had a world of
my own, everything would be nonsense. Nothing would be what it is, because
everything would be what it isn't. And contrary wise, what is, it wouldn't be.
And what it wouldn't be, it would. You see?”
Envisioning a figure like a
libertarian Frank Underwood makes it clear what the impact of a master politician
who pursues libertarian legislation could be.
“I can't explain myself,
I'm afraid, sir, Because I'm not myself you see.”
But questions about
purity—doctrinal or otherwise—rarely touch on how the sausage gets made. At
some point, some libertarians are going to have to get their hands dirty.
“Well that's it: if
you don't think, you shouldn't talk!”
There are also worries about the
corruptive nature of power and if a libertarian could actually avoid succumbing
to its temptations.
“We're all mad here.”
After all, how much of one’s soul
must be sold off to achieve such heights of power?
“I think you might do
something better with the time than waste it in asking riddles that have no answers.”
And so the question becomes: What
ends justify what means?
“If you drink much
from a bottle marked 'poison,' it is almost certain to disagree with you,
sooner or later.”
Or, where on the continuum has the
libertarian politician gone too far?
Whenever the horse
stopped (which it did very often), he fell off in front; and, whenever it went
on again (which it generally did rather suddenly), he fell off behind.
Otherwise he kept on pretty well, except that he had a habit of now and then
falling off sideways; and, as he generally did this on the side on which Alice
was walking, she soon found that it was the best plan not to walk quite close
to the horse.
…we cannot dispute that a willingness
to “play the game” is absolutely vital if the liberty movement has any hope of
moving out of the Internet’s basement and into the statute books.
“Why, sometimes I've
believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast.”
Sources:
Excellent!
ReplyDeleteI will let Alice know that you liked it.
DeleteSo according to this thinking, "we must destroy the village in order to save it."
ReplyDeleteAmit
Here's how you play this game of politics: secession and nullification. Amirite?
ReplyDeleteAs long as it is individual secession and nullification, yes you are!
DeleteDon't you love those Randian terms?
ReplyDeleteThe word "proper" used by Ayn Randians.
The words "play the game" by Rand Paulians.
Drink the koolaid; there's more left and we don't have the space to keep it around.