I’ve often stated that I find it easier to convert conservatives to libertarian ideals than liberals. There are several reasons for this, but for this post I will focus on just one. It’s not that I find liberals stupid or even less intelligent than conservatives for that matter. I don’t associate with people I think are stupid (No, not even you.), so I don’t have much occasion to argue political philosophy with them. The real problem is that liberals believe people are stupid.
The argument usually goes something like this: “Kelly, your belief in individual rights, personal responsibility, and rational self-interest is all well and good, but it fails to take into account a fundamental reality. Most people are stupid. Without guidance, people will make poor decisions, and we’ll all suffer as a result.” While I will readily concur that people are stupid, – you can get far by appealing to my intellectual arrogance –I’m surprised that they assume I haven’t taken this into account. I’m even more surprised by their alternative to my position.
Their solution is invariably government involvement, always well planned and never overly intrusive. The government in their mind can be used to regulate markets that might otherwise be unfair or restrict peoples’ behavior that can often be harmful. After all, they say, we do it all the time. We have laws against murder and rape, don’t we? We have agencies like the FDA and the EPA to protect us from dangerous products and practices, do we not? The government provides services that simply couldn’t be addressed in any other way like roads, the postal system, and a social safety net, doesn’t it? What could be better, or more constitutional, than democratically elected representatives looking out for the interests of the people and enacting laws that they desire?
It is at this point that my eyes generally roll back in my head, and I say something snarky and uncalled for. I’ve grown as a person and mellowed with age, though, so I think I can offer a more moderated refutation. Perhaps I will have better success with the liberal mindset this time.
Actually, this train of thought fell off the rails of logic pretty early on, but the truly salient point comes at the end. The most faulty premise here seems to be that duly elected representatives somehow have the intellectual ability or the constitutional authority to look out for these “interests.” The original corollary seems to have been forgotten: People are stupid. If I accept this as being true (and I do), I am being asked to pin my hopes on a large (stupid) group of people electing a smaller representative (stupid) group of people to enact legislation and regulation that reflects their (stupid) desires.
I’m pretty sure that playing in traffic would be safer.
The truth about people can be stated in three parts:
1. People sometimes act stupidly – even me.
2. Groups of people often act even more stupidly – congress and mobs come to mind.
3. All this breaks down only at the largest levels. When peoples’ decisions are considered as an aggregate, their decisions are surprisingly good. When people have a truly free market they generally choose the best of the products they are offered – arguments with respect to Betamax, Apple, and Baywatch are accepted if not conceded.
This is of course why my preferred ideology is anarcho-capitalism. That said, I understand that we already have a system in this country. But, if I really must have elected representatives making decisions in far off places, I would prefer that they did as little as humanly possible. The Constitution seems to me a pretty good indication that the Founders felt the same.
Tomorrow is Election Day. I will, as it seems I always do, vote the lesser of two (or more) evils. And I will no doubt lose – I live in Vermont after all. The stakes are high this year, and I would like to take this opportunity to suggest that all most some a few . . . Oh whatever, we’re probably doomed no matter what happens.
