Many friends of mine — people who have worked for the progress of
liberty for years — are mightily encouraged by the popularity of Donald
Trump and Bernie Sanders. My friends point out that they are both
radicals of a sort, people who represent a threat to the established
political order. We too are against the establishment, so their rise
suggests rising discontent with the status quo. That’s a step in the
right direction, they say.
As far as it goes, I see the point, and I sympathize. In fact, on these pages, I’ve drawn parallels between the Tea Party and the Occupy movement: both oppose the status quo in ways partisans of liberty can appreciate.
But there’s a problem. The state power we oppose is not identical to the establishment we reject. You can overthrow the establishment and still be left with a gigantic machinery of legalized exploitation. All the agencies, laws, regulations, and powers are still in place. And now you have a problem: someone else is in charge of the state itself. You might call it a new establishment. It could be even more wicked than the one you swept away.
Indeed, it usually is. Maybe always.
http://fee.org/articles/hating-the-establishment-is-not-the-same-as-supporting-liberty/
As far as it goes, I see the point, and I sympathize. In fact, on these pages, I’ve drawn parallels between the Tea Party and the Occupy movement: both oppose the status quo in ways partisans of liberty can appreciate.
But there’s a problem. The state power we oppose is not identical to the establishment we reject. You can overthrow the establishment and still be left with a gigantic machinery of legalized exploitation. All the agencies, laws, regulations, and powers are still in place. And now you have a problem: someone else is in charge of the state itself. You might call it a new establishment. It could be even more wicked than the one you swept away.
Indeed, it usually is. Maybe always.
http://fee.org/articles/hating-the-establishment-is-not-the-same-as-supporting-liberty/
No comments:
Post a Comment